|
|
| FINANCING FUROR
MARCH 11, 1997TRANSCRIPT |
|---|
Following a concession by the Republican leadership, the Senate expanded the focus of its campaign finance investigation to cover all "improper" actions during the 1996 elections. Democrats agreed to the new jurisdiction and said they would use the committee to look into soft money and other legal, but "unseemly," finances and to propose campaign reform. Following a background report from Kwame Holman, Margaret Warner discusses the day's events with Senators Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Thad Cochran (R-MS).
Sen. Cochran, what more can you tell us about why your fellow Republicans decided to go along with what you all on the committee wanted and expand the scope of this investigation?
SEN. THAD COCHRAN, (R) Mississippi: I think one of the driving forces behind this is the fact that this investigation has been held up now for too long. We are seeing people leave the country. We're seeing documents being destroyed, evidence being hidden, and the concern is that if this investigation isn't begun now, it may not be completed, and we may have a failure of an effort to get to the bottom of the charges. They're serious, and we are happy now that we are going to get a resolution approved today, and the committee can continue its work.
MARGARET WARNER: The reports are including Kwame's report we just heard that the change in strategy or decision came at your lunch, your Republican Senators' lunch. What happened at that lunch? Did you face significant defections among your ranks?
SEN. THAD COCHRAN: Well, I think it also reflects a concern that the Democrats were beginning to accuse us of trying to hide something and not want to look into the broad range of campaign activities that could have been improper, as well as illegal. And the fact of the matter is that decision was unanimous among Republicans and Democrats in the Governmental Affairs Committee when we first reported this resolution out. So the action taken today really undergirds and supports the original decision by the Governmental Affairs Committee, and those of us who serve on that committee are very pleased.
MARGARET WARNER: Sen. Durbin, are you and your fellow Democrats now satisfied with the scope and range of the investigation?
SEN. RICHARD DURBIN, (D) Illinois: There were two goals that we had when we started off this discussion. The first was a fair investigation. The second, that it would result in campaign finance reform to change the system and to make sure that this doesn't happen again. We made a great step forward today toward fairness because by changing the scope of the investigation as the Democrats have requested, we are now talking about looking into presidential campaigns, congressional campaigns, Democrats, and Republicans. And also I think looking at improper activities will give us clear signals and suggestions about how to move toward campaign finance reform.
MARGARET WARNER: All right. Be a little more specific if you could. What can you now look at because improper is covered that you couldn't have looked at if the investigation had to be confined to what's illegal?
SEN. RICHARD DURBIN: If you deal with things that are technically legal but improper--
MARGARET WARNER: Such as--
SEN. RICHARD DURBIN: Well, things such as the use of offices on Capitol Hill or in the White House for soliciting campaign contributions. Those things may be technically legal. Are they proper? It appears that many people believe they're not and we should change the law. So by looking at improprieties we've set the stage for real campaign finance reform, which I think has always been the end game for Democrats.
MARGARET WARNER: Sen. Cochran, would you agree with your colleagues' definition of what this expanded scope means?
SEN. THAD COCHRAN: I think he's right about it in those terms. What we were seeing was a lot of legal advice coming down from White House counsel or the attorney general's office saying that certain campaign practices that we now know about that took place in the White House may have been legal, or, as the Vice President said, there was no controlling legal authority saying that they weren't legal, although in the face of very clear language it appeared from the statutes that they were illegal. Well, this investigation could have just bogged down over a long, drawn out argument over terminology. We're trying to find out what happened, what the facts are, because we think that if some things weren't illegal, they ought to be.
MARGARET WARNER: Now would you include the manner in which soft money, these large unlimited contributions made by everything from unions to corporations to the parties, is raised--are raised--do you include that? Is that something you'll look at?
SEN. THAD COCHRAN: I think it's a matter of concern for many Senators, and in this resolution we suggest that the Rules Committee which has jurisdiction over campaign finance reform undertake a review of those rules. We've already had hearings on a number of suggestions to reform and change campaign laws. I think we're going to see that continue, and I think this entire matter gives impetus to the effort to make our laws better, to make them so that the American people have confidence in our electoral process. MARGARET WARNER: Sen. Durbin, do you think soft money as a general category will be looked into by--the raising of soft money by your committee?
SEN. RICHARD DURBIN: As a result of this change today, this concession by the Republican leadership, I think we'll look into soft money, mystery money, and look into the phenomena, no matter how much money we seem to sink into this political campaign system, fewer and fewer people turn out to vote. There's a message there. We've got to clean up the system--real reform. And if that isn't the end game, if that isn't what we're all aiming toward, I think this investigation will be a disappointment. And I hope it won't be.
