[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 20]
[Senate]
[Pages 29370-29373]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                           EXECUTIVE SESSION

                                 ______
                                 

 NOMINATION OF CAROL MOSELEY-BRAUN TO BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND 
  PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO NEW ZEALAND AND 
                                 SAMOA

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the nomination.
  The legislative clerk read the nomination of Carol Moseley-Braun, of 
Illinois, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the 
United States of America to New Zealand and Samoa.
  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I am pleased that today the Senate is 
voting on the nomination of our friend and former colleague Carol 
Moseley-Braun to be U.S. Ambassador to New Zealand, as well as 
Ambassador to Samoa.
  I am confident that Senator Moseley-Braun will be an excellent 
ambassador. She has all the requisite skills--political savvy, personal 
charm, and street smarts--to represent the United States

[[Page 29371]]

in the finest tradition of American diplomacy.
  I would like to make a few comments about the remarks made yesterday 
by the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, the senior senator 
from North Carolina.
  During yesterday's session, the chairman spoke on the floor about 
this nomination. While he essentially conceded that Senator Moseley-
Braun will be confirmed by the Senate, he proceeded to make several 
arguments which I believe deserve a response.
  First, the chairman stated that there had been a ``successful 
coverup'' of serious ethical wrongdoing. I believe such a loaded 
accusation should be supported by facts, yet the chairman offered not a 
shred of evidence that anyone has covered up anything.
  On the contrary, during the consideration of the nomination, the 
Committee on Foreign Relations was provided with several thousand pages 
of documents requested by the Chairman, documents which were produced 
in a very short period of time. Included in these materials were 
several internal memoranda from the Department of Justice and the 
Internal Revenue Service; Committee staff members were even permitted 
to read the decision memos related to the IRS request to empanel a 
grand jury.
  Second, the chairman suggested that Senator Moseley-Braun has ``been 
hiding behind Mr. Kgosie Matthews,'' her former fiance, who, the 
chairman charged, is now ``conveniently a missing man.'' Mr. Matthews, 
it should be emphasized, is Senator Moseley-Braun's former fiance, and 
it is ludicrous to suggest that she is somehow responsible for his 
whereabouts or actions.
  Third, the chairman suggested that the request of the Internal 
Revenue Service for a grand jury to investigate the Senator was blocked 
by political appointees in the Justice Department, ``no doubt on 
instructions from the White House'' and that it was somehow odd that 
the request was blocked.
  Here are the facts: in 1995 and 1996, the Chicago field office of the 
Internal Revenue Service sought authorization to empanel a grand jury 
to investigate allegations that Senator Moseley-Braun committed 
criminal violations of the tax code by converting campaign funds to 
personal use (which, if true, would be reportable personal income). The 
IRS request was based almost exclusively on media accounts and some FEC 
documents. When the first request was made in 1995, the Department of 
Justice urged the IRS to do more investigative work to corroborate the 
information that was alleged in the media accounts. Justice invited the 
IRS to resubmit the request.
  The IRS resubmitted the request in early 1996; but it had not added 
any significant information to the request. In other words, it did not 
provide the corroborative information that the Justice Department had 
requested.
  The decision to deny the request for authorization of the grand jury 
was made in the Tax Division, after consultation with senior officials 
in the Public Integrity Section.
  Although it is not that common for grand jury requests to be refused, 
the Department of Justice is hardly a rubber stamp--for the IRS or 
anyone other agency. It is guided by the standard of the United States 
Attorneys' Manual, which requires that there be ``articulable facts 
supporting a reasonable belief that a tax crime is being or has been 
committed.'' (U.S. Attorneys' Manual, 6-4.211B). The committee staff 
was permitted to review, but not retain, the internal memos in the Tax 
Division rejecting the IRS request. From the trial attorney up to the 
