[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 89 (Monday, June 17, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H6418-H6419]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                               TRAVELGATE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from New Mexico [Mr. Schiff] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I want to take a few minutes to talk about 
the matter that has been before the Congress and before the public for 
some time now, that began with the involvement of the White House 
Travel Office in 1993, and has been known in the media as Travelgate, 
and has now, through the continuing investigations by the House, 
brought up the issue of FBI files being sent to the administration in 
an inappropriate manner.
  What I want to make the point of is that it has often been accused 
that everything that happens in Washington is for political purposes. 
It would be very naive to suggest that in a Presidential year, 
particularly, there is not politics on the minds of both sides of both 
major parties. That is certainly the case.

[[Page H6419]]

  I want to make the point, since I am vice chairman of the Committee 
on Government Reform and Oversight which has been handling the greater 
part of the Travel Office matter and will be handling the FBI files 
matter this week, that this is not a political venture. In fact, quite 
the contrary. Our chairman, the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. 
Clinger] has consistently tried to put this matter to rest. He has 
actually tried to close this investigation, but he has been unable to 
do so because at each juncture new information, questionable 
information, has come to our attention that has had to be pursued.
  I would like to go back to the beginning of this situation. In 1993, 
the incoming Clinton administration wanted to replace certain employees 
of the White House who worked at the Travel Office. The Travel Office 
primarily makes travel arrangements for members of the media to travel 
with the President of the United States, a very important 
responsibility to the White House and to the public. These employees 
have been with the White House, on the whole, for a number of years, 
but they are not protected by Government civil service or other 
protections of their job. The administration had every legal right to 
change them if the administration wanted to do so.

                              {time}  1415

  The administration, however, did not want to say we want to fire 
these people to put in our own political choices to handle these jobs, 
because they thought that would look bad. Instead they did something 
worse. Instead they trumped up a lot of charges against the individuals 
who worked at the Travel Office and besmirched the reputation of these 
people who had been devoted public servants under Presidents of both 
parties for a number of years.
  When the smoke finally cleared and when the one criminal charge 
brought against one of those individuals was resolved by an acquittal, 
a finding of not guilty, the White House apologized for the handling of 
that matter. That should have ended it. The White House made a mistake, 
the White House admitted it made a mistake and apologized and that 
should have concluded matters. At least that is what our chairman, 
Chairman Clinger, expected. But we did have a hearing to determine 
whether the investigations, the administrative investigations, into 
that matter were complete.
  What did we learn at that first set of hearings? We learned that the 
White House had withheld documents from the investigators from various 
agencies who were investigating what happened at the Travel Office. 
That was not the end of it. When we learned that, we subpoenaed 
documents from the White House and we received a number of documents 
including a memorandum which was acknowledged by the then White House 
administrator that contradicted the explanation that was given by the 
White House of how that mistake occurred. The White House had said a 
mistake was made but it was made by a certain level in the White House 
management and the people who made the mistake were suitably 
reprimanded. The problem is the memorandum authored by the person who 
was in charge of White House activities suggested very strongly that he 
was ordered by people higher than himself to take that action and he 
did not do it on his own.
  So we have two contradictions right there: First we have a 
withholding of documents from people who are charged administratively 
to review what happened in the Travel Office. Then we have, when 
documents are produced, a contradiction from what the White House said 
happened to what apparently really happened.
  We now have a new development. After we got the documents that 
contradicted the White House's earlier position, we subpoenaed 
additional documents. The White House resisted turning those documents 
over to Congress on the grounds of executive privilege. Executive 
privilege is most often raised for reasons of national security and 
that level. I believe there is such a thing as executive privilege. But 
after the Congress pushed the issue, after our committee voted contempt 
of Congress citations against individuals involved, numerous other 
documents have arrived, and that is where we learned that the White 
House had in its possession numerous FBI files on former Republican 
officeholders in the White House, including ordinary staff people who 
did not necessarily hold high positions. These kinds of records did not 
belong in the White House in the first place and once the White House 
knew they were there, they should have been sent back immediately, when 
they were not. Nobody knew about any of this until our committee found 
this information.
  We will hold hearings this week, Mr. Speaker, and I hope these 
hearings will finally be the end of this matter, but do not count it.

                          ____________________