MARGARET WARNER: Sen. Cochran, let's turn to the allegations that are out there now about whether the country of China tried to influence the elections through illegally laundered contributions, and you and your Republicans, fellow Republicans, were talking about that today, and looking into that, how do you avoid coming into conflict with the Justice Department and FBI probe of that if your committee is also going to look at it?
SEN. THAD COCHRAN: We realize that the Justice Department has a task force of prosecutors and that there are approximately 25 FBI agents investigating some of these matters. We're not going to try to duplicate everything that others are doing, but we feel that we have a responsibility to the country to make sure that what went on is fully understood. If there were efforts by foreign government officials to infiltrate or influence decisions in federal agencies or the White House, itself, I think we need to know that. We need to know that so that we can keep it from happening again. These are very serious illegal acts which ought to be brought to the attention of prosecuting officials in the Department of Justice and through our investigation we can help uncover that information.
MARGARET WARNER: But how do you think you can actually get at that?
SEN. THAD COCHRAN: We think there are witnesses who will tell us about it. We know that there are some who've left the country and there may be others, but we think that we can request information not only from federal agencies and officials at the White House but from others who may have knowledge of these activities and can build a body of evidence that will acquaint us with what happened.
MARGARET WARNER: Sen. Durbin, do you see any potential conflict between your committee's work and the Justice Department on this China--set of China allegations--for instance, if some of these witnesses that Sen. Cochran referred to want immunity before testifying?
SEN. RICHARD DURBIN: Congress learned a valuable lesson during the Iran-Contra hearings. If we go stumbling into this investigation, and we're not sensitive to the fact that the Department of Justice or independent counsel is considering criminal prosecution, we could make a mess of it. We can get a great headline and end up people not being held accountable for their criminal acts. I don't want that to happen. I want to make sure that as we look toward real reform, as the endgame is processed, that we also are sensitive to the need to be working with the prosecutors and not to make their work any harder.
MARGARET WARNER: Sen. Cochran, do you--is there anything in the way campaign funs are raised that you think is still off the table? In other words, I guess what I'm asking you is, where do you draw the line? If it was hard to draw the line between illegal and improper, how do you draw the line between improper and proper?
SEN. THAD COCHRAN: Our committee is going to have to set priorities. We don't have enough money and we don't have enough time to investigate every possible subject that could come under the jurisdiction of our investigation. And so we are going to have to decide what are the most important things to look into, and do those first, and if we do need to continue the investigation beyond the expiration date in this resolution, then I'm sure the Senate will extend the time and provide more funds if it's justified.
MARGARET WARNER: Sen. Durbin, do you think you and the Republicans are pretty much on the same wave length about these priorities at this point?
SEN. RICHARD DURBIN: We've certainly agreed with the principles of the investigation. And I think you're going to see a bipartisan vote in support of this authorizing resolution. The real question is the procedure that will be followed. We want to make certain that we do have this bipartisan spirit preserved when it comes to the issuing of subpoenas and the setting of priorities for this investigation and make certain that we continue to focus on the fact that when it's all said and done the American people want to see this system changed.
MARGARET WARNER: And Sen. Durbin, if you uncover evidence of illegal activity or allegations of illegal activity by either the President or any members of Congress, what happens to that? Are they referred for prosecution?
SEN. RICHARD DURBIN: Well, most definitely, they should be. There's a limitation to what we can or should do, and if we're not careful, dealing in this area of illegality, whether it's by a member of Congress or someone else involved in the campaign, then we, as I mentioned earlier, may jeopardize a criminal prosecution. I don't want to see that happen.
MARGARET WARNER: But, I mean, if there were allegations of illegal activity by a member of Congress, would that go to the Justice Department or to the Ethics Committee?
SEN. RICHARD DURBIN: If I recall correctly, the resolution calls for reference to the Ethics Committee. The Ethics Committee does not consider illegality in and of itself criminal conduct, and they may then refer to the Department of Justice. But I think that has to be worked out.
MARGARET WARNER: Do you agree, Sen. Cochran, with that analysis?
SEN. THAD COCHRAN: I do. There are rules of the Senate. There are federal election campaign laws that candidates for public office have to obey. And if we uncover any evidence where those have been violated, we will refer them to the appropriate authority. And in this case the Senate Ethics Committee will review complaints against any sitting Senator. We also are subject to being prosecuted under the federal election laws by the Department of Justice and an independent prosecutor could be named if a member of Congress is charged with an illegal act.
MARGARET WARNER: All right. Well, thank you both very much.
 |
   
|
|
| Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station. | ||
| ||
| PBS Online Privacy Policy Copyright ©1996- MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved. | ||
| ||