Assistant Attorney General for the Tax Division--four levels of 
review--all agreed that there was not a sufficient predicate of 
information that justified opening a grand jury investigation. In 
short, there were not the ``articulable facts'' necessary for 
empaneling the grand jury.
  There is no evidence--none--that this decision was influenced by 
political considerations or outside forces.
  Last year, when the story became public that Senator Moseley-Braun 
had been investigated by the IRS--and that the requests for a grand 
jury had been denied--the Office of Professional Responsibility at the 
Department of Justice opened its own inquiry. They investigated not 
Sen. Moseley-Braun, but the handling of the case within the Department 
of Justice. Their inquiry concluded that there was no improper 
political influence on the process. So, far from the ``Clinton White 
House blocking the grand jury,'' all the proper procedures were 
followed, and there is no evidence of White House intervention in the 
case. Equally important, the Office of Professional Responsibility 
review concluded that the decision on the merits was appropriate.
  Next, the chairman suggested that the decision to reject the grand 
jury request was somehow tainted because the senior official at the 
Justice Department who made the decision, Loretta Argrett, ``was a 
Moseley-Braun supporter, who had made a modest contribution'' to 
Senator Moseley-Braun's campaign, ``who had a picture of Ms. Moseley-
Braun on her office wall'' and that the Senator had ``even presided 
over Ms. Argrett's confirmation in 1993.''
  Here are the facts: Ms. Argrett, the Assistant Attorney General for 
the Tax Division, was the senior official at Justice who approved the 
decision not to authorize the grand jury request. It is true that Ms. 
Argrett gave money to the Senator's campaign: the grand sum of $25. It 
is also true that the Senator chaired Ms. Argrett's hearing, a hearing 
at which several other nominees also testified. I chaired the Judiciary 
Committee at that time. I routinely asked other members of the 
Committee to chair nomination hearings, just as Senator Thomas chaired 
last week's hearing on Senator Moseley-Braun. Finally, it is also true 
that Ms. Argrett had a photograph of her and the Senator hanging in her 
office--a photo taken at that confirmation hearing.
  All of these facts were disclosed to the Deputy Attorney General at 
the time, Jamie Gorelick, for a determination as to whether Ms. Argrett 
should be involved in the case. On June 2, 1995, Assistant Attorney 
General Argrett disclosed these facts to the Deputy Attorney General 
and concluded that, based on the minimal contact she had with the 
Senator, she believed she could act impartially in this case. Deputy 
Attorney General Gorelick --one of the most capable public officials I 
have known in my years in the Senate--approved Ms. Argrett's continued 
participation in the case.
  Mr. President, I will not delay the Senate any further. The Committee 
did its job and gathered the available evidence. There is no evidence 
in the record that disqualifies Senator Moseley-Braun.
  She will be an excellent ambassador, just as she was an excellent 
senator. We are lucky that she still wants to continue in public 
service. I urge my colleagues to vote to confirm Senator Carol Moseley-
Braun.
  Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. President, I submit this statement in opposition 
to the nomination of former Senator Carol Moseley-Bruan as Ambassador 
of the United States to the governments of New Zealand and Samoa. The 
people of Illinois are intimately familiar with Senator Moseley-Braun's 
public career, as am I. Based on my extensive knowledge of her record, 
I cannot in good conscience support her nomination. While her tenure 
involved a significant number of controversies, many of which are 
troubling, her secret visits to, and relations with, the late General 
Sani Abacha and his regime are themselves a disqualifier for any kind 
of position that involves representing the United States in a foreign 
land. They demonstrate a lack of judgment and discretion that should be 
required of any ambassadorial nominee.
  According to her written responses provided to the Senate Foreign 
Relations Committee on November 6, 1999, the Senator traveled to 
Nigeria in December, 1992; July, 1995; and August, 1996. According to 
the same documents, Senator Moseley-Braun met with Sani Abacha during 
all three trips. Abacha was one of the world's most brutal and corrupt 
dictators, an international pariah, widely reviled. After taking power 
in 1993, he jailed Nigeria's elected president, reportedly imprisoned 
as

