[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 128 (Wednesday, September 23, 1998)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1773]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

[[Page E1773]]



            THE STARR REPORT AND THE CONGRESSIONAL RESPONSE

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. LEE H. HAMILTON

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                     Wednesday, September 23, 1998

  Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, I insert my Washington Report for 
Wednesday, September 23, 1998 into the Congressional Record.

            The Starr Report And The Congressional Response

       On September 9, 1998 Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr 
     submitted his report to Congress regarding President 
     Clinton's relationship with Monica Lewinsky. The U.S. House 
     of Representatives now begins the process of reviewing the 
     evidence the Independent Counsel has gathered from his grand 
     jury investigation as well as evidence provided by the 
     President and others. The House, after reviewing the Starr 
     report and other evidence, will decide whether to proceed 
     with formal impeachment hearings. The key judgment will be 
     for the House to determine whether the President's conduct 
     amounts to ``High Crimes and Misdemeanors,'' the 
     Constitutional standard for removing a President from office.
       The Starr report: The 453-page Starr report alleges that 
     President Clinton committed acts that may constitute grounds 
     for impeachment. The report lays out in graphic detail the 
     chronology of events surrounding the President's affair with 
     Ms. Lewinsky, and concludes that the facts may establish 11 
     possible grounds for impeachment, including lying under oath 
     in the Paula Jones case and before Starr's grand jury, 
     obstructing justice, witness tampering, and abuse of power.
       The President has acknowledged that he had an inappropriate 
     relationship with Ms. Lewinsky and that his conduct was 
     wrong, but rejects the view that he committed the offenses 
     catalogued in the Starr report. Furthermore, the President's 
     attorneys contend that his conduct, while inappropriate and 
     wrong, does not rise to the level of ``High Crimes and 
     Misdemeanors,'' and therefore does not warrant Congress 
     proceeding with an impeachment inquiry.
       Presidential conduct: I have read the Starr report in full, 
     and like many Americans, am shocked and dismayed by its 
     contents. I recognize, of course, that the report represents 
     only the prosecutor's assessment of the facts and that 
     Congress has a duty to examine all the evidence, including 
     evidence which tends to exonerate the President.
       Putting the Starr report to one side, I have nonetheless 
     been deeply disappointed by the President's conduct. The 
     sexual misconduct was offensive but that really was not the 
     worst of it. He misled his wife, his staff, and the country. 
     His pattern these last several months to hide his improper 
     relationship has been to conceal, fabricate, stonewall, and 
     attack Starr. He surely could have saved the country much 
     agony by making a confession months ago. His legalistic 
     hair-splitting on the issue of lying insults the common 
     sense of most of us.
       Where we go from here: Congress now faces the grave 
     responsibility of deciding whether to move ahead with a 
     formal impeachment proceeding against the President. 
     Overturning the results of a popular election is very serious 
     business. Next to declaring war, Congress perhaps has no 
     greater duty under our Constitution. Hence, we must proceed 
     in the weeks and months ahead with deliberate speed, but with 
     caution and fairness, to seek the truth and make a judgment. 
     This process is not about partisan political advantage, but 
     about the future of our country.
       The key question will be whether the President's conduct, 
     disgraceful as it is, constitutes, ``High Crimes and 
     Misdemeanors.'' The Framers of the Constitution borrowed the 
     expression from the English common law to suggest grave 
     offenses against the state--offenses which undermined the 
     integrity of the Presidency or our constitutional system of 
     government--but did not define what precisely those offenses 
     might be, aside from treason and bribery. ``High Crimes and 
     Misdemeanors'' has been generally understood to encompass 
     public misdeeds, such as abuse of official power that 
     threatens the country, but not private misconduct.
       Nature of process: The impeachment process is a mix of law, 
     politics, and public opinion. It should not be used to remove 
     a President with whom Congress has political differences, nor 
     should it be limited to possible violations of criminal law. 
     Rather, it should primarily ask whether a President's conduct 
     is so bad that he can no longer be trusted to serve. 
     President Clinton's ability to govern the country has been 
     damaged. The looming question is whether he retains enough of 
     the confidence of the American public that he will be able to 
     govern effectively.
       Congress will pay close attention to public opinion as this 
     process unfolds. In effect two processes are now taking 
     place: one in Congress and one in the public. Both are 
     necessary. Of the two, the process in the American public is 
     more important. The public deliberation taking place over the 
     next several weeks will drive this process and will 
     eventually drive congressional action.
       Thus far, the American public does not support impeaching 
     the President. The public is of two minds about the 
     President. They believe Clinton is doing a good job as 
     President and is a strong leader in touch with their 
     problems. On the other hand, they do not like his morals and 
     question his integrity and his character. The public today 
     appears to favor some form of censure of the President, short 
     of impeachment, and wants Congress to get through this 
     process and back to the people's business as quickly as 
     possible.
       My assessment: The Starr report presents a strong case of 
     Presidential misconduct. The evidence that the President lied 
     under oath about the relationship with Ms. Lewinsky is 
     persuasive. The President does not challenge the basic facts 
     of the report, which paint a devastating portrait. Starr's 
     charges of obstruction and, particularly, abuse of power are 
     less compelling, and there is considerable conflicting 
     testimony relative to these charges. I have doubts, at this 
     point, whether the President's misconduct rises to the level 
     of ``High Crimes and Misdemeanors'' to warrant his removal 
     from office.
       I am not advocating at this time censure, resignation or 
     impeachment. Congress has the Constitutional obligation to 
     weigh the evidence presented by the Independent Counsel very 
     carefully as well as evidence presented by the other side. I 
     do not see how we can make a judgment about the President 
     until we have had a chance to evaluate all the evidence. I do 
     not think the Congress should adjourn while these issues 
     about the President's future are unresolved.
       The question on my mind is how best to get through the next 
     two years with the least harm to the country. We must be very 
     careful with the institution of the Presidency. We must avoid 
     a paralysis of the Presidency and the inability of the 
     President to lead effectively. I do think some kind of 
     judgment needs to be given on the President's conduct. What 
     kind of judgment it is will depend on the evidence. But even 
     on the basis of the information we now have, we cannot permit 
     the impression to prevail that the President's behavior is 
     acceptable.

     

                          ____________________