[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 109 (Wednesday, August 5, 1998)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1562]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         REGARDING H. RES. 507

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. PATSY T. MINK

                               of hawaii

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, August 5, 1998

  Mrs. MINK of Hawaii. Mr. Speaker, on July 30, 1998 Congressman 
Hoekstra stated during the debate on House Resolution 507 that ``two 
IBT employees wearing green uniforms delivered an industrial size 
shredder to the office of the IBT communication director, Matt Witt, 
during the week of July 13, 1998, and that the noise of the shredder 
operating in that office could be heard on Saturday, July 18, when Mr. 
Witt was in the building.'' Later that afternoon, at the Committee on 
Education and the Workforce's Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations hearing, this accusation was again repeated by the 
Majority's co-lead counsel Vicki Toensing who also alleged that Mr. 
Witt had resigned.
  In an effort to determine the merit of these charges, during a break 
in the hearing, I met with Mr. Witt. I found him to be appalled by the 
criminations, which he stated had no merit. He asked that he be able to 
address the Subcommittee in order to deny the charges against him under 
oath. He told me that he would deny that he had resigned, would deny 
having a shredder delivered to his office, and would deny being in the 
building or shredding documents on July 18th. At the resumption of the 
hearing, Representative Scott asked for unanimous consent to permit Mr. 
Witt to deny the outrageous charges against him. Congressman Hoekstra 
refused to permit Mr. Witt the opportunity to deny the allegations, 
objecting to the unanimous consent request and ruling the Minority's 
motion out of order.
  Unfortunately, this irresponsible allegation by the Majority has cast 
grave doubt on the Subcommittee's investigation. The Majority has made 
a serious allegation of criminal behavior and then refused to permit 
the person maligned an opportunity to rebut the charges. Rather than 
admit that their charges were baseless, the Majority refused to allow 
the individual about whom they made their allegation the right to 
defend himself. I find this unworthy of a Congressional investigation.

                          ____________________