[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 109 (Tuesday, July 29, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Page S8284]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  URGING APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL PROSECUTOR FOR CAMPAIGN FINANCE ABUSES

 Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I rise today to offer my support to 
the request for a special prosecutor to look into the campaign finance 
abuses of the last election.
  It comes as a shock to me that I even have to give this speech. It is 
so clearly necessary to have a nonpartisan, noncoercible investigator 
looking into these issues that the failure to appoint one in itself 
looks suspicious. The current troubles over election funding are just 
the sort of situation the special prosecutor idea was created for. The 
problem is a far reaching, bi-partisan scandal involving two branches 
of Government. It is also a scandal where those being investigated have 
the ability and possibly the desire to curb or even block efforts to 
fully unearth all the relevant facts.
  And let me make this clear--it is not a potential scandal, Mr. 
President, it is a scandal. It is a scandal we see unfolding on TV, in 
the papers, and in the Hart Committee room with Senator Thompson's 
hearings.
  And by the word scandal, I don't mean it's a little bit of gossip the 
media can pick over, but a scandal in that the situation is an illegal, 
unethical, and glaringly blatant violation of what the American people 
expect from their elected officials. There needs to be a full scale 
investigation into the entire finance problem, and a special prosecutor 
is the best way to accomplish this.
  I admire Senator Thompson. I admire what he is doing. I have the 
utmost respect for his investigatory powers, and I truly believe he can 
do what he says he is going to do. His committee is fairly and bravely 
shining the public light of inquiry into the darker corners of election 
funding, and for that he deserves all the kudos he can be given. But 
the fact remains that a special prosecutor is needed.
  Senator Thompson's hearings should serve as the springboard from 
which a special prosecutor's investigation is launched. He has called 
attention to the problem, he has let our colleagues from both sides of 
the aisle have a chance to look into the abuses of fund-raising and 
soft money, and he has helped greatly to awaken the American people to 
the travesties done in an attempt to win their votes. Now, from this 
solid base, a solid legal case can be built against those who have 
abused our--admittedly--easily abusable system.
  A special prosecutor investigation has more mobility, more leeway and 
more time than a Senate committee. It also is not troubled with 
partisan bickering and posturing. I know that Senator Thompson has done 
his best to curtail any partisanship, and he has done an excellent job, 
but the special prosecutor was created for just this reason--to avoid 
the clash between parties in a wide ranging investigation.
  Honestly, how can there be any doubt that we need a special 
prosecutor in this case?
  Not only the chairman, but also the ranking member of the committee 
looking into campaign finance abuses, Senator Glenn, admits that the 
evidence before the committee supports the conclusion that attempts 
were made by foreign powers to buy our elections.
  There are those who say that the Justice Department could handle any 
illegalities associated with campaign abuse, if indeed any are found. 
Well, the Justice Department faces a conflict of interest trying to 
investigate up its chain of command. Anyone who thinks differently is 
kidding themselves. The Justice Department lawyers looking into this 
are careerist, and they report to political appointees.
  For instance--the FBI claims they have not been able to find Charlie 
Trie, but Tom Brokaw was not only able to find him, he was able to 
interview him. I know that the American media are good, but better than 
the combined powers of our Federal police forces? More likely, there is 
a restraining force on the Justice Department. They are not to blame. 
Nobody should have to investigate their boss, and nobody should have to 
investigate the people who find them.
  A special prosecutor has not been appointed because the Attorney 
General says that there is not enough proof to warrant one. I am not 
sure, exactly, where to begin to refute that idea. The abuses we have 
been made aware of are so glaring and so blatant and so widespread that 
I am almost thinking that the Attorney General is kidding. She herself, 
according to the press, has created a tax force inside the Justice 
Department and convened a grand jury to look into allegations.
  Now, the special prosecutor's system has taken some hits lately. But 
we can insure that any prosecutor appointed is given a clear, 
specialized and fixed mandate to investigate the election funding 
issue. We can set guidelines that do not curb the power of the 
prosecutor, but insure a very narrow and specific investigation.
  I urge the appointment of a special prosecutor. I urge the 
investigation of the election fundraising abuses. I urge a fair and 
just conclusion to this stain on our democratic election 
system.

                          ____________________