[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 24 (Friday, February 28, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1790-S1791]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             PRESIDENTIAL VIOLATION OF FEDERAL CAMPAIGN LAW

  Mr. CRAIG. In speaking in morning business this morning, I want to 
express my concern, actually for the first time, on an issue that has 
been brewing publicly and not so publicly for well over 2 months now. 
As the Senate struggles to try to develop a mechanism under which we 
can effectively investigate the alleged wrongdoing at the White House 
as it relates to Presidential campaign fundraising, the issue gets 
larger and larger by the day. Yesterday, I finally believed it was time 
to speak out in relation to the Justice Department appointing 
independent counsel. I say so because it is obvious to me now that the 
public does not want the Congress to grind itself into gridlock and 
partisan fracturing in an effort to do what it should responsibly do, 
and that is investigate alleged wrongdoing or violations of law on the 
part of the executive branch.
  Be that as it may, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are 
also finding themselves in what I believe to now be a most embarrassing 
situation, having to argue that we probably ought not to do this, or to 
reduce the scope of what we should legitimately do, all in defense of a 
President who, by the hour, appears to be increasingly more involved in 
what is allegedly wrongdoing or violation of Federal campaign law.
  So, yesterday, I asked the Attorney General in a press release to 
appoint independent counsel and to move ahead with what she and the 
Justice Department must responsibly and rightfully do. The New York 
Times editorialized, and they said this:

       Janet Reno's insistence that she is waiting for creditable 
     evidence before appointing an independent counsel has now 
     reached a point of mindlessness. By the standards that 
     applied to the Carter, Reagan, and Bush administrations, 
     the threshold for appointing an independent counsel has 
     been reached and passed. If she will but look, Ms. Reno 
     will see a pervasive pattern of reckless behavior and an 
     array of suspicious incidents that cry out for an 
     independent counsel.

  That editorial went on to say--it speaks of the White House, and it 
says:

       Presidents and their White House aides are inevitably 
     involved in campaign planning, as certainly U.S. Senators are 
     in the planning of their campaigns. But, by openly bartering 
     Presidential invitations for political contribution and by 
     relentlessly mixing official and political, this 
     administration has gone so far beyond the normal rules of 
     political behavior and the traditional interpretation of 
     Federal law that even so dogged a Democrat as Pat Moynihan. . 
     . .

  And so on and so forth. And it speaks again for Ms. Reno to appoint 
that independent counsel.
  This morning in the Washington Times, again, headlines, ``Reno Not 
Ready for Outside Probe.''
  My question today is to Ms. Reno. When will you be ready? When there 
is a massive public outcry of wrongdoing or alleged wrongdoing? When 
the evidence piles so high at the door of the White House that you 
cannot step across the threshold to go see your friend, the President, 
Mr. Clinton?
  Ms. Reno, wake up. Listen to what is being said in public. It is time 
to act. It is time we develop an independent counsel, bipartisan, 
nonpartisan, to investigate what is now verging on a major scandal. 
Someone asked me while I was traveling in Idaho last week, ``Why is the 
President out advocating campaign finance reform when it appears that 
he is the greatest violator?'' I said, ``There is an old adage that 
those who sin the most are the first to the altar.''
  We find it increasingly embarrassing to read in the newspapers 
everyday that somehow the White House, the very image of this country, 
was used for personal gain in a way that no other President has used 
it.
  So, once again, today I call on the Attorney General to do what she 
must responsibly do. The allegations grow by the day. Ms. Reno, do what 
you should do. Appoint an independent counsel to investigate, in a 
nonpartisan way, what should be done, for the sake of the Presidency 
and the White House itself.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Wall Street Journal 
article entitled ``Irate Clinton Blasts Moves for Counsel'' be printed 
in today's Record.
  There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

             [From the Wall Street Journal, Feb. 18, 1997]

                 Irate Clinton Blasts Moves for Counsel

                           (By David Rogers)

       Washington.--An angry President Clinton called Democratic 
     senators this week complaining of demands inside the party 
     for a special counsel to investigate foreign influence in 
     fund raising for his presidential campaign.
       Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D., S.D.) was awakened around 
     1 a.m. Monday by Mr. Clinton. Leaders of the Democratic 
     Senatorial Committee were also called Sunday night by the 
     president, who angrily reminded senators he had gone to New 
     York to raise money for their campaigns in the prior week.
       None of the senators called by Mr. Clinton would discuss 
     these conversations, and the White House declined to comment. 
     Members of Congress and Democratic aides, however, confirmed 
     the timing and substance of the calls. Mr. Clinton appears to 
     have been provoked by Sunday talk shows in which former New 
     Jersey Sen. Bill Bradley and Sen. Russell Feingold (D., Wis.) 
     endorsed the appointment of an independent counsel.

