[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 141 (Monday, October 3, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            NOMINATION OF RICKI RHODARMER TIGERT TO THE FDIC

  Mr. RIEGLE addressed the Chair.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Michigan.
  Mr. RIEGLE. Mr. President, how much time is remaining on this side?
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Michigan has 9 
minutes. The Senator from New York has 7 minutes and 10 seconds.
  Mr. RIEGLE. Mr. President, let me thank the Senator from North 
Carolina for his gracious personal comments. I am touched by it and I 
appreciate it. I am going to miss his friendship and serving with him.
  I yield 8 of the 9 minutes to the Senator from Washington.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Washington [Mrs. 
Murray] is recognized for 8 minutes.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Thank you, Mr. President.
  Mr. President, I rise today to support the nomination of Ricki Tigert 
to Chair the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and to urge our 
colleagues to invoke cloture today and finally allow this nomination to 
move forward.
  Mr. President, the FDIC maintains the safety and soundness of our 
financial institutions. The FDIC promotes and preserves public 
confidence in banks. It protects the money supply by providing 
insurance coverage for depositors.
  The FDIC oversees nearly three and one-half trillion dollars' worth 
of deposits.
  But this is not an issue for Wall Street, it is an issue for Main 
Street. My parents, my brothers and sisters, and my friends and 
neighbors all save their money in federally insured accounts. They 
depend on this System being overseen by a qualified and competent 
regulator. In my home State of Washington, the FDIC insures more than 
52 billion dollars' worth of deposits.
  I cannot stand by and allow average Americans to be put at risk while 
this nomination is being held up.
  The Chair of the FDIC is one of the most important positions in our 
Government to average Americans.
  Yet, for the past 2 years, Mr. President, we have not had a Chair of 
the FDIC.
  This confirmation process should not be the time to score debating 
points. I know there are decent Senators on both sides of the aisle who 
draw the same line I do here in the Chamber: Some things are just not 
worth the risk.
  Mr. President, I am not a personal friend of Ricki Tigert. I have not 
known her for years. In fact, I met her first this last February, when 
she came to my office prior to her confirmation hearing in the Banking 
Committee.
  So, I would like to enter into the Record a statement by those who 
have worked with her and who know her well.
  The Wall Street Journal published a letter from Beryl Sprinkel, 
President Reagan's Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers; Peter 
Wallison, President Reagan's counsel; and Linn Williams, President 
Bush's Deputy Trade Representative. All Republicans.
  They say about Ricki Tigert: ``She has had a distinguished career and 
is held in high esteem as an internationally recognized expert in 
banking law and regulation. She is committed to the complete 
independence and integrity of the bank regulatory process.''
  I ask unanimous consent that the full text of their letter be printed 
in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

             [From the Wall Street Journal, Aug. 22, 1994]

                        [Letters to the Editor]

                     Ricki Tigert: No Clinton Crony

       In his Aug. 5 column, ``On Whitewater: Clinton Team Doesn't 
     Inhale,'' Paul Gigot left the impression that Ricki Tigert, 
     the Clinton administration's nominee to chair the Federal 
     Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), has not agreed to 
     recuse herself from Whitewater matters if she were confirmed 
     by the Senate.
       In his column Mr. Gigot wrote: ``On Feb. 1 Ms. Tigert told 
     the Senate she wouldn't recuse herself from Whitewater 
     matters; we now know that was the same week the White House 
     leaned on Mr. Altman not to recuse.'' This is a clever 
     juxtaposition of unrelated events, but it leaves the false 
     impression that Ms. Tigert's position and Mr. Altman's were 
     somehow connected.
       In reality, a few days after her confirmation hearing and 
     prior to the Senate Banking Committee's vote, Ms. Tigert 
     advised the Senate Banking Committee in writing that she 
     would recuse herself from any investigation, inquiry, or 
     determination concerning President or Mrs. Clinton. The 
     committee then approved her nomination, 18 to 1.
       We know from our discussions with Ms. Tigert during the 
     confirmation process that she never sought or received advice 
     from any White House official on the decision to recuse 
     herself. Instead, she followed her own counsel and advised 
     the Deputy White House Counsel that this was her decision. 
     There was no effort to dissuade her. And she was unaware at 
     the time of any controversy within the White House concerning 
     Roger Altman.
       Further, we strongly disagree with the suggestion in your 
     editorial. ``The Meese Test,'' of July 20, that Ms. Tigert 
     would be a ``bank regulator/crony.'' We have all known Ms. 
     Tigert for at least a decade, and have worked with her 
     closely in her government service and private law practice. 
     Two of us worked with her in the Reagan administration. She 
     has had a distinguished career and is held in high esteem as 
     an internationally recognized expert in banking law and 
     regulation. She is committed to the complete independence and 
     integrity of the bank regulatory process, as she testified in 
     her confirmation hearing. The notion that she is a Clinton 
     ``crony'' is a canard.
       She has met the Clintons, but only in public. She has never 
     spent time alone with either of them.
       We believe the Senate and House should diligently pursue 
     Whitewater, but Ms. Tigert's nomination to chair the FDIC is 
     a completely unrelated matter. Continuing to hold up a vote 
     on her nomination does nobody any good--least of all the 
     banking industry. She deserves to have her nomination 
     considered by the full Senate, and she deserves to be 
     confirmed.
     Beryl W. Sprinkel,
     Former Chairman, Council of Economic
                            Advisers in the Reagan Administration.
     Peter J. Wallison,
                               Former Counsel to President Reagan.
     S. Linn Williams,
                                          Former Deputy U.S. Trade
                        Representative in the Bush Administration.