[[Page 29372]]

many as 7,000 political opponents, hanged environmentalist Ken Saro-
Wiwa and eight other activists and allegedly stole more than $1 billion 
in oil revenues while presiding over the nation's economic collapse.
  During her appearance before the East Asian and Pacific Affairs 
subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator 
Moseley-Braun likened her meetings with General Abacha to meetings 
between other Senators and Members of Congress with leaders of 
countries accused of violating human rights. This analogy is 
inappropriate; her visits were of a chilling and distinctly different 
nature. Senator Moseley-Braun's visits with Abacha were secret 
encounters, condemned by the U.S. State Department, hidden not just 
from the government but even from her own staff. Moreover, her former 
fiance, Mr. Kgosie Matthews, was at one time a registered agent for the 
Nigerian government. Mr. Matthews accompanied her to Nigeria, although 
it is not clear how many times he did so. In response to written 
questions, Senator Moseley-Braun stated that she was ``unaware of 
whether . . . Mr. Matthews `directly or indirectly received any money 
or anything of monetary value' from the Nigerian government.'' To 
secretly visit a corrupt despot like Abacha, remaining unaware of 
whether a fiance, a one-time agent of the regime, is profiting in any 
way from Abacha or the Nigerian government, demonstrates a profound 
lack of judgment.
  The confirmation hearing briefly touched upon areas of concern other 
than Senator Moseley-Braun's relations with Abacha. During her tenure, 
the Internal Revenue Service requested a grand jury investigation of 
Senator Moseley-Braun, suggesting a number of areas of inquiry. In her 
written responses to questions posed by the Foreign Relations 
Committee, the nominee stated that ``I was unaware that I was the 
subject of any criminal investigation by the Internal Revenue Service 
prior to the July, 1998 WBBM report.''
  The WBBM-TV report, to which Senator Moseley-Braun referred, 
disclosed that the IRS twice sought to convene a grand jury to explore 
allegations concerning the personal use of campaign funds as well as 
allegations relating to ``possible bank fraud, bribery and other 
federal crimes.'' The committee record established that the Department 
of Justice rejected the requests for grand juries, citing a lack of 
sufficient evidence, thus halting the ability of the IRS to proceed 
with the very subpoena power necessary to acquire sufficient evidence. 
The circularity of this process--the IRS requests for grand juries and 
Department of Justice refusals--as well as the inability of these 
concerns to be probed to conclusion, leaves a host of unanswered 
questions. These questions should have been resolved prior to a vote on 
the confirmation.
  Senator Moseley-Braun refers to an FEC audit report that she believes 
rebuts the IRS concerns. First, assuming for the sake of argument that 
the FEC audit refutes the personal use of campaign funds, it 
nevertheless clearly does not refute the other allegations reportedly 
raised by the IRS such as ``possible bank fraud, bribery and other 
federal crimes'' reportedly going back to her tenure as Cook County 
Recorder of Deeds.
  Second, it is unclear to what extent the FEC investigated the 
personal use of campaign funds. There are countless ways a diversion of 
campaign funds for personal use could occur. Discussion in the 
confirmation hearing centered around just campaign credit cards. 
Section I. D. of the FEC audit report does not mention the diversion of 
campaign funds as being within the scope of the audit, but instead 
lists, in specific detail, eight other areas of inquiry. On the other 
hand, the last page of the audit report indicates that the FEC audited 
the activity of the campaign credit cards. FEC working papers provided 
to the Senate further indicate that the FEC found that the cards were 
used to pay $6,258.14 of Mr. Matthews' personal expenses, but that, 
after deducting sums which the campaign argued it owed him, these 
personal expenses totaled only $311.28. It is unclear whether the FEC 
probed the possible diversion of campaign funds by other, less blunt, 
more oblique means, such as by cash purchases or by cashier's checks 
purchased with cash, or by other mechanisms. To the best of our 
knowledge, major allegations of diversion, such as those discussed in 
the Dateline NBC report, did not arise until after the FEC audit was 
completed.
  Third, the FEC itself pointedly said that no inferences should be 
drawn from its failure to resolve its examination of Senator Moseley-
Braun's campaign fund. According to a Chicago Tribune article dated 
April 8, 1997, FEC spokeswoman Sharon Snyder mentioned ``a lack of 
manpower, a lack of time'' and cited the impending expiration of the 
statute of limitations. She went on to say: ``There's no statement 
here: no exoneration, no Good Housekeeping seal of approval, just no 
action.''
  Thus, with respect to the FEC investigation, as with the IRS requests 
for grand juries, many questions remain unresolved. However, the visits 
with General Sani Abacha are undisputed and, in their context, they are 
so unusual and bizarre as to alone disqualify her as an ambassador.
  Mr. President, I recognize the Senate must fulfill its constitutional 
obligation. This body has given Senator Carol Moseley-Braun a select 
responsibility. While I cannot in good conscience support her 
nomination, I wish her well in her new post.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I strongly support our distinguished 
former colleague, Senator Carol Moseley-Braun, and I urge the Senate to 
confirm her as Ambassador to New Zealand. Senator Carol Moseley-Braun 
served the people of Illinois with great distinction during her six 
years in the Senate. She fought hard for the citizens of Illinois and 
for working men and women everywhere, and it was a privilege to serve 
with her. In her years in the Senate, she was a leader on many 
important issues that affect millions of Americans, especially in the 
areas of education and civil rights. She worked skillfully and 
effectively to bring people together with her unique energetic and 
inspiring commitment to America's best ideals.
  Senator Moseley-Braun has been breaking down barriers all her life. 
She became the first African-American woman to serve in this body. Her 
leadership was especially impressive in advancing the rights of women 
and minorities in our society. As a respected former Senator, she will 
bring great stature and visibility to the position of Ambassador to New 
Zealand. That nation is an important ally of the United States, and it 
is gratifying that we will be sending an Ambassador with her experience 
and the President's confidence.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to express my strong 
support for the nomination of my friend and former colleague, Carol 
Moseley-Braun, to be Ambassador to New Zealand.
  I had the pleasure of serving with Senator Moseley-Braun for six 
years and I know her to be a dedicated, caring, intelligent, and hard-
working public servant. I am confident she will carry these qualities 
to her new post in New Zealand.
  Prior to her service in the United States Senate, Senator Moseley-
Braun distinguished herself as a member of the Illinois Legislature and 
as the Recorder of Deeds for Cook County, Illinois. From 1973 to 1977 
she also served as Assistant District Attorney in the Northern District 
of Illinois.
  In 1992, Carol Moseley-Braun made history by becoming the first 
African American female elected to the United States Senate. As a 
United States Senator, she dedicated herself to issues that would make 
a difference in the lives of ordinary Americans: increased funding for 
education, HMO reform and family and medical leave.
  Following her service in the Senate, Senator Moseley-Braun continued 
to stay involved in the issues that mean most to her and become a 
consultant to the United States Department of Education.
  On October 8, 1999, President Clinton presented her with a new 
challenge and

