[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 4]
[Senate]
[Pages 4804-4805]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                     DISTURBING PATTERN OF CONDUCT

  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I want to talk this morning about a 
disturbing pattern of conduct by the people around President Bush. They 
seem to be willing to do anything for political purposes, regardless of 
the facts and of what is right.
  I don't have the time this morning to talk in detail about all the 
incidents that come to mind. Larry Lindsay, for instance, seems to have 
been fired as the President's Economic Adviser because he spoke 
honestly about the costs of the Iraq war. General Shinseki seems to 
have become a target when he spoke honestly about the number of troops 
that would be needed in Iraq.

[[Page 4805]]

  There are many others, who are less well known, who have also faced 
consequences for speaking out. U.S. Park Police Chief Teresa Chambers 
was suspended from her job when she disclosed budget problems that our 
Nation's parks are less safe, and Professor Elizabeth Blackburn was 
replaced on the Council on Bioethics because of her scientific views on 
stem-cell research.
  Each of these examples deserves examination, but they are not my 
focus today. Instead, I want to talk briefly about four other incidents 
that are deeply troubling.
  When former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill stepped forward to 
criticize the Bush administration's Iraq policy, he was immediately 
ridiculed by the people around the President and his credibility was 
attacked. Even worse, the administration launched a government 
investigation to see if Secretary O'Neill improperly disclosed 
classified documents. He was, of course, exonerated, but the message 
was clear: If you speak freely, there will be consequences.
  Ambassador Joseph Wilson also learned that lesson. Ambassador Wilson, 
who by all accounts served bravely under President Bush in the early 
1990s, felt a responsibility to speak out on President Bush's false 
State of the Union statement on Niger and uranium. When he did, the 
people around the President quickly retaliated. Within weeks of 
debunking the President's claim, Ambassador Wilson's wife was the 
target of a despicable act.
  Her identity as a deep-cover CIA agent was revealed to Bob Novak, a 
syndicated columnist, and was printed in newspapers around the country. 
That was the first time in our history, I believe, that the identity 
and safety of a CIA agent was disclosed for purely political purposes. 
It was an unconscionable and intolerable act.
  Around the same time Bush administration officials were endangering 
Ambassador Wilson's wife, they appear to have been threatening another 
Federal employee for trying to do his job. In recent weeks Richard 
Foster, an actuary for the Department of Health and Human Services, has 
revealed that he was told he would be fired if he told Congress and the 
American people the real costs of last year's Medicare bill.
  Mr. Foster, in an e-mail he wrote on June 26 of last year, said the 
whole episode had been ``pretty nightmarish.'' He wrote: ``I'm no 
longer in grave danger of being fired, but there remains a strong 
likelihood that I will have to resign in protest of the withholding of 
important technical information from key policymakers for political 
purposes.''
  Think about those words. He would lose his job if he did his job. If 
he provided the information the Congress and the American people 
deserved and were entitled to, he would lose his job. When did this 
become the standard for our government? When did we become a government 
of intimidation?
  And now, in today's newspapers, we see the latest example of how the 
people around the President react when faced with facts they want to 
avoid.
  The White House's former lead counterterrorism adviser, Richard 
Clarke, is under fierce attack for questioning the White House's record 
on combating terrorism. Mr. Clarke has served in four White Houses, 
beginning with Ronald Reagan's administration, and earned an impeccable 
record for his work.
  Now the White House seeks to destroy his reputation. The people 
around the President aren't answering his allegations; instead, they 
are trying to use the same tactics they used with Paul O'Neill. They 
are trying to ridicule Mr. Clarke and destroy his credibility, and 
create any diversion possible to focus attention away from his serious 
allegations.
  The purpose of government isn't to make the President look good. It 
isn't to produce propaganda or misleading information. It is, instead, 
to do its best for the American people and to be accountable to the 
American people.
  The people around the President don't seem to believe that. They have 
crossed a line--perhaps several lines--that no government ought to 
cross.
  We shouldn't fire or demean people for telling the truth. We 
shouldn't reveal the names of law enforcement officials for political 
gain. And we shouldn't try to destroy people who are out to make our 
country safer.
  I think the people around the President have crossed into dangerous 
territory. We are seeing abuses of power that cannot be tolerated.
  The President needs to put a stop to it, right now. We need to get to 
the truth, and the President needs to help us do that.
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Pennsylvania is 
recognized.

                          ____________________