  Mrs. MURRAY. Ricki Tigert's former colleagues at the Federal Reserve 
during Republican administrations have strongly supported her 
nomination, including former Chairman Paul Volcker and former Gov. 
Wayne Angell.
  Former FDIC Chairmen William Isaac, a Republican, and John Heimann, a 
Democrat, have urged her confirmation in a letter to my good friend, 
the majority leader.
  They wrote: ``She has an established record as an independent bank 
regulator. Her judgment and her strong record at the Federal Reserve 
underscore our conviction that she will be an outstanding Chairman of 
the FDIC and deserves immediate confirmation.''
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the full text of their 
letter be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                               September 28, 1994.
     Hon. George J. Mitchell,
     U.S. Senate, Russell Senate Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Mitchell: As former chairmen of the Federal 
     Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) we are writing to ask 
     for your help in assuring the immediate confirmations of 
     Ricki R. Tigert and Andrew C. Hove as Chairman and Vice-
     Chairman, respectively, of the FDIC prior to the end of the 
     103rd Congress.
       The FDIC has awaited a permanent chairman for more than two 
     years since the untimely death of William Taylor in August 
     1992. Andrew Hove has done an exceptional job as Acting 
     Chairman of the FDIC, but only a permanent chairman can 
     undertake significant initiatives to address the critical 
     issues facing the agency.
       Ricki Tigert was nominated last November to chair the FDIC. 
     She was approved by the Senate Banking Committee in February 
     by a vote of 18 to 1. Like William Taylor she has an 
     established track record as an independent bank regulator at 
     the Federal Reserve. She emphasized in her confirmation 
     hearing that safety and soundness is her starting point in 
     analyzing and responding to all issues that face the agency. 
     We think she is absolutely correct. Her judgment and her 
     strong record at the Federal Reserve underscore our 
     conviction that she will be an outstanding chairman of the 
     FDIC and deserves immediate confirmation.
       In our view Ricki Tigert and Andrew Hove will make an 
     excellent team to lead the agency through difficult issues 
     that require immediate attention. Two of the most important 
     of these issues are the potential premium differential 
     between the Bank Insurance Fund and the Savings Association 
     Insurance Fund and the ongoing evaluation of the 
     effectiveness of risk-based insurance premiums for 
     encouraging safe and sound management of financial 
     institutions.
       In the final weeks of the 103rd Congress we urge you not to 
     forget the FDIC, which for more than sixty years has 
     protected American savings. The agency needs and deserves 
     strong, permanent leadership. Ricki Tigert and Andrew Hove 
     should be confirmed as soon as possible.
           Very truly yours,
     William M. Isaac.
     John G. Heimann.

  Mrs. MURRAY. Even the business community she will be overseeing has 
been lobbying heavily for her confirmation. How often do we see that 
here in the Senate? I ask unanimous consent that a letter from Ken 
Guenther of the Independent Bankers Association of America be printed 
in the Record, as well as a letter from James Watt, president and CEO 
of the Conference of State Bank Supervisors.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                               Independent Bankers


                                       Association of America,

                                Washington, DC, September 9, 1994.
     Hon. Donald W. Riegle,
     U.S. Senate, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Riegle: The Federal Deposit Insurance 
     Corporation (FDIC), the primary federal regulator for some 
     8,800 state-chartered banks, has been without a confirmed 
     chairman since the tragic death of Chairman Bill Taylor in 
     August 1992. The confirmation of Ricki Tigert, the very well-
     qualified and capable individual who has been nominated as 
     FDIC chairperson, has been delayed for months. The 
     Independent Bankers Association of America (IBAA) requests 
     your assistance to have the Senate act on the nomination of 
     Ricki Tigert as chairperson, as well as on the nominations of 
     Andrew Hove as vice chairman and Anne Hall as FDIC director.
       By statute, the FDIC is required to have a five-member 
     board that consists of a chairman, vice chairman, and three 
     directors, including the Comptroller of the Currency and the 
     director of the Office of Thrift Supervision. Acting FDIC 
     Chairman Andrew Hove is chairing a board of just three 
     members, where the only confirmed member is the Comptroller 
     of the Currency. The IBAA believes that acting FDIC Chairman 
     Hove has done a highly credible job under trying 
     circumstances. However, it is impossible for an individual in 
     an ``acting'' capacity, who is awaiting his own confirmation, 
     to bring the necessary independent political clout to the 
     agency. And since two of the three FDIC board seats are 
     filled by individuals directly responsible to the political 
     leadership of the Treasury Department, this important agency 
     is effectively under Treasury control.
       This is a matter of considerable concern to the banking 
     industry and runs contrary to the clear intent of the 
     Congress in setting up the FDIC. Issues of great importance 
     are pending.
       The FDIC-BIF is moving towards the important 1.25 reserve 
     ratio, which should trigger substantially lower bank 
     premiums. Earlier in the Clinton Administration, thought was 
     given to channeling deposit insurance premiums to affordable 
     housing programs. A fully functioning FDIC board could play a 
     crucial role in this issue.
       It is further expected that the Treasury proposal to 
     consolidate the regulatory agencies will resurface early in 
     the next Congress. In recent days, Treasury Under Secretary 
     Frank Newman, who has been named by Secretary Bentsen to 
     succeed Roger Altman as deputy secretary, has told the press 
     this. Since the FDIC would be a major loser under the 
     original Treasury plan and under the rumored Treasury-Fed 
     apparent agreement, an independent FDIC board could play a 
     crucial role in the upcoming debate.
       The President's CRA reform initiative is pending. Again, 
     this has largely been negotiated out by the Fed and the OCC, 
     with President Clinton having assigned Comptroller Ludwig the 
     lead role. The FDIC's voice should be heard when the proposal 
     is put out for comment this month.
       Fourth, the RTC is winding down and major staff integration 
     and money decisions will have to be made early in 1995.
       Finally, a personal note. I did not know Ricki Tigert when 
     her name surfaced. Since the FDIC chairperson regulates more 
     community banks than any other federal regular, I did due 
     diligence on her, checking sources who worked with her at 
     both the Fed and the Treasury. I checked at the political 
     level and the career staff level. Ms. Tigert checks out, and 
     has impressive bi-partisan policy level and career staff 
     support.
       She is clearly an experienced, independent professional 
     with previous high-level regulatory experience. She 
     understands the workings of government and her confirmation 
     would restore much-needed balance to the banking regulatory 
     agencies.
       It is time that the FDIC returned to the status intended by 
     the Congress--an independent regulatory agency.
       The IBAA is hopeful that the Senate will be able to 
     promptly confirm Ms. Tigert and Skip Hove at this cruical 
     time and ensure the continued independence of the FDIC. As 
     you may know, the confirmation impasse has alreadly claimed 
     one victim. Anne Hall, a banker and the daughter of a former 
     Democratic congressman from Ohio, who was slotted for the 
     open FDIC directorship--and who also has been waiting all 
     this year for confirmation--has asked that her name be 
     withdrawn.
           Sincerely,
                                              Kenneth A. Guenther,
     Executive Vice President.
                                  ____

