[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 26 (Friday, February 12, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1664-S1666]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CENSURE RESOLUTION OF PRESIDENT WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I just want to point out to everyone
who is interested that a censure resolution has been entered at the
desk. It has 38 cosponsors.
Mr. President, during these trying days, the question has been asked
of many of us: ``What will we tell our children about this sordid
period in our Nation's history?''
Mr. President, Members of the Senate, I had hoped to be able to tell
my granddaughter and, indeed, the rest of our Nation, that the United
States Senate had come together in bipartisan fellowship to approve a
censure resolution that would deliver a clear message that the behavior
of President William Jefferson Clinton has been inappropriate,
intolerable and unacceptable.
Unfortunately, some in this body have forestalled our ability to
bring such a resolution to the floor of the Senate for a vote. This I
regret deeply.
There are moments in history when we are able to rise up against the
forces driving us apart and come together with a united purpose. I
believe that the censure resolution provided us with just such an
opportunity.
While not a cure-all, the resolution is a way to share with our
children and the rest of our nation our findings, our sentiments, our
belief that the actions of the President are a violation of the trust
of the American people and have brought shame and dishonor upon the
presidency and the man.
But as has been made clear, those of us who truly believe a strong
censure is the appropriate resolution in this case are being prevented
from bringing it to the floor of this Senate for a vote.
The main co-sponsor is the Senator from Utah, Mr. Robert Bennett. In
all, it is co-sponsored by 36 Senators.--over \1/3\ of this Senate.
The words of the resolution were strong, but they are fitting words
and I believe a bipartisan majority of the Senate would be prepared to
vote for this censure resolution if it were permitted to come to a vote
today.
Over the past few weeks, I have worked very closely with a large
number of Senators to develop a bipartisan resolution, largely because
I felt it so important that anyone who looks at this shabby episode of
American history understands that while one may not vote to convict and
remove a president, one can have profound dismay and concern about the
misconduct that was inherent in the articles of impeachment.
That is why I regret deeply that some have seen fit to prevent us
from voting on a censure resolution.
Because that cannot happen today, I have joined with the cosponsors
of this resolution to formally present it to the Senate and record it
in the Congressional Record, making clear for all time the strong
censure of this President and condemnation of his actions by at least
one-third of the U.S. Senate.
Earlier today, I voted against conviction and removal of the
President on both articles of impeachment. I did not believe the House
managers established beyond a reasonable doubt that this President is
guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice.
Although I deplore the circumstances that have brought us to this
point, I do not believe they present a clear and present danger to the
functioning of our government, and therefore this President, who has
been a good President for the people of the United States, should not
be convicted and removed from office.
However, I feel very strongly and sincerely that the acquittal of the
President on the articles of impeachment should not be the Senate's
last word on the President's conduct, and that without further action
such as a resolution of censure, the wrong message about the
President's actions and the Senate's views thereon will be sent to the
country.
One of the most worthwhile experiences of my Senate career has been
listening to the remarks of the Senators over the past three days on
the floor of the U.S. Senate. Each one gave substantial deliberation,
serious thought and research and tried his or her level best to
maintain their oath of impartiality.
It should be clear that this was not an easy time. It should be clear
that every one in the Senate at every minute of every day wished this
were not happening. But we found ourselves caught up in a
constitutional requirement that gave us little choice.
I hope we come out of this with a deeper understanding of the
divisions and polarization, which all of this has caused, and that
every effort can be made, not only by our leadership, but by every
member of the Senate in every issue that comes before us to seek out a
bipartisanship and to work
[[Page S1665]]
together to solve the problems facing our nation.
A good start in this process would have been to have allowed a vote
on the censure resolution. I hope that when we return from the
President's Day recess, we will do better.
intent behind the censure resolution
I want to clear up once and for all the intent behind our censure
resolution.
The resolution does not express legal conclusions in the court of
impeachment. Rather, it is a legislative measure, expressing our
conclusions regarding the President's conduct.
The legal conclusions to be made in this case, if any, will be left
to a court of law. Our intent is not to bind or influence the court one
way or another, for good or ill, in making any determinations which it
may about the President's conduct.
Instead, our purpose is to speak to the moral ramifications of the
President's conduct, and to the message that those actions send to the
people of our nation, especially its youth.
While the President's actions do not constitute a fundamental threat
to the nation, neither were they at all acceptable. The President's
conduct was both willful and wrong, clearly by any standard, his
behavior is indefensible.
These actions demeaned the Office of the President, violated the
trust of the American people, and brought shame and dishonor upon
President Clinton.
drafting the resolution
Let me speak for a moment about the process which we have gone
through in developing the language. I began the process when I started
to doubt whether the President's conduct rose to the level of a high
crime or misdemeanor for which he should be removed from office.
Senator Herb Kohl was an early partner in this effort, and he and his
staff provided valuable input.
As we developed the language further, I sounded out more of my
colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, on the issue. I was fortunate
enough to have Senator Bennett join me as the lead Republican co-
sponor. Senator Bennett has been a stalwart partner in this effort, and
it has been a real pleasure working with him.
