[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 34 (Tuesday, March 24, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H1410-H1411]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
WASTED MONEY ON IRRELEVANT INVESTIGATIONS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, tomorrow the Committee on House Oversight
is expected to give $1.3 million to the House Committee on the
Judiciary for an enlarged congressional staff to investigate President
Clinton. The American people are tired of this waste, and so am I, and
this is from a leadership that promised to trim congressional staffs.
{time} 1800
Now, what is amazing to me is the exchange between the chairman, the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Henry Hyde), myself, and the gentleman
from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) only 1\1/2\ hours ago in the Committee
on the Judiciary, when I explained that I thought we needed no more
wasted dollars and harassment of the President.
The chairman of this committee, in session, sought to reassure me
that the monies would be used for harmless oversight of the Department
of Justice and for the noncontroversial reauthorization of the
Department. It is on the record in the committee. This is in direct
contradiction to the written statement yesterday of the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Hyde) in a letter that has come to my attention that he
has sent to the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas), chairman of the
Committee of House Oversight, to justify this new windfall by saying
that new investigators were needed to recycle and duplicate nearly
every independent counsel investigation into the Clinton
administration, from fundraising to allegations at the Department of
Energy and the Department of the Interior. These matters have already
been overinvestigated, but they directly contradict the purpose for
which these funds are being authorized by the committee.
I have never received a letter about this in my career. This is a
unilateral Republican action to which I take total exception. There has
been stealth in correspondence, there have been internal
contradictions. But I must now come to the House and report that the
Republican leadership is planning to surreptitiously commence to staff
for an impeachment investigation without any notice to the Congress, to
the Democrats on the Committee on the Judiciary, or to the American
people, without a vote from the House of Representatives.
I urge the gentleman from Georgia (Speaker Gingrich), with all
respect, to rethink this dangerous, radical political strategy. It is
outrageous that we are being told publicly one thing by the gentleman
from Illinois (Chairman Hyde) when his letter to his own leadership is
saying something else entirely different: More money to investigate the
President.
Why can the majority not just admit it, rather than hiding under
these cloaks and misstatements. Members of the House will get no
opportunity to vote on this massive increase of funds. When I explained
that the Speaker agreed with this request in a cover letter, the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) asked that he not be saddled with
the Speaker's words.
So today, Mr. Speaker, I will release to the press the words of the
gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde) justifying this new
congressional surplus of money and staff and resources, and let the
American people judge for themselves.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. CONYERS. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts, the ranking
subcommittee chairman.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member,
and I think he is performing a very important service.
[[Page H1411]]
I know as the second ranking minority member that neither he, I, nor
any other Members have been consulted. We have read a lot in the paper
about what the Committee on the Judiciary was going to do, what it
would not be allowed to do, how it was going to be bypassed.
To have this funding request come forward, it is over a $1 million,
some of which would be presumably assigned the minority, with no
consultation is a problem. And the problem is compounded because the
chairman of the committee did say there would be consultation, but the
consultation he discussed was on a subject that appears to be
different.
____________________