                                                     Conference of


                                       State Bank Supervisors,

                               Washington, DC, September 19, 1994.
     Re Tigert nomination to Chair the FDIC.

     Hon. Patty Murray,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Murray: The Conference of State Bank 
     Supervisors (CSBS) strongly urges you to act on the 
     nominations of Ricki Tigert to chair the Federal Deposit 
     Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and Andrew Hove as Vice Chairman 
     of the FDIC.
       Over two years ago, FDIC Chairman William Taylor died 
     unexpectedly. Since then, the FDIC has been headed by acting-
     Chairman Andrew Hove. Acting-Chairman Hove has done an 
     outstanding job in leading the FDIC under very difficult 
     circumstances. However, the FDIC needs and deserves an 
     appropriately appointed and confirmed Chair and Board of 
     Directors to take on the challenges that currently face the 
     FDIC and the banking industry.
       CSBS is comprised of the state officials that charter and 
     supervise banks in the fifty states and the four possessions. 
     There are over 8,800 state banks that hold more than $1.79 
     trillion in assets. Of this number, over 7,800 state banks 
     are not members of the Federal Reserve System. These so-
     called state nonmember banks are regulated in close 
     cooperation by the states and the FDIC. This gives state bank 
     supervisors both a unique perspective on the workings of the 
     FDIC and a critical interest in the effectiveness of the 
     FDIC.
       The absence of a confirmed Chair and Board of Directors is 
     a serious and growing problem for the FDIC. Over two years 
     without permanent leadership has resulted in a dramatic fall 
     in the morale at the FDIC. The FDIC is faced with numerous 
     and varied new challenges to the soundness of the deposit 
     insurance funds including the likely disparity in deposit 
     insurance assessments between the Bank Insurance Fund and the 
     Savings Association Insurance Fund and the regulation of bank 
     derivative activities. In addition, the FDIC is faced with 
     significant administrative challenges, including the need to 
     substantially reduce the work force at the FDIC in light of 
     the reduction in bank failures.
       What the FDIC needs is strong, permanent leadership, and it 
     needs it now. Ms. Tigert is without question extremely well 
     qualified and capable to fill the void at the FDIC. She has 
     an established record as an independent bank regulator. As in 
     the case of William Taylor, her years of experience at the 
     Federal Reserve Board have given her a strong understanding 
     of the critical role that banking regulation plays in 
     assuring the safety and soundness of financial institutions. 
     Ms. Tigert will provide the agency, the banking industry, and 
     the country with a regulator who is dedicated to protecting 
     the taxpayers' guarantee of the federal deposit insurance 
     system and to confronting aggressively the challenges before 
     the banking industry.
       Without a Chair and functional Board, the FDIC cannot play 
     its critical role as deposit insurer in the bank regulatory 
     system. Once Ms. Tigert and her fellow FDIC Board nominee 
     Andrew Hove are confirmed by the Senate, we can all rest 
     assured that balance and independence will be restored to 
     bank regulation.
       CSBS respectfully requests that you confirm the nominations 
     of Ms. Tigert and Mr. Hove. We recognize that there are many 
     crucial issues awaiting floor action. We would not raise the 
     issue of a nomination at this time but for our absolute 
     conviction that the timely confirmation of Ms. Tigert and Mr. 
     Hove is necessary for the future stability of the banking 
     system.
       CSBS appreciates your attention to this matter. We look 
     forward to working with you toward a stronger, safe banking 
     system.
           Sincerely,
                                                    James B. Watt,
                                                President and CEO.

  Mrs. MURRAY. I also ask for unanimous consent that a letter of 
support for the Tigert confirmation from the Independent Insurance 
Agents of America be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                             Independent Insurance


                                       Agents of America Inc.,

                               Washington, DC, September 29, 1994.
     Hon. Patty Murray,
     Senate Hart Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Murray: We are writing to request your support 
     in confirming Ricki Tigert as chairperson of the Federal 
     Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).
       She is an experienced, independent professional with 
     significant regulatory experience.
       The FDIC is too important an agency to have a leadership 
     vacuum. The time has come for the Senate to act favorably on 
     this nomination. A failure to act before adjournment will 
     almost certainly mean that the FDIC will drift until next 
     spring.
       The Independent Insurance Agents of America believes that 
     an independent board of directors at the FDIC is important 
     for both business and consumers in this country. Ms. Tigert's 
     background has prepared her well to be the chairperson of the 
     FDIC.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Robert Rusbuldt,
                                   Vice President Federal Affairs.

  Mrs. MURRAY. The Insurance Agents wrote:

       The FDIC is too important an agency to have a leadership 
     vacuum. The time has come for the Senate to act favorably on 
     this nomination. A failure to act before adjournment will 
     almost certainly mean that the FDIC will drift until next 
     spring.

