With only three exceptions, we have faced a resolution to issue a subpoena at every single executive business meeting of this Committee for the past seven months. In fact, in this session of Congress, we have had subpoena resolutions on the agenda at every single executive session.

As a consequence, before we have been able to get to any substantive legislative matter before this Committee, we have had to first deal with a subpoena to an Executive Branch agency, ranging from the Department of Justice to the Departments of Defense, Energy and CIA. Flashing subpoenas appears now to be standard operating procedure for how this Committee conducts its oversight. As we approach the party conventions in August and the elections in November, the Committee’s steady diet of subpoenas will likely continue unabated.

Before we vote on these subpoena resolutions, I want to make two simple observations. I will be brief. First, these subpoenas are entirely unnecessary. The Justice Department made the LaBella and Freeh memoranda available in September 1998 to Chairmen Hatch, Hyde, and Burton, along with Messrs. Conyers, Waxman and me.

More recently, I understand that a letter was sent by Chairman Hatch, Senator Specter and Chairman Hyde and Representative Canady to the Attorney General demanding that the LaBella and Freeh memoranda and numerous other documents be produced by April 10th and still other related documents be produced by April 24th.

The Department has been responsive and has made the documents available for review to staff and members of the Judiciary Committee on the same terms as the documents are being made available to staff of the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee. If we do not like those terms, we should negotiate different ones, not issue a subpoena.

I note that one of the requested subpoenas is directed to Charles LaBella for his memoranda. Senator Specter has represented that Mr. LaBella retains in his possession his memoranda and other related documents. I will be surprised if Mr. LaBella, who is no longer a Justice Department employee, has a copy of his memorandum since, as I recall, the last time the Justice Department showed it to the Chairman and me, and others, this document contained grand jury material and must be kept under lock and key at the Department.

Second, I will not support a subpoena resolution that is so blatantly partisan and makes no reference even to requiring consultation with the Ranking Member. This is an unfortunate precedent for this Committee.

In this regard, it highly telling that the versions of the subpoena resolutions on today’s agenda were delivered to us this morning as we walked into this meeting. These versions had never been circulated to us and we had not been provided with the exhibits to the resolutions. It may not matter what the resolutions or exhibits actually say, since the majority has the votes to subpoena whomever it want and to pass what it likes, but as a simple courtesy, I would appreciate – as would all the other the minority members of the Committee – that we be provided with the final versions of what we are asked to vote on in a timely manner before the executive business meeting.

Two prior resolutions have already been approved by this Committee authorizing the issuance of subpoenas for the LaBella memorandum and related documents, if certain conditions were met. We approved on a bipartisan basis one of these resolutions on October 14, 1999 and one on November 17, 1999. Both resolutions required that