The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“INTRODUCTION OF INDEPENDENT COUNSEL LAW REFORM” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Justice was published in the Extensions of Remarks section on pages E24-E25 on Jan. 7, 1997.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
INTRODUCTION OF INDEPENDENT COUNSEL LAW REFORM
______
HON. JOHN CONYERS, JR.
of michigan
in the house of representatives
Tuesday, January 7, 1997
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing a new bill that will amend the independent counsel law to reform many of the current law's clear blemishes.
Although this bill is not intended to embarrass or target the Whitewater independent counsel Ken Starr, the need for serious revisions to the independent counsel law has become clear to me after observing the abuses taking place in the Whitewater case. Whatever your view of Whitewater, you may be surprised to learn that the investigation of Whitewater has already cost more money and involved more FBI agents than the investigation of the World Trade Center bombing.
No matter how serious you think Whitewater may be, there is absolutely no comparison between a land deal that occurred over 17 years ago and a terrorist conspiracy to blow up a major American landmark and office building, killing many people, injuring scores of others, reeking havoc and mayhem on the entire city of New York, and causing millions of dollars in damages.
The office of the independent counsel has run amok. It is time that we stopped allowing independent counsels to run off on their own with no accountability to run up bills running into the millions of dollars with little to no benefit for the American people.
The prosecution of Whitewater has also brought up many ethical matters--beginning with the initial appointment process. My bill will require all ex parte communications relating to the appointment of an independent counsel by the judges who appoint the counsel to be memorialized.
The appointment of Ken Star has also flagged several other ethical issues that should be considered before the appointment of any future counsels.
Are lawyers who have previously represented people with interests adverse to the target of the investigation truly able to be independent? Ken Starr represented Paula Jones, the woman who is suing the President for sexual harassment, and the Bradley Foundation, a conservative organization known for its vitriolic coverage of Whitewater. Such prior representation raises, to my mind, at the very least, the appearance of a conflict.
In addition, while pursuing the Whitewater matter, Judge Starr has remained affiliated with the law firm of Kirkland & Ellis where he pulls down over a million dollars a year. Do we want an independent counsel who will investigate the matter and do his or her job as quickly as possible without distractions or do we want someone who fits the investigation in around other commitments so as not to diminish his high salary?
Mr. Starr's continued affiliation with his firm raises other troubling ethical questions--should an independent counsel be in the position of questioning individuals who are in turn questioning his own law firm about their prior activities--in this case the Resolution Trust Corporation?
It seems to me that the special court should at least consider such conflicts when appointing an independent counsel and my bill will require the court to consider such issues.
As important as these ethical questions are, an even greater problem is that these questions distract us from the main issue--the Whitewater investigation itself. In recent months you have not been able to read a single article about Whitewater before bumping into a discussion of Ken Starr's ethical jungle. Because the office of the independent counsel is so important and so high profile, those appointed to the position should not have even the appearance of conflicts.
My bill would require a court appointing an independent counsel to look at the potential counsel's past and present conflicts and to consider whether the counsel should work on the investigation full time.
I also want to note my grave disappointment over the politicization of efforts to revise the independent counsel law.
Last February, the Crime Subcommittee held a hearing on this matter and there appeared to be widespread bipartisan agreement that the statute is in need of revisions.
I hope that Chairman Hyde will consider this bill, and in the spirit of bipartisanship that was exhibited during the independent counsel hearing, schedule a markup as quickly as possible.
Conyers' Independent Counsel Law--Section by Section
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
The title of the bill is the ``Independent Counsel Accountability and Reform Act of 1997.''
SEC. 2. EXTENSION.
This section reauthorizes the Independent Counsel Act.
SEC. 3. APPOINTMENT AUTHORITY.
This section requires at least one member of the division of the court appointing an independent counsel to have been named to the Federal bench by a President of a different political party than the other two members of the court.
This section gives the District Court for the District of Columbia jurisdiction over the special division.
This section provides that the members of the special division shall be bound by the Judicial Code of Conduct. It authorizes the judges appointing an independent counsel to seek comments about potential nominees, but requires them to memorialize, not the substance, but the fact of those communications.
This section requires the special division to consider whether: (1) a potential independent counsel has any conflicts of interest; (2) will devote him or her self to the investigation full time; and (3) the potential counsel has prosecutorial experience.
SEC. 4. BASIS FOR PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION.
This section requires the Attorney General to conduct a preliminary investigation whenever she has received specific information from a credible source that an individual subject to the Independent Counsel Law has committed any federal felony or any federal misdemeanor for which there is an established pattern of prosecution.
SEC. 5. SUBPOENA POWER.
This section gives the Attorney General the power to issue subpoenas duces tecum when conducting a preliminary investigation.
SEC. 6. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE.
This section allows the Attorney General to determine that there is no basis for an investigation to continue if, by a preponderance of the evidence, she determines that the subject of the investigation lacked the requisite state of mind.
SEC. 7. PROSECUTORIAL JURISDICTION OF INDEPENDENT COUNSEL.
This section limits the scope of the independent counsel's investigation to those matters for which the Attorney General has requested the appointment of the counsel and matters directly related to such criminal violations, including perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of the evidence, and intimidation of witnesses.
SEC. 8. CONSULTATION WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.
This section allows an independent counsel to consult with the Department of Justice regarding the policies and practices of the Department is such consultation would not compromise the counsel's independence.
SEC. 9. AUTHORITIES AND DUTIES OF INDEPENDENT COUNSEL.
This section requires the independent counsel to comply with the Department of Justice's policies for handling the release of information relating to criminal proceedings.
This section requires the independent counsel to petition the court, after 2 years, for funding to continue the investigation. This section also requires the periodic reports filed by the independent counsel to include information justifying the office's expenditures.
SEC. 10. REMOVAL, TERMINATION AND PERIODIC REAPPOINTMENT OF
INDEPENDENT COUNSEL.
This section adds the subject of the investigation to the list of those who can seek the termination of the independent counsel on the ground that the investigation has been completed or that it would be appropriate for the Department of Justice to complete the investigation or conduct any prosecution.
This section requires the independent counsel to petition the court for reappointment every 2 years and allows the court to appoint a new counsel if the court finds that appointed counsel is no longer the appropriate person to carry out the investigation.
SEC. 11. JOB PROTECTIONS FOR INDIVIDUALS UNDER INVESTIGATION.
This section protects individuals whose positions are not excepted from the competitive service on the basis of confidential, policy-determining, policymaking, or policy advocating character from being terminated for the sole reason that the person is the subject of an independent counsel investigation.
____________________