  Mr. President, the FDIC is a corporation with an operating budget of 
nearly $2 billion. It has more than 13,000 employees, and reserves of 
$13 billion.
  Its shareholders are the American people--average Americans who 
depend on the safety and soundness of our financial institutions. And, 
it has gone rudderless for 2 years.
  Can you think of any other $13 billion corporation whose shareholders 
would allow it to operate without a board, and with an acting CEO, for 
2 years?
  Mr. President, we have an outstanding nominee. Ricki Tigert passed 
out of the Senate Banking Committee by a vote of 18 to 1. She has had 
broad-ranged experience in the U.S. Government spanning the executive 
branch, the U.S. Congress, and the Federal Reserve.
  She has worked for more than 15 years on a range of banking and 
financial issues that has gained her respect and admiration from all 
her former colleagues, many of whom are Republicans.
  Ricki Tigert's confirmation is not being opposed for any substantive 
reason. It is all politics. And, the American people will not stand for 
this body jeopardizing the safety and soundness of our banking system.
  This is exactly what Americans hate about politics. It sends a 
terrible message about public service. It takes the honor and the sense 
of duty out of serving the American people.
  And, it is dangerous to average American depositors.
  The objections that have been raised are red herrings--that she knows 
Bill and Hillary Clinton. Those arguments have been debunked.
  That the recusal did not come soon enough--those arguments have been 
debunked. And now that there are too many recusals out there.
  Mr. President, this reminds me of a child in preschool who threw all 
the toys on the floor and turned around and said, ``It's too messy for 
me to play in here.''
  Mr. President, I urge the swift confirmation of Ricki Tigert, and 
urge all of our colleagues to vote for this cloture motion.
  I reserve the remainder of our time.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Who yields time?
  The Senator from New York [Mr. D'Amato] is recognized.
  Mr. D'AMATO. May I inquire how much time we have?
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator has 7 minutes and 9 
seconds.
  Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, let me first say that I voted for Ms. 
Tigert. There is no doubt that she is qualified. But Ms. Tigert was 
less than candid with the committee, less than candid as it related to 
the issue of recusal, less than candid thereafter--her spokesperson 
saying one thing and the record indicating quite clearly something 
else.
  I have a memo here. I ask unanimous consent the memo be printed in 
the Record as if read in its entirety.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  (See exhibit 1.)
  Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, this document is a memo from the files of 
David Gergen, entitled ``Contacts with the RTC/FDIC.'' I only have 7 
minutes, but let me say this memo raises more questions than were 
raised by Roger Altman.
  I do not think we want a FDIC chairperson who is going to be called 
before the Banking Committee to explain how many contacts she had with 
the White House on the issue of recusal. I suggested to the White House 
we not go forward with this so I would not even have to make this brief 
statement. I have not issued press releases. I find it rather 
disingenuous to have a former Deputy Secretary of the Treasury, Peter 
Wallison, who was Ms. Tigert's law partner, lobbying on her behalf as 
if there was no contact; making statements that she only had one 
contact with the White House when indeed we know of at least one other. 
That comes from Mr. Gergen himself.
  We have gone through enough problems--problems with the issues of 
White House contacts and attempts to manipulate and oversee who is 
placed in control of independent agencies, who controls decisions on 
matters that are very sensitive and affect the White House. When are we 
going to learn? I went to the chairman of the committee, I went to 
others. I said we should avoid this. This is not the time to bring this 
nomination forward.
  I have extensive remarks that, if we lose this cloture vote, I will 
put into the Record. There are questions that have to be raised. The 
committee should be able to ask her these questions.
  I find it incredible that as it relates to her contacts with the 
White House she says on one hand, through her spokesperson: I only had 
one. Yet Mr. Gergen's memo indicates that there was at least one other, 
and that she herself called him to make that contact with the White 
House.
  Is that the kind of situation we want to have develop, as it relates 
to the chairperson of this important agency? Is it important? Yes. Has 
she had highly placed people lobbying on her behalf? Yes. What is their 
relationship? Either law partners or former associates. I do not think 
that they are independent. I think they comprise an insider network 
which is working to help one of their own there.
  Remember, this comes from a Senator who advised her before her 
hearing that she would be asked about recusal. I thought that she 
should be candid. And she was less than candid. I supported her 
initially, not withstanding the question that was raised by one of the 
members of the committee as it relates to this. Did she give us candor 
thereafter? No. Do her representatives give us candor thereafter? No.
  I find it incredible that Mr. Wallison, who was himself a 
distinguished counsel and Deputy Secretary of the Treasury, comes 
forward and says there was only one contact when indeed we know of at 
least another one, as a result of the memo that we have received and 
that I put into the Record.
  Mr. President, I do not believe--I can ask the chairman here--that I 
have opposed one nomination that has come through the Banking 
Committee. I have gone out of my way to be helpful, even where there 
have been somewhat controversial nominations. I have not used my status 
as ranking member to come to the floor to oppose nominations. This is 
the first time. These are unusual circumstances.
  Roberta Achtenberg, Assistant Secretary of Housing was very 
controversial. I said, ``As far as I am concerned, she has the 
qualifications, she promises to do the job according to the law.'' And 
she has proven to be even more controversial in the job than suspected. 
I did not try to oppose her.
  I have not attempted to second guess the President. I ask the 
chairman if he is aware of any of the nominations that have come before 
our committee, and there must have been close to 30 of them, that I 
have held up or that I have voted against? If I have, I would vote and 
let it go.
  I oppose this nomination for good cause and with good reason, unless 
we just choose to say, ``Oh, we need somebody, plunge ahead.'' If we 
want to get into the merits, I will put it into the Record. Indeed, if 
we lose cloture I will do exactly that. We will provide the facts we 
have now. But that will not preclude us from asking her to come before 
the committee for detailed, comprehensive hearings on the Whitewater 
matter, and asking about her contacts with the White House, and the 
statements that her representatives have put that are not accurate.
  I do not think it makes sense to go forward. I advised the 
administration through the chairman that it is not the time nor the 
place, and there are questions that need to be asked. I did not go to 
anyone off the record or on the record with the statement. I did not 
feed this out to the press, to say these were going to be questions 
that are being raised. But by going forward in this manner, I at least 
have to put this into the Record, as to why this Senator opposes the 
nomination.