Many senators offered input regarding the specific language of the
resolution, and we have incorporated virtually every suggestion made.
Senators Lincoln, Snowe, Levin, Jeffords, and Schumer, for instance,
all have left their imprint upon this text, as has Senator Moynihan,
who was appointed by Senator Daschle to join Senator Kohl and myself as
a Democratic task force on censure.
In the process of developing this language and striving for a
bipartisanship, we have gone through some 25 drafts of the resolution.
We believe that the text before you today is that which can obtain the
most support from the most senators, of both parties, possible.
As a result of these efforts, I am very pleased that we have been
joined by a very significant number of co-sponsors from both sides of
the aisle. These co-sponsors run the ideological gamut from liberal to
moderate to conservative. The breadth of these co-sponsors, I believe,
represents the widespread consensus that the President's actions merit
serious condemnation.
Historical Precedents for Censure
Let me now discuss the ample historical precedents for this censure
resolution.
Censure is an extraordinary measure that Congress has used sparingly
over the past 200 hundred years.
Censure is rare because it is such a powerful expression of
Congressional criticism. In a censure resolution, a House of Congress
publicly states its collective view that an individual has acted beyond
the bounds of acceptable professional conduct. A censure records for
history the major misdoings of public men and women.
Over the past 200 years, the House and Senate have initiated censure
proceedings against Executive Branch officials on at least 13 different
occasions.
Three times a House of Congress has adopted measures that could be
described as a censure of a President. In 1834, the Senate censured
President Andrew Jackson. Twice the House has adopted statements
criticizing presidents--in the cases of John Tyler and James Buchanan.
Censuring President Clinton would be consistent with historical use
of this rare, but powerful, Congressional power.
the case of andrew jackson
By far the most famous censure case of a sitting president involved
Andew Jackson.
President Jackson feuded with Congress over the establishment of a
bank of the United States.
1. First, In 1832, he vetoed the rechartering of the Bank of the
United States on the grounds that it was unconstitutional, elitist, and
had failed in establishing a sound currency.
2. Second, Jackson directed the government to withdraw its funds from
the Bank. When his Treasury Secretary protested the withdrawal, Jackson
removed him from his position.
On March 28, 1834, the Senate voted to censure President Jackson by a
partisan vote of 26-20.
The resolution stated:
Resolved, That the President, in the last executive
proceedings in relation to the public revenue, has assumed
upon himself authority and power not conferred by the
Constitution and laws, but in derogation of both.
The censure resolution expressed more than idle words. It dealt
Jackson a painful blow in the arena of public opinion and in history.
Soon after the vote, Jackson wrote to the Senate challenging its
action. He noted that the Senate resolution was an ``an imputation upon
my private as well as public character.''
This censure was such a powerful condemnation of President Jackson's
actions that his supporters led the Senate to revisit the issue several
years later. On January 14, 1837, the Senate voted to expunge the
censure resolution from the record by a vote of 24-19.
The House of Representatives has adopted two other statements that
can be construed as censure motions against a president.
president john tyler
In 1841, John Tyler assumed the Presidency upon the death of
President William Henry Harrison. In contrast to President Harrison,
whose Whig views coincided with views of the majority of Congress,
Tyler espoused State's rights.
Tyler aroused the anger of Congress by vetoing Whig-sponsored bills
related to tariffs and the creation of a national bank. Exasperated
Members of the House of Representatives finally decided to publicly
rebuke the President.
A select committee drafted a report criticizing the President for:
``Gross abuse of constitutional power and bold assumptions of powers
never vested in him by any law''; for having ``assumed the whole
Legislative power to himself, and levying millions of money upon the
people, without any authority of law''; and for the ``abusive exercise
of the constitutional power of the President to arrest the action of
Congress upon measures vital to the welfare of the people.''
On August 17, 1842, the House passed this select Committee report.
president james buchanan
Along with his Secretary of the Navy, President Buchanan was
implicated in a financial scandal. There were accusations of
``kickbacks'' and the granting of government contracts to political
supporters.
On June 13, 1860 the House of Representatives voted 106-61 in favor
of ``censuring'' the Secretary of the Navy and stating that President
Buchanan's conduct deserved its ``reproof.''
The resolution stated:
Resolved, That the President and the Secretary of the Navy,
by receiving and considering the party relations of bidders
for contracts and the effect of awarding contracts upon
pending elections, have set an example dangerous to the
public safety, and deserving the reproof of this House.
Other executive officials: At least three secretaries of cabinet
departments and one ambassador have also been censured.
These cases include:
(1) Secretary of the Navy Isaac Toucey, 1860--On June 13, 1860, the
House of Representatives passed a resolution censuring Secretary Toucey
in the same ``kickback'' and bribery scandal that led to the
``reproof'' of President Buchanan.
(2) Secretary of War Simon Cameron, 1862--In another corruption
scandal, the House passed a censure resolution against Secretary of War
Cameron for embezzlement and for entrusting public money to his
lieutenant, Alexander Cummings. Mr. Cummings allegedly spent $21,000 of
government funds on personal items like straw hats, linen pantaloons,
scotch ale, and herring.
