On the recordMarch 17, 1994
I read in today's paper that the Government Operations Committee is going to have oversight hearings next week. Maybe counsel ought to go down there and say: Wait a minute, we do not need to do this. We will appoint a Republican lawyer, and we do not have to go through these oversight hearings. Maybe if we are not going to have oversight, we ought to repeal all these oversight laws in the books, some of which have been on the books as far back as 1946. Either we are going to have oversight or not. I think that is a judgment we can make later. I repeat that Mr. Fiske has his job to do. But he must understand that we have a job to do, too--one that I think we are legally and constitutionally obligated to perform. Mr. Fiske's job is prosecution. Our job is public disclosure. I think that the White House Treasury meetings are clearly a legitimate subject for congressional oversight. We would not have known about those today if not for the Republicans on the Banking Committee asking Mr. Altman, as sort of an aside, if he had any meetings. Then we learned he had more than one. What public purpose was served by allowing the Deputy Treasury Secretary and general counsel to brief White House officials? Was it ethical, and was preferential treatment given to their White House benefactors, so that the meetings compromised the independence of the RTC? These are judgments Congress has to make.
Source
govinfo.gov