[[Page 29373]]

nominated her to be United States Ambassador to New Zealand. I am sure 
her tenure as Ambassador will only add to this long and distinguished 
career.
  The overwhelming and bi-bipartisan vote in favor of her nomination by 
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee should answer any critic that 
questions her qualifications to be the next ambassador to New Zealand.
  New Zealand is an important ally and a vital part of our relations in 
the Asia-Pacific region. We need an ambassador who will be able to 
handle all aspects of United States-New Zealand relations and best 
represent our interests. Carol Moseley-Braun is the right person for 
that job.
  Mr. President, I was proud to serve with Senator Moseley-Braun, I am 
proud to call her a friend and I am proud to support her nomination to 
be Ambassador to New Zealand.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, Will the Senate advise and 
consent to the nomination of Carol Moseley-Braun, of Illinois, to be 
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of 
America to New Zealand and Samoa?
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain), 
and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kyl) are necessarily absent.
  I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from 
Arizona (Mr. Kyl) would vote ``yea.''
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 96, nays 2, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 361 Ex.]

                                YEAS--96

     Abraham
     Akaka
     Allard
     Ashcroft
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bryan
     Bunning
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Chafee, L.
     Cleland
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Coverdell
     Craig
     Crapo
     Daschle
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Frist
     Gorton
     Graham
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hollings
     Hutchinson
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     McConnell
     Mikulski
     Moynihan
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nickles
     Reed
     Reid
     Robb
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Roth
     Santorum
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith (NH)
     Smith (OR)
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Torricelli
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Wellstone
     Wyden

                                NAYS--2

     Fitzgerald
     Helms
       

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Kyl
     McCain
       
  Tne nomination was confirmed.
  Mr. DURBIN. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. SANTORUM. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The President will be notified of the action 
taken by the Senate.

                          ____________________