[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 64 (Thursday, April 6, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H4339]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 CLARIFICATION OF THE MURDOCH CONTRACT

  (Mr. LINDER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, when such information as you have just heard 
is presented to the House floor, it needs to be responded to.
  The fact of the matter is this: Mr. Murdoch was selling a property to 
the Tribune Co. headed by Quincy Jones, a black entrepreneur. Mr. 
Murdoch had two contracts for that property, one to be sold at this 
amount and one to be sold at another amount if he got a Treasury 
certificate.
  The beneficiary of the Treasury certificate was the Quincy Jones 
operation, which would have received that property at less than the 
amount equal to the Treasury certificates. Mr. Murdoch was going to get 
precisely the same amount whether or not the certificates were ordered.
  In the other body, the gentlewoman from Illinois argued that we 
should open the timeframe for the certificates to be allowed, and she 
amended the contract to open the timeframe to extend it.
  The Senate insisted on her position. The House could not get her to 
remove her position, and so Quincy Jones is going to be the beneficiary 
of the $38 million or $65 million, whichever the amount is.


                          ____________________