                               Exhibit 1


                                              The White House,

                                        Washington, March 7, 1994.
     From David Gergen.
     Subject Contacts with RTC/FDIC.
       To the best of my memory, I have not had any 
     conversations--direct or indirect--with officials 
     representing RTC about the content of subjects under 
     investigation. My files also do not show any phone calls or 
     contain papers which suggest contacts.
       For purposes of the record, I wish to take note of the 
     following:
       Last Monday, February 28, I placed a call to Roger Altman 
     to congratulate him on recusing himself with regard to 
     Madison Guaranty. I thought he had voluntarily taken the 
     proper step and I wanted to be sure he knew of my support.
       This past Saturday morning, March 5, Roger Altman called me 
     to discuss a public letter he had sent to Senator Riegle 
     explaining aspects of his earlier meeting with White House 
     officials, including the fact that his office had obtained 
     prior clearance from the Office of Ethics at Treasury. He 
     wished to ensure that White House officials and members of 
     the press were more fully apprised of the letter, and I 
     assured him we would make an effort to make sure people knew 
     of its contents. At the end of the conversation, I raised the 
     subject of his coming testimony to Congress and I emphasized 
     how strongly the President wished that in all such matters, 
     his people be forthcoming and honest.
       This past Sunday evening, March 6, my wife and I had dinner 
     at Mr. Altman's home. It was largely a social occasion. He 
     and I did talk about the controversies that were in the press 
     re: Whitewater but we did not talk about anything which might 
     have been untoward (e.g., we specifically avoided discussion 
     of his forthcoming testimony at the request of Special 
     Counsel Fiske). (I have previously attended one other dinner 
     at Roger Altman's home but I believe the subject of the RTC 
     never came up, nor can I recall any other conversations with 
     Mr. Altman about it.)
       On another front: about three Sundays ago (I may be off by 
     a week or so), I received a call at home from Ricki Tigert, a 
     friend, who wanted to discuss her pending appointment to the 
     chairmanship of the FDIC and the question of whether she 
     should recuse herself from matters relating to Whitewater. 
     She expressed a preference for recusal, and I encouraged her 
     to seek such recusal. She asked if I would discuss her 
     interest in a recusal with others at the White House, and I 
     promised her that I would. Thereafter, I spoke with Joel 
     Klein, who also supported a recusal. Joel notified me that 
     Monday (possibly Tuesday) that Ricki would indeed be recusing 
     herself.
       My memory is a little hazy, but I believe these 
     conversations represent my contacts with regulators in the 
     Madison matter.

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Who yields time?
  Mr. RIEGLE. Mr. President, how much time remains on this side?
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Michigan has 3 
minutes and 22 seconds.
  Mr. RIEGLE. I am going to reserve time for the Senator from 
Tennessee. We have 3 minutes remaining. Let me yield a minute now to 
the Senator from Maryland.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Maryland [Mr. 
Sarbanes] is recognized for 1 minute.
  Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I rise in support of the nomination of 
Ricki Tigert to be Chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance 
Corporation [FDIC].
  The FDIC has been without a confirmed chairman since August 1992, 
when the able William Taylor tragically died. Andrew Hove, a member of 
the board of the FDIC, has been serving as acting chairman since that 
time. Although by all accounts Mr. Hove has done creditable job, most 
observers agree that the FDIC is in need of the permanent leadership 
and direction that only a duly appointed and confirmed chairman can 
provide.
  Mr. President, the Senate Banking Committee held a hearing on Ms. 
Tigert's nomination on February 1, and on February 10 the committee 
favorably reported out her nomination by a vote of 17 to 1.
  A brief review of the responsibilities of the FDIC makes clear why it 
is important that a duly appointed and confirmed chairman assume its 
leadership.
  The FDIC has a budget of $2 billion and approximately 12,000 
employees. It has responsibility for managing both the Bank Insurance 
Fund [BIF] and the Savings Association Insurance Fund [SAIF], which 
insure deposits up to $100,000 in commercial banks and thrift 
institutions in the United States.
  The FDIC is also the primary Federal regulator for over 6900 State 
chartered banks with $862 billion in assets. The FDIC is the primary 
Federal supervisor for nearly 400 State chartered savings banks with 
assets of $192 billion.
  In addition, the FDIC has authority to regulate activities of state-
chartered banks and thrifts that pose a serious threat to the Bank 
Insurance Fund or the Savings Association Insurance Fund, as well as to 
conduct examinations and bring enforcement actions relating to its 
responsibility to protect the insurance funds.
  Beginning in 1995, the FDIC will not only have responsibility to 
resolve failed banks but it will also take over the responsibility to 
resolve failed thrifts from the Reduction Trust Corporation [RTC]. 
Further, when the RTC goes out of business at the end of 1995, the FDIC 
will become responsible for disposing of its remaining asset inventory.
  Ms. Tigert is well qualified nominee, who brings a distinguished 
record of experience and achievement in the public and private sectors 
to this nomination.
  She is an honors graduate of Vanderbilt University and the University 
of Chicago Law School. She had the honor of clerking for one of our 
country's most distinguished jurists, the Honorable John Minor Wisdom 
of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
  After working for 2 years on the staff of the Senate Judiciary 
Committee and practicing law for 4 years with a Washington law firm, 
Ms. Tigert went to work for the Treasury Department as Senior Counsel 
for International Finance for 3 years.
  She followed that with 7 years of service with the Federal Reserve 
Board as their Associate General Counsel for International Banking. 
Since 1992 she has been a partner in the Washington law firm of Gibson, 
Dunn, and Crutcher, providing legal advice on domestic and 
international banking issues.
  She has served as adjunct professor of law at the Georgetown 
University Law Center, and as chair of the American Bar Association's 
Committee on International Banking and Finance.
  Ms. Tigert brings a great depth of experience and expertise in 
financial regulation to this nomination. She is well prepared and I 
believe she will be an able chairman of the FDIC.
  I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the cloture motion so that 
debate can be limited and the Senate can have the opportunity to vote 
on this important nomination.
  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, on March 2, 43 Republican Senators signed a 
letter to the distinguished majority leader, Senator Mitchell. This 
letter stated that we would:

       * * * object to any agreement * * * to proceed to the 
     nomination of Ricki Tigert * * * until the Senate Banking 
     Committee has an opportunity to thoroughly examine the 
     Resolution Trust Corporation's handling of its civil 
     investigation into Madison Guaranty Savings and loan.

