[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 24 (Friday, February 28, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1783-S1785]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
NOMINATION OF ANTHONY LAKE
Mr. LIEBERMAN. I thank the Chair. Mr. President, I rise this morning
to discuss the status of the President's nomination of Anthony Lake--
Tony Lake--to be the Director of Central Intelligence.
Mr. President, I read from the New York Times this morning, which
reports in its lead story, ``Leaders in the Senate demand FBI files on
CIA nominee.'' I quote from the lead paragraph:
Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said today
that unless he received all of the FBI files on Anthony Lake,
he would not hold confirmation hearings for Mr. Lake.
Later, in that same story, the author says:
It is reported that two senior Republican members of the
committee, Senators Lugar and Chafee, said today they would
probably vote for Mr. Lake, barring some devastating
disclosure at the confirmation hearings.
Senator Lugar, our distinguished colleague and friend from Indiana,
says that he strongly disagrees with the demand for the opening of
these files and the delay of the hearing. According to Senator Lugar,
``The whole confirmation process becomes more and more outrageous.
People feel it is their duty to engage in character assassination or to
cause the nominee's defeat, or to discourage and demoralize them. The
FBI files are raw files,'' Mr. Lugar said. ``They may contain rumor,
gossip, hearsay, or innuendo. They may be true, they may be false, they
may be scandalously defamatory, but they should not be the basis of
evaluating someone's character.''
Mr. President, I come to the floor to appeal to the leadership of the
Intelligence Committee to move forward with the hearing on March 11 and
to treat this nominee fairly, because the process is becoming unfair.
Every time a hurdle is erected for Mr. Lake and he jumps over it,
another one seems to be erected in its place. Continuing with the
sports analogy, every time Tony Lake moves the ball toward the goal
line, the goal line is pushed back. And the process is beginning to
look more like a fishing expedition than like a process of
congressional evaluation of a Presidential nominee--one who has served
his country with distinction over the course of many years--that is
fair and proceeding expeditiously and with a sense of due process.
Mr. President, in speaking about Tony Lake's nomination, I think it
is important that I share my belief of what our role is when we advise
and consent here in this Senate to nominations of the President. I
faced this question early in my time here, in 1989, on several
occasions regarding the nominations of President Bush. I supported
almost all of them. It seemed to me then, as it does now, that our role
here is not to substitute ourselves for the President. The President is
elected to make these nominations. I decided that the standard I would
impose is not whether I would have nominated this individual. That is
what Presidents are elected for. The Senate's role is to advise and
consent. I think that means the standard we should follow is to
determine whether the President's nominee is within the acceptable
range for
[[Page S1784]]
the particular job for which that person is nominated, not whether we
would have nominated that person.
Mr. President, on that standard, it seems to me that Tony Lake more
than meets the qualifications for being a superb Director of Central
Intelligence at a very, very critical time for the intelligence
community in the history of our Nation.
As I indicated a few moments ago, Mr. Lake has served our country in
various capacities with great honor over many years. He has been a
student of government and a teacher of government in universities, and
returned to government again to serve for the last 4 years with dignity
and, I think, great effect as the National Security Adviser.
What standards do we hold up for this particular nomination? I am
pleased to be able to find a good source to rely on. That is an article
written by Robert Gates, CIA Director under President Bush, published
in the Wall Street Journal on January 29 of this year. Bob Gates held
up three standards for judging a nominee for Director of Central
Intelligence.
No. 1, is that person recognized as a man of integrity and principle,
a man prepared to stand up for what he believes is right?
No. 2, is that person knowledgeable about foreign affairs?
No. 3, does that person have the confidence of the President and know
well the rest of the President's national security team?
On all three counts, Bob Gates, a distinguished public servant with
an excellent record of service to our country, found Tony Lake
qualified with a lot to spare.
I quote from that article in the Wall Street Journal. First, Bob
Gates says, Tony Lake is ``broadly recognized as a man of integrity and
principle, and as a man with courage to stand up for what he believes
is right. This offers reassurance that he will be independent of the
White House in which he served and will be directed by a moral
grounding most Americans would find admirable.''
It is hard to convey this in a few moments on the floor. But I have
known Tony Lake for a number of years. And I do not agree with
everything he has ever done in his career. But, believe me, this is a
person who has always been animated by a desire to do the right thing
for his country. And that is why Bob Gates says accurately that Tony
Lake ``* * * will be directed by a moral grounding most Americans would
find admirable.''
Second, whether or not one agrees with him on the issues, he is
thoroughly knowledgeable about foreign affairs. That is self-evident
based on the enormously successful record he has made over the last 4
years sitting at the center of America's foreign policy during a
difficult time, and one in which I think most observers agree has seen
America remain strong and recognized as not only the one superpower in
the world but a superpower that has used its power effectively and
ethically and morally.
Third, does he have the confidence of the President? I suppose that
is self-evident since the President appointed him. He does. And, of
course, he knows the rest of the people that comprise the national
security team in this administration. That is important, not just for
matters of friendship, but because the intelligence functions should be
at the heart of our foreign policy. Because of the personal relations
Tony Lake has with the President, the Vice President and others in a
foreign policy apparatus of this Government, he will bring intelligence
to the center of their deliberations, where it clearly belongs.