[[Page S1666]]
(3) Attorney General, A.H. Garland, 1886--On March 24, 1886, the
Senate passed a resolution of ``condemnation'' of the Attorney General
for refusing to turn over government papers regarding the removal of a
District Attorney from Office.
(4) Ambassador Thomas Bayard, 1896--On March 20, 1896 the House of
Representatives considered a resolution condemning and censuring
Ambassador Bayard for diplomatic improprieties. He was charged with
making partisan remarks to British audiences.
censur of members of congress
Congress has also used censure to condemn the conduct of its own
members. Nine senators and 22 members of the House have been censured.
Indeed, many members of this body personally know former senators who
have been censured. To those who argue that censure is ``a wet noodle
across the wrist,'' I would respectfully request that they ask their
colleagues how these former senators felt about being censured. I am
confident, because I have had some of these conversations myself, that
they would find that censure was felt deeply, and was a very
significant stain upon their reputations and legacy.
censure history conclusion
In sum, censure is a powerful tool used very sparingly by Congress to
condemn unacceptable conduct. Congress has initiated censure
proceedings in policy disputes, but it has also criticized executive
branch officials in the case of President Buchanan, Navy Secretary
Welles, and President Nixon for personal misconduct.
So to those who argue that passing this censure would establish a
precedent for the future where presidents and cabinet officials could
be censured, I hope this discussion has made it clear: that precedent
has already been set.
bipartisan censure promotes healing
In this bipartisan censure, we provided the Senate with a real
opportunity to achieve a strong, unifying, bipartisan conclusion to
this whole tawdry, exhausting and divisive controversy.
The House's actions were marred with partisanship. Indeed, one
example of this was the action of the House leadership to prevent a
censure resolution from even being considered on the House floor.
The Senate started its proceedings on a high note, when we came
together to agree unanimously, across party lines, upon procedures for
the trial. Passing our censure resolution by a strong, bipartisan vote
would represent an appropriate ``bookend'' to this bipartisan
beginning, and would stand this Senate well in the annals of history.
Moreover, it would put the proper historical perspective upon the
Senate's actions and determinations, which should not be read as a
vindication of the President.
I believe that passing this censure on a bipartisan basis would bring
a real closure to the process, and would help to heal the divisions
between the parties which were created during these proceedings, so
that we can move on to work together to address the real problems
confronting the American people, like saving social security, improving
education, and continuing the fight to reduce crime.
It is time that we move on to these other matters of significance to
our people, to reconcile differences between and within the branches of
government, and to work together--across party lines--for the benefit
of the American people.
I ask unanimous consent that a list of cosponsors and the text of the
resolution be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Cosponsors
Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Moynihan, Mr. Chafee, Mr.
Kohl, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Smith of Oregon, Mr.
Daschle, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Reid, Mr. Gorton, Mr. Bryan, Mr.
McConnell, Mr. Cleland, Mr. Domenici, Mr. Torricelli, Mr.
Campbell, Mr. Wyden, Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Kerrey, Mr.
Schumer, Mr. Durbin, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Wellstone, Mr. Breaux,
Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Reed, Ms. Landrieu,
Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Levin, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Robb, Mr.
Inouye, and Mr. Akaka.
____
Resolution of Censure
Whereas William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United
States, engaged in an inappropriate relationship with a
subordinate employee in the White House, which was shameful,
reckless and indefensible;
Whereas William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United
States, deliberately misled and deceived the American people,
and people in all branches of the United States government;
Whereas William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United
States, gave false or misleading testimony and his actions
have had the effect of impeding discovery of evidence in
judicial proceedings;
Whereas William Jefferson Clinton's conduct in this matter
is unacceptable for a President of the United States, does
demean the Office of the President as well as the President
himself, and creates disrespect for the laws of the land;
Whereas President Clinton fully deserves censure for
engaging in such behavior;
Whereas future generations of Americans must know that such
behavior is not only unacceptable but also bears grave
consequences, including loss of integrity, trust and respect;
Whereas William Jefferson Clinton remains subject to
criminal actions in a court of law like any other citizen;
Whereas William Jefferson Clinton's conduct in this matter
has brought shame and dishonor to himself and to the Office
of the President; and
Whereas William Jefferson Clinton through his conduct in
this matter has violated the trust of the American people:
Now therefore, be it
Resolved, That the United States Senate does hereby censure
William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States,
and does condemn his wrongful conduct in the strongest terms;
and now be it
Further resolved, That the United States Senate recognizes
the historic gravity of this bipartisan resolution, and
trusts and urges that future congresses will recognize the
importance of allowing this bipartisan statement of censure
and condemnation to remain intact for all time; and be it
Further resolved, That the Senate now move on to other
matters of significance to our people, to reconcile
differences between and within the branches of government,
and to work together--across party lines--for the benefit of
the American people.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, we are prepared to conclude the session. I
simply await the instructions from the majority leader to do such items
as may remain.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________