[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 153 (Thursday, September 28, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H9599-H9600]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   PEOPLE WANT THE LETTER OF THE LAW

  (Mrs. SCHROEDER asked and was given permission to address the House 
for 1 minute, to revise and extend her remarks, and to include therein 
extraneous material.)
  Mrs. SCHROEDER. Mr. Speaker, as an American, I feel very good about 
the fact that everybody is under the letter of the law. As a Member of 
this body during Watergate, I was very saddened by the fact that the 
Presidency was being attacked, but I also felt very good that we were 
showing the world that no one is above the letter of the law in this 
great and wonderful country, thanks to Thomas Jefferson and many of our 
forefathers and the rules they put together.
  Yesterday, Mr. Speaker, I felt sick because I found an article in the 
Hartford Courant in which the ethics charges against the Speaker were 
being discussed by the chairwoman of the Ethics Committee who said, the 
letter of the law is not compelling to me, that there is a lot of 
flexibility in our rules, and I wanted to put together a process that 
will make Members feel good.
  I do not think people want that flexibility. I think they want the 
letter of the law.
  Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record the article to which I 
referred.

                   Johnson Defends Ethics Case Stance

                         (By John A. MacDonald)

       Washington.--Rep.  Nancy  L.  Johnson, R-6th District, 
     confirmed Tuesday that she signed a 1988 letter to the House 
     ethics committee urging if to conduct a ``full inquiry'' into 
     complaints against then Speaker Jim Wright, a Texas Democrat.
       The letter was a circulated by Rep. Newt Gingrich, who at 
     the time was a relatively unknown Republican from Georgia. 
     Now, he is speaker of the House and is the subject of 
     complaints under review by the ethics committee.
       Johnson became the committee's chairwoman when Republicans 
     took control of the House in January.
       In addition to the letter, Gingrich issued a press release 
     may 26, 1988, in which he said it was ``vital'' for the 
     committee to hire an outside counsel to pursue the complaints 
     against Wright throughly.
       The letter and press release are significant because many 
     think they set a standard the committee has failed to meet in 
     its Gingrich investigation.
       Asked why that was not happening, Johnson said, ``This is 
     Newt speaking, and you see some of our Democratic colleagues 
     agree with him. . . . In signing this original letter, that 
     didn't mean I agreed with him on all this stuff.''
       Johnson's comments came during a wide-ranging meeting with 
     Connecticut reporters.
       The committee is considering complaints relating to a book 
     deal Gingrich signed with media magnate Rupert Murdoch, the 
     financing and promotion of a college course Gingrich taught 
     in Georgia and whether the speaker allowed an outside 
     consultant to perform official House business.
       Johnson also defended the committee's decision not to use 
     an investigative procedure set out in the House Ethics 
     Manual.
       ``The letter of the law is not compelling to me,'' she 
     said. ``I will work with our rules. Our rules have a certain 
     amount of flexibility. . . . My goal is to have a process 
     that the committee members feel good about.''
       Rep. Jim McDermott of Washington, the senior committee 
     Democrat, has objected to the course the committee is 
     following, complaining that the panel was not prepared to 
     question key witnesses who appeared in July. Tuesday, Johnson 
     complained that McDermott had not raised his concerns with 
     the committee before making them public.
       McDermott did not respond to a request for comment.
       As she has in the past, Johnson held out the possibility 
     that the committee will turn for help to an outside counsel, 
     as many House Democrats and several government watchdog 
     groups have requested. But she said the 10-member panel, 
     evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats, had not 
     reached that point.
       Responding to reports the panel was close to appointing an 
     outside counsel, Johnson said, ``It is absolutely true, 
     without doubt in my mind, that the committee has made no 
     decision.''
       Johnson sought to portray the committee as struggling to 
     find the best way to achieve a consensus on how to complete 
     its inquiry. ``Jim's position is certainly legitimate,'' she 
     said, referring to McDermott.
       But, she went on, ``Six-four decisions aren't healthy. They 
     don't get you anywhere, particularly 6-4 procedural 
     decisions. Six-four procedural decisions tend to set up 5-5 
     deadlocks.'' A 6-4 vote is the narrowest majority by which 
     the 10-member committee can approve an action.
       The letter Johnson and 70 other House Republicans signed in 
     1988 has been circulated in recent days by groups seeking an 
     outside counsel with unlimited authority. It concluded: ``The 
     integrity of the House of Representatives and the trust of 
     the American people require a full inquiry [into the Wright 
     complaints].''
       Johnson said Tuesday, ``I don't see that as contradictory 
     of what I'm doing . . . I have every intent that this will be 
     a full inquiry.''
       She also said that naming an outside counsel could get in 
     the way of the committee making its own judgments.

[[Page H 9600]]

       ``We need original source information where it's practical 
     and where it's reasonable,'' she said. ``I think we're going 
     to do a better job than those who would have turned it over 
     to someone.''
       Others have said that only an outside counsel could conduct 
     a complete, impartial investigation.
       Johnson disagreed with those who say the committee has 
     established special rules for Gingrich, and she defended the 
     committee's action in setting aside the ethics manual in the 
     speaker's case.
       ``My job, as I perceive it, is not to fulfill some sort of 
     generic expectation,'' she said. ``My job is to provide just 
     consideration of the complaints that come before us.''
       The ethics manual says that once the committee decides a 
     complaint meets certain criteria, it may begin a formal 
     inquiry. The panel then is to split into subcommittees--one 
     to investigate the complaints and the other to hear sworn 
     testimony and decide the validity of the complaints.
       Instead, the committee has yet to vote to conduct a formal 
     investigation while the full panel has taken sworn testimony 
     from more than a dozen witnesses, including Gingrich and 
     Murdoch.
       Johnson said the committee's 1992 investigation of members 
     who bounced checks on the now-defunct House Bank showed the 
     ethics manual process to be an ``utter and total disaster.'' 
     McDermott served on the ethics sub, that recommended making 
     public the names of only 24 members who abused their banking 
     privileges.
       But Johnson and three other committee Republicans objected 
     that all those who wrote bad checks should be named. 
     Eventually, Johnson's position prevailed. She said the bank 
     investigation unfairly harmed the reputations of many 
     members, adding, ``I don't want a result like that.''
       Government watchdog groups that have recently joined the 
     call for an outside counsel with unlimited authority to 
     handle the Gingrich case include Common Cause, Public Citizen 
     and the Congressional Accountability Project, a Ralph Nader 
     organization.

                          ____________________