  Seven months later, this condition has not been met. The Banking 
Committee has not thoroughly examined the RTC's handling of its 
investigation into Madison. The Senate has not gotten to the bottom of 
Whitewater. We do not know whether RTC officials in Washington tried to 
muzzle the activities of the field investigators in Kansas City. Nor do 
we know why the Justice Department failed to act upon the RTC criminal 
referrals in an orderly and prompt fashion.
  Quite simply, there are far more Whitewater questions today than 
there are answers.
  In fact, the Senate has not even completed the very limited hearings 
called for by Senate Resolution 229, adopted last June after much 
debate. At the urging of Robert Riske, the Banking Committee has 
refrained from investigating one of the narrow subjects that we already 
agreed ought to be investigated--the removal of Whitewater documents 
from the office of the late Vincent Foster.
  Mr. President, I intend to vote against cloture on this nomination. I 
signed a letter on March 2, and I intend to stick by it.
  Let me just say that I have no reason to doubt Ms. Tigert's 
competence and integrity. Nor do I have any inside information as to 
whether she is, or is not, a close personal friend of the Clinton's as 
some have claimed. I know that my distinguished colleague from New 
York, Senator D'Amato, has raised some troubling questions concerning 
whether White House officials improperly sought to dissuade Ms. Tigert 
from recusing herself from the Madison-Guaranty investigation. This 
issue of alleged White House pressure needs to be very closely 
examined.
  The bottom line is that, if my colleagues on the other side of the 
aisle really wanted to see Ms. Tigert confirmed, they would have 
already allowed the Senate to proceed with full and unabridged 
hearings. No matter how hard they may try and no matter how much they 
may hope, Whitewater is not going to go away anytime soon. The American 
people deserve a full accounting of Whitewater, and they will get it; 
maybe not this year, but perhaps in 1995.
  Unfortunately, we witnessed a new phenomenon this past session: It's 
called taking the Fiske.
  Taking the Fiske means abdicating our own oversight responsibilities 
by following the orders of an unelected bureaucrat. The American people 
have lost out as a result, and so, apparently, has Ricki Tigert.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the March 2 letter be 
reprinted in the Record immediately after my remarks.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                                  U.S. Senate,

                                    Washington, DC, March 2, 1994.
     Hon. George J. Mitchell,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Leader: We are writing to inform you that we will 
     object to any agreement seeking consent to proceed to the 
     nomination of Ricki R. Tigert, President Clinton's nominee to 
     chair the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, until the 
     Senate Banking Committee has an opportunity to thoroughly 
     examine the Resolution Trust Corporation's handling of its 
     civil investigation into Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan.
       As you know, the Acting Chief Executive Officer of the RTC, 
     Roger Altman, recently disclosed that he sought a meeting 
     with White House officials to give them a ``heads-up'' on the 
     RTC's investigation. Needless to say such a meeting is highly 
     improper and raises very real questions about Mr. Altman's 
     impartiality and the alleged independence of the 
     investigation. Specifically, why were Harold Ickes and 
     Margaret Williams present, in addition White House Counsel 
     Bernard Nussbaum? According to the Washington Post, Mr. Ickes 
     the Deputy Chief of Staff, is responsible for Whitewater 
     ``damage control''. Ms. Williams, Chief of Staff for Mrs. 
     Clinton, had previously participated with Mr. Nussbaum in 
     searching Vincent Foster's office and sending all or some of 
     the materials to David Kendall of Williams and Connally who 
     is representing the President and Mrs. Clinton.
       We believe public hearings are required to explore these 
     and other questions involving the attendance of political 
     operatives at the White House in briefings by the head of a 
     supposedly independent agency on matters that have nothing to 
     do with the Executive Office of the President.
       We regret having to delay the Senate's consideration of Ms. 
     Tigert's nomination. Nevertheless, the American people 
     deserve to have confidence that the RTC conducts its 
     important business in an independent and impartial fashion. A 
     Congressional hearing is an appropriate forum in which to 
     examine the important ethical and regulatory issues raised by 
     the Altman-White House meeting.
           Sincerely,
         Alfonse D'Amato; Bob Dole; Malcom Wallop; Phil Gramm; 
           Judd Gregg; Larry E. Craig; Trent Lott; Dan Coats; 
           Connie Mack; Conrad Burns; John McCain; Robert F. 
           Bennett; Kit Bond; Ted Stevens; Lauch Faircloth; Bob 
           Packwood; Arlen Specter; John H. Chafee; Jim Jeffords; 
           Al Simpson; Jesse Helms; Don Nickles; Mitch McConnell; 
           Orrin Hatch; Strom Thurmond; Thad Cochran; Pete V. 
           Domenici; Hank Brown; Frank H. Murkowski; Larry 
           Pressler; Bill Roth; John Danforth; Chuck Grassley; 
           Bill Cohen; Dave Durenberger; Slade Gorton; Richard G. 
           Lugar; Bob Smith; Nancy Landon Kassebaum; John Warner; 
           Dirk Kempthorne; Kay Bailey Hutchison.