[[Page S1791]]

       The picture of an agitated president making late-night 
     calls is very different from the calm image the White House 
     has sought to project. The incident testifies to the 
     increased tension between Mr. Clinton and Congress amid the 
     almost daily revelations regarding his past fund-raising 
     practices.
       Trying to seize the high ground, Democrats are demanding 
     that Republicans make a commitment to allow campaign-finance-
     reform legislation to come to the floor this year. But Mr. 
     Clinton's outbursts may only feed Republican complaints that 
     Democrats are stalling on behalf of the embattled president--
     an important fund-raiser.
       The fight is expected to come to a head in the Senate as 
     early as next Wednesday. Mr. Dashcle said yesterday that 
     Republicans must promise to bring up campaign reform this 
     spring if Democrats are to support funding for a GOP-backed 
     inquiry of campaign abuses by the White House.
       ``We will not agree to funding . . . to anything, until we 
     get campaign-finance reform,'' said the South Dakota 
     Democrat. His statement, the clearest linkage of the two 
     issues to date, is designed to exploit GOP division on this 
     front.
       The Republicans' strongest reform advocate, Arizona Sen. 
     John McCain, supports both an independent counsel and a 
     campaign-finance bill, but Majority Leader Trent Lott (R., 
     Miss.) is decidedly cool to overhauling the current system. 
     Caught in the middle is Sen. Fred Thompson (R., Tenn.), who 
     chairs the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, charged 
     with carrying out the planned inquiry. And some Republicans 
     are openly proposing to scuttle Mr. Thompson's budget if the 
     investigation becomes a vehicle to advance campaign reform.
       Mr. Lott last night warned Democrats against filibustering 
     the committee's funding but said he had exhausted efforts to 
     reach a compromise and expected to meet the issue head-on 
     next week.
       As the Thompson inquiry has stalled, smaller investigations 
     are springing up. One of the latest comes from a Senate 
     Judiciary subcommittee overseeing the National Bankruptcy 
     Review Commission. The commission's chairman, Brady 
     Williamson, attended a fund-raiser for Mr. Clinton last 
     September that drew a large set of big donors from the 
     bankruptcy professional community.
       In an interview this week, Mr. Williamson said he went as a 
     ``private citizen'' and only after seeking an opinion from 
     the White House counsel's office. But Sen. Charles Grassley 
     (R. Iowa), chairman of the Judiciary subcommittee, said 
     yesterday he had received written correspondence indicating 
     those running the event had pressured members of the banking 
     industry to attend if they wanted to be heard on bankruptcy 
     issues.
       In another development, Federal Bureau of Investigation 
     agents who this week raided the Washington offices of the 
     U.S.-Thai Business Council couldn't find records related to 
     Ban Chang International, which shared offices with the 
     council and helped finance it. Pauline Kanchanalak, a major 
     Democratic contributor whose gifts are now under srcutiny by 
     the FBI, worked for Ban Chang and helped organize the 
     council.
       Ban Chang is a subsidiary of Ban Chang Group, a 
     conglomerate based in Bangkok, Thailand. Last June Ms. 
     Kanchanalak and a relative gave $185,000 to the Democratic 
     National Committee in conjunction with a coffee event at the 
     White House with President Clinton, attended by top 
     executives of another Thai conglomerate, CP Group.
       People familar with the matter say the FBI wants to know if 
     Ms. Kanchanalak knows where the records are, but she is 
     currently thought to be in Thailand. Her Washington-based 
     attorney, and an attorney for Ban Chang in Washington, 
     couldn't be reached for comment.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the Senator from New 
Hampshire.

                          ____________________