Whitewater Hearings August 1, 1994 - Part 1
Whitewater Hearings August 1, 1994 - Part 1
(10:50:27) The subject of Madison Guaranty, as I recall, may have come up 3 or 4 times during the course of those meetings. The discussions were procedural in nature and I'm quite certain that the substance of any allegations was not discussed. Let me note that Mr. Altman's instructions to me and to the other RTC staff always was to deal with Madison Guaranty the same as the RTC would deal with any other similar institution. 5 Regarding the meetings and/or contacts between Treasury and the White House, I first learned of the February 2, 1994, White House meeting in Mr. Altman's office during a question and answer session being held shortly before and to prepare for the February 241 1994, Senate oversight bearing. I bad no prior knowledge of this meeting and was unaware of any other contacts with the White House until I read about them in the press. As the Committee is aware, there have been press reports that a Kansas City investigator was told by a visiting RTC Washington lawyer that I would like to show that Whitewater did not cause a loss to Madison because it would "get us off the book." I have never instructed anyone to do anything but find the truth and work to see if the RTC had a cost-effective civil case, as is our regular procedure, In the final analysis, any judgment on the conduct of this investigation should be based on what is actually being done and on the results of the investigation that is underway. During my tenure, the RTC has taken the following steps: First, the reopening of the Madison investigation in light of the extension of the statute of limitations and additional information; second, the request of the Office of the Inspector General to -review the RTC generated report of the Rose Law Firm, as well as billings of that firm with respect to Madison; third, the retention by the legal division in early 1994 of Pillsbury, Madison, and Sutro to serve as outside counsel to help with the investigation; and fourth, the full cooperation the RTC has given to Special Counsel Fiske, When the RTC has completed its investigation and taken appropriate action, a full report of this matter will be made to the Congress. We fully expect to be judged by our actions at that time. Finally, I wish to state that no one at the Treasury has exerted any pressure or instructed me to do anything to influence the outcome of RTC's investigation of Madison Guaranty and I have never talked to anyone at the White House about Madison Guaranty or anything else, for that matter. I would be happy to answer any questions the Committee might have. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Ryan. Ms. Kulka, I understand you have a statement to make. Ms. KULKA. Yes, I do, The CHAIRMAN. We'd be pleased to bear from you now, and Maybe I can ask you to move the microphone just a little closer, too, so people in the back of the room are able to hear you clearly. STATEMENT OF ELLEN B. KULKA, GENERAL COUNSEL, RESOLUTION TRUST CORPORATION, WASHINGTON, DC Ms. KuLKA. My name is Ellen Kulka. I have been the General Counsel of the Resolution Trust Corporation since January 17, 1994. Before that, from February 1991 to January 1994, 1 was the Regional Counsel for the Northeast Region of the Office of Thrift Supervision in New Jersey. My first Government employment was in this capacity, Other than this period of Government service and a few years as assistant professor at the Graduate School of Management at Rutgers University, my entire professional career bad been in the pri 6 vate sector, where I practiced corporate, securities, and banking law. I have been frequently asked how I could possibly have accepted the job I now bold because of the widespread perception that the RTC operates in a difficult environment and might even be characterized as having bad a history as a very troubled agency in which anyone associated with it is subject to disparagement or worse. And it is true that many urged me not to accept the position because of its thankless, grueling nature. I would like to share with you my reasons for doing so because they are relevant to my perception of my responsibilities. I was first interviewed for the position of General Counsel in the spring of 1993, 1 year after the death of my husband following a 4-year illness.