  Mr. RIEGLE. Mr. President, I yield the remaining time to the Senator 
from Tennessee [Mr. Sasser].
  Mr. SASSER. Mr. President, Ricki Tigert is from my home State of 
Tennessee. She has compiled a distinguished career and will be a very 
able chairperson with the FDIC. She has bipartisan support.
  Mr. President, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation is one of 
the most important agencies within the U.S. Government. It is charged 
with protecting the deposits of the millions of hardworking people of 
this country.
  Despite this most important of missions, the FDIC has been without 
permanent leadership for 2 years now.
  A year ago, the President nominated Ricki Tigert, of my home State of 
Tennessee, to be Chairwoman of the FDIC. I strongly urge my colleagues 
to support Ms. Tigert's nomination.
  Ricki Tigert is extremely qualified to chair the FDIC. Ms. Tigert has 
a broad background in Government, having worked for both the executive 
and legislative branches. She is an internationally recognized expert 
on bank regulatory issues. She served 7 years as the chief 
international lawyer for the Federal Reserve Board.
  In early February, Ms. Tigert's nomination was reported favorably by 
the Senate Banking Committee by a nearly unanimous vote of 18 to 1. I 
repeat the vote was 18 to 1.
  Following the overwhelming committee vote, partisan politics took 
over. Ms. Tigert's nomination has been held up ever since, leaving the 
FDIC essentially in limbo.
  The time has come to set partisan politics aside and to confirm Ms. 
Tigert. And Mr. President, I am not alone in this judgment.
  Many distinguished Republicans outside this body have voiced their 
strong support for Ms. Tigert.
  Beryl Sprinkel, the former head of Ronald Reagan's Council of 
Economic Advisers, has written in strong support of Ms. Tigert.
  Along with other top Republican executive branch officials, Dr. 
Sprinkel wrote:

       She has had a distinguished career and is held in high 
     esteem as an internationally recognized expert in banking law 
     and regulation. She is committed to the complete independence 
     and integrity of the bank regulatory process. Further, 
     continuing to hold up a vote on her nomination does nobody 
     any good, least of all the banking industry.

  And the list of Ms. Tigert's supporters does not end there. Federal 
Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan supports Ms. Tigert's nomination. 
Dr. Greenspan and I do not always agree but we both know that Ricki 
Tigert will make an excellent FDIC Chairwoman.
  Why do all these past and present Republican officials support Ms. 
Tigert to head the FDIC? The answer is simple--because she is 
qualified.
  It is in the best interests of the U.S. banking system to have a 
fully operational FDIC.
  The banking industry realizes this. The Independent Bankers 
Association has strongly endorsed Ms. Tigert and expressed the 
importance it places on her confirmation.
  Many leading bankers from my home State have written me personally to 
recommend swift confirmation.
  It is time for the Senate to act. I urge my follow Senators on both 
sides of the aisle to put aside unrelated partisan issues and join me 
in supporting Ricki Tigert to be Chairwoman and board member of the 
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
  Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to vote against 
cloture on the nomination of Ms. Ricki Tigert to chair the FDIC.
  Mr. President, I had originally supported Ms. Tigert's nomination 
when it came out of the Banking Committee last spring. I had all 
intentions of supporting her on the floor, but recent developments have 
raised questions concerning her ability to chair the FDIC in an 
independent manner. Until these doubts are resolved, I cannot, in good 
conscience, support her nomination. Moreover, until she answers some 
questions about her independence and candor before the committee, I 
believe it is imprudent for the Senate to vote on the nomination.
  Mr. President, the President needs to nominate, and the Senate needs 
to confirm, qualified candidates for these vital financial regulatory 
agencies--candidates in whom Congress and the American people can have 
total confidence. And the administration needs to restrain its penchant 
for attempting to interfere with the work and the decisions of 
supposedly independent agencies.
  During the Whitewater hearings, the Banking Committee heard first-
hand testimony under oath about improper communications between the 
White House and agency staff designed to influence ongoing law 
enforcement activities and investigations at independent agencies, and 
to interfere with agency decisions involving the private affairs of the 
Clintons. We have direct testimony, diaries and documents that provide 
incontrovertible evidence of unethical, if not illegal, conduct by 
overzealous political associates and friends of the Clinton's to 
control and influence the actions of agencies that Congress intended to 
be beyond the White House's political control and influence.
  Mr. President, especially in light of the Banking Committee's recent 
Whitewater hearings and the shocking testimony and documentation of 
numerous improper meetings between Treasury officials and the White 
House, I am now skeptical that the FDIC could be independently headed 
by Ricki Tigert any more than the RTC was independently headed by Roger 
Altman. We learned from these hearings that she had contacts with White 
House and Treasury officials. But we have not had a chance to question 
her about these contacts and the committee should before the Senate is 
asked to vote on confirmation.
  Mr. President, spokesman on her behalf have said there were no 
contacts or one contact, but she has said little publicly about the 
meetings. A member of the White House Counsel's Office said in a recent 
Wall Street Journal article that he had the one and only contact with 
Ms. Tigert. I doubt that this is the full extent of the contacts 
between the White House and Ms. Tigert; I believe there is evidence to 
the contrary. Roger Altman only admitted to one meeting until the 
committee pressed him for the truth.
  Mr. President, with Ricki Tigert, we should have a chance to question 
her and she should have a chance to explain herself. Until then, I 
cannot support her. There are just too many doubts about whether or not 
she could carry out her duties and responsibilities as Chair of the 
FDIC independently and free of White House or Treasury interference.
  Mr. President, I want to have confidence that the regulators will 
exercise independent judgment. I want to have confidence that issues 
will not be decided based on politics or personal relationships. I want 
every issue decided on the facts and the merits. We can not afford to 
have regulators who are, or even appear to be, susceptible to undue 
political influence. And this is a standard that I want followed by 
every regulator and in every administration, no matter which party 
controls the White House or the Congress.
  Mr. President, for these reasons, I have changed my position on the 
nomination of Ms. Tigert to Chair the FDIC. I voted for confirmation in 
February. But I strenuously oppose her confirmation today. If confirmed 
as FDIC Chair, Ms. Tigert would preside over an agency that is already 
investigating Madison and the Rose Law Firm. At our recent Whitewater 
hearings, the former White House Counsel and others referenced her name 
in discussing Roger Altman's recusal. At a minimum the committee needs 
to investigate these references further before her nomination is 
considered.
  Mr. President, I am forced to conclude that it would be imprudent for 
the Senate to consider Ms. Tigert's nomination. Despite her 
considerable qualifications, I do not believe she should be confirmed 
by the Senate for this position. I have a much more extensive statement 
detailing and documenting the reasons for my opposition to Ms. Tigert's 
confirmation.
  A vote on cloture is scheduled for 6 o'clock so I will not read the 
statement. If cloture is invoked, I will use all of the time I am 
allowed to review the record for my colleagues.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, on November 16, 1993--almost 1 year ago--
Ricki Tigert was nominated by the President for Chairwoman of the 
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The Senate Banking Committee 
held her nomination hearing on February 1, 1994. The hearing was 
basically pro forma. It lasted just over 2 hours and included two other 
FDIC nominees. On February 10, 1994, by a vote of 17 to 1, the Senate 
Banking Committee voted to confirm her.
  That was 8 months ago. But today, Ricki Tigert has yet to be 
confirmed. The Nation's main bank regulator and insurer, the FDIC, 
remains a leaderless agency. Why?
  Because, Mr. President, Ricki Tigert's confirmation has been blocked. 
It has been held up for almost 8 months. It has been obstructed for one 
reason and one reason alone.
  It has nothing to do with her qualifications--she has extraordinary 
experience and impressive credentials. It has nothing to do with her 
views on matters of substance. It has nothing to do with ongoing 
disputes over policy. Ricki Tigert's confirmation is being blocked 
simply so some can attempt to score political points hashing and 
rehashing tired issues related to the Whitewater matter.
  The delay of Ricki Tigert's nomination is all about unvarnished 
partisan politics. According to some of my colleagues, Ricki Tigert is 
not a suitable candidate for the FDIC because she knows President 
Clinton. Their rationale is that because the FDIC is probing issues 
related to the Whitewater/Madison Guarantee, she would, as Chairwoman, 
somehow attempt to use the power of her office to influence matters to 
benefit the Clintons. This is simply preposterous.
  Mr. Chairman, this is a troubling new standard to which Ricki Tigert 
is being held. This standard would preclude anyone who has a 
preexisting relationship with a President or First Lady from serving in 
an appointed position. By itself, Ricki Tigert's relationship with the 
Clintons, whether close or distant, should not disqualify her from 
serving on the FDIC Board or in any other position for that matter.
  Just because she is acquainted with the President and the First Lady, 
does not mean she is unable to serve impartially as FDIC Chairwoman. 
But just to be absolutely certain, Ricki Tigert recused herself in 
February from ``Participation in any * * * investigation, inquiry, or 
determination'' involving the Clintons.
  Mr. President, this partisan delay has gone on long enough. There is 
absolutely no rational reason why Ricki Tigert should not be confirmed. 
I strongly urge my colleagues to invoke cloture and vote to confirm 
Ricki Tigert as the next Chairperson of the FDIC.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, it is time to move this nomination 
forward. No more partisan delays. No more gridlock. Ricki Tigert--the 
first woman ever nominated to head a major U.S. bank regulatory 
agency--is smart, she is independent, and she is qualified. It is time 
for the Senate to approve her nomination to head the FDIC.
  Ricki Tigert graduated magna cum laude from Vanderbilt University and 
is an honor's graduate from University of Chicago Law School, where she 
was a member of the law review.
  Ricki Tigert worked on banking and finance issues in the public 
sector for over 10 years: first, as Senior Counsel for International 
Finance at the Department of Treasury, and more recently as Associate 
General Counsel for International Banking at the Federal Reserve.
  Ricki Tigert taught international finance at Georgetown University 
Law Center and has published numerous articles on international banking 
and finance issues. Since October 1992, Tigert has been a partner at a 
major Washington, DC, law firm.
  Ricki Tigert is without question qualified to head the FDIC. She has 
gone through an exhaustive confirmation process--in fact, the Banking 
Committee voted 18 to 1 to recommend her confirmation. Senator D'Amato 
said during Tigert's confirmation hearing that:

       I had an opportunity to speak with the nominee. I met with 
     her. I think we're indeed fortunate that she's someone who 
     has the experience. She indicates to me that, notwithstanding 
     any personal relations she may have with people in the 
     Administration she feels and has indicated that she will be 
     independent. That is very, very important. I'm impressed by 
     her sincerity. So I intend to support the nominee.

  But, let me say: This debate is not about Ricki Tigert's 
qualifications. No, this debate is about whether Ms. Tigert is or is 
not a friend of the Clintons.
  So, let's look at the facts: Ricki Tigert has never met privately 
with either the President or the First Lady. She has never talked on 
the phone with either the President or the First Lady. Her only real 
contact with them has been in large public gatherings--in fact, she has 
never been with either of the Clintons with fewer than 200 other 
people!
  In a letter to the Wall Street Journal, three well respected 
Republicans who held positions in the Reagan and Bush administrations, 
said that Tigert is ``committed to the complete independence and 
integrity of the bank regulatory process *  *  *. The notion that she 
is a Clinton `crony' is a canard.''
  And, in case there was any question, Ms. Tigert has recused herself 
from any investigation, inquiry, or determination concerning the 
President or the First Lady.
  So, I say: It is time to stop this partisan effort to stop this 
nomination. The FDIC has been without a permanent Chairperson since 
August 1992--over 2 years! Americans who have placed their hard-earned 
savings in banks across this country rely on the FDIC to insure their 
deposits. Those who are playing politics with the Tigert nomination are 
playing politics with the safety of the savings of the American people.
  In the last week of this Congress, let us set aside partisan politics 
for a moment. Let us vote to confirm a woman who is extremely qualified 
and ready to serve. It is in the best interest of our banking industry 
and it is in the best interest of the American people.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired.

                          ____________________