John Sarbanes: “I want to be very clear with respect to the reasonableness of the issue that is before us. When Senate Resolution 120…”

“I want to be very clear with respect to the reasonableness of the issue that is before us. When Senate Resolution 120 was adopted, it was adopted and encompassed within it certain premises, all of which are now being departed from or violated by the proposal offered by the Senator from New York. The first premise was that there would be a fixed deadline in the proposal that would seek to keep the inquiry out of the election year. That was the February 29 date, and it was agreed to. We had overwhelming bipartisan support for the resolution that was adopted last year for this inquiry. Regrettably, the majority has now gone down a different track and made impossible, up to this juncture, a further bipartisan concord with respect to this matter. Senate Resolution 120 was consistent with Senate precedents. The proposal that is now before us is a complete departure from Senate precedents. The proposal last year for a fixed-ending date reflected the very argument that Senator Dole made in 1987 with respect to Iran-Contra, where some Democrats wanted to extend it into the election year and he said that would not be a fair and reasonable thing to do. Senator Inouye and others accepted that proposition, and they put on a deadline. It is very important that that be understood. The proposal before us departs from that essential premise.”