Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 30, 1974 (2/2)
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 30, 1974 (2/2)
[01.10.08] Mr. LATTA. Objection, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. Objection is heard. Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Chairman? Mr. RAILSBACK. Mr. Chairman? Mr. Chairman, I agree with what the gentleman from Ohio said. This particular issue has been debated at length, I think really 3 hours is too long. I wonder if we cannot cut it down and make it 1 1/2 or 2 hours. The CHAIRMAN, Well, does the gentleman from Illinois revise unanimous consent request? Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Chairman. I am not interested in prolonging debate on this. If we do not adopt this unanimous consent proposal, then, of course, we would be operating under the 5-minute rule as I understand, which would give all 38 members 5 minutes to discuss the article in general and then we would be at the amendatory stage which, of course, could further prolong this. I do not like to limit or restrict person's opportunity to speak on this. If it is more acceptable, I would revise my unanimous consent request to limit the time not to exceed 2 hours. Mr. LATTA. Mr. Chairman?, The CHAIRMAN. IS objection heard? Mr. LATTA. Mr. Chairman reserving the right to object, and I shall not object, I want to thank the gentleman from Illinois for reducing the time and I think it is a wise move. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Chairman? The CHAIRMAN. The policy will be, again that perfecting amendments will be recognized in order of precedence. Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Chairman, if there is no Objection, I would like the unanimous is consent to proceed for 10 minutes Mr. DENNIS. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object, if we have only 2 hours, I think 10 minutes for the author may be a little bit, excessive. The CHAIRMAN. . Is the gentleman objecting? Mr. DENNIS. Oh, I will -not, object, but I hope the Chair, will recognize me for about 2 minutes' time. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, it is so ordered. The, gentleman is, recognized for 10 minutes. Mr. McCLORY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In presenting this article, article III> it seems to me we. are getting at something very basic and very fundamental insofar as our entire impeachment proceeding and inquiry is concerned. I think it is well for us to recall that the Constitution rests in us. the House of Representatives, and us. the House Judiciary Committee which has been designated by the House of Representatives, to conduct this inquiry, with the sole power of impeachment. Now. implicit, in that Sole power of impeachment is the authority to make this inquiry, to investigate the office -which is under investigation. In this case it happens to be the President, of the, United States, There have been a total, I believe, of 13 impeachments in the House of Representatives. and a total of 69 cases which have been referred and where there has been some action taken of one kind or another with regard to the subject of impeachment. Now. implicit in this authority to conduct an impeachment inquiry is the authority to investigate the actions that take place in that office. If we are without that authority, or if the respondent has the, right to determine for himself or herself to what extent the investigation -shall be carried on, of course, we do not have the sole power of impeachment. Someone else is impinging upon our authority. So it seems to me implicit in this authority that we have a broad authority to conduct an investigative inquiry. This has been recognized in our proceeding, as a matter of fact, in that the House of Representatives delegated, to us the authority to Issue subpenas relevant and necessary to our inquiry, and as a result of that, we. have issued eight subpenas to the President requesting information. Now, prior to the time that we issued these subpenas we directed letters 'to the President requesting information and these letters requesting information were sent by the chairman after consultation with the ranking minority member. In Other words, we have the joint authority and the joint expression of Republicans and Democrats with respect to the information that we have requested. Now, the President, Of course, did not respond to the. requests that we directed to him in the course of Our letters. and so we. exercised the authority which was granted to us by the House resolution to issue subpenas. Now, with respect to the subpenas the vote was 33 to one on one, 37 to 1 on two, and 34 to 4 on the fourth one. In other words, the action of the committee was bipartisan and it -was overwhelming that we wanted this material, that we wanted this response to the requests for information which we felt were necessary and relevant to our inquiry. [01.15.38]