I have said that in this process of evaluating Tony Lake's
nomination, at every point where a hurdle was established he jumped
over it, and then more hurdles were erected. Some of these questions
have been fair. The questions about how he handled stock holdings were
examined by the appropriate oversight bodies and he was cleared. And I
have some personal knowledge on questions about how he handled the
shipment of arms from Islamic countries through Croatia to Bosnia
because, along with the former majority leader, Senator Dole, and other
distinguished colleagues here, I worked for a long time to lift the
arms embargo against the Bosnians.
The question was, did Tony Lake do anything in response to messages
from our Ambassador to Croatia indicating that the Croatians were
wondering how we would react to shipments of arms across this country
to Bosnia? Tony Lake responded that there were no instructions. Some
critics have seemed to suggest that there was a point in these
deliberations where, although Tony Lake clearly said there were no
instructions, somehow his body language conveyed a different message.
Now, if we are getting to the point where we are beginning to question
the capacity of people to be Directors of Central Intelligence because
of their body language, we are heading down a very unusual road.
I think questions about this incident have been well handled. Not
only was the no-instructions policy not covert, but it was not an
action within the meaning of relevant statute. And, in my personal
opinion, because our European allies were taking a position against
lifting the arms embargo and letting these poor Bosnians defend
themselves, I think Tony Lake's decision to give no instructions
successfully resolved a very difficult situation and was the absolutely
moral decision to make.
OK, so he jumped those two hurdles. But now, as the process goes on,
it seems that every accusation made against the White House, that every
question of criticism about foreign policy, is being put on his desk.
He is being held up to a standard that is impossible to meet and
fundamentally unfair. One day, somebody says, we will have to ask him
questions about the administration's policy on Haiti. Another says that
we have to check to make sure he had no involvement in any of the
political fundraising going on in the White House. He seems to have
kept himself very, very far from all of that.
Now, there is the question of the FBI report. Knowing Tony Lake as I
do, knowing his desire to cooperate with this Congress, I agree with
Senator Robert Kerrey, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence
Committee, when he says in the newspaper today that Tony will try to
work out some agreement by which the members of the Intelligence
Committee can see the FBI report. In some substantial sense, I regret
that. Senator Kerrey has seen the report in full. I asked him for his
judgment. I trust him totally. He said that there was nothing he saw in
that report which would alter his decision to enthusiastically support
Tony Lake's nomination.
So I appeal to the leadership of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
The Senator from Alabama, the chairman, is a good friend and an
honorable, standup individual.
I understand that some people may oppose this nomination, but,
please, go ahead with that hearing on March 11. Let the man have his
day. Ask him the tough questions. Then let the matter go to a vote in
that committee. Bring it out to the floor. We can debate it out here.
Let us vote on it. But let us not subject this fine man, this great
public servant, this patriot to a kind of water torture where we keep
dripping water on his head and do not treat him with the respect and
dignity that he and the agency that he is nominated here by the
President of the United States to lead both deserve.
Mr. President, Senator John McCain, distinguished colleague and
friend from Arizona, usually a pretty good guide to what is right
around here--I say usually because he has a few gaps in logic with
regard to the submarine construction program, but I leave those aside
for now--sent a letter to all of us on January 29 in which he said:
I support the nomination of Tony Lake to be the next
Director of Central Intelligence and will introduce him to
the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence when it holds
hearings on this issue. I have worked frequently with Tony
Lake over the years, and I agree with Bob Gates--
Referring to the earlier article I mentioned--
that he is a knowledgeable man of principle and integrity who
can be expected to work well with other members of the
President's national security team and with Congress.
End of the quote from the Senator from Arizona, the Honorable John
McCain.
Mr. President, let me just add this one word about the intelligence
community. I just do not think it is in the interest of the
intelligence community
[[Page S1785]]
or the country to permit Tony Lake's nomination to be unfairly delayed
or to get mired in partisan politics. This nomination should be judged
on its merits. That is all the nominee, that is all the Commander in
Chief, that is all any of us who support him are asking. Delay and
political warfare risks doing serious damage not only to Tony Lake's
honor and good name but also to an agency that has traditionally
enjoyed and still fundamentally and seriously deserves bipartisan
support. The CIA and the intelligence community are at a crossroads.
They need a principled and strong leader now, and that man is Tony
Lake.
Mr. President, at the end of the column he wrote for the Wall Street
Journal, Bob Gates summed it up very well, and I quote finally from
that article. Bob Gates says:
As the last CIA Director, nominated by a Republican
President and confirmed by a Democratic controlled Senate, I
strongly believe that hard questions should be asked of Mr.
Lake and then he should be confirmed expeditiously with broad
bipartisan support. This would be in the best interests of
the country and of the intelligence community.
I thank the Chair and I yield the floor.
Mr. BYRD addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Roberts). The Senator from West Virginia
is recognized.
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, first I wish to thank the distinguished
Senator, Mr. Craig Thomas, for his consideration in allowing me to go
ahead of him. He has been patiently waiting in the Chamber to be
recognized, but he has generously acceded to my request that I be
permitted to proceed in that I have an important appointment to meet. I
will be very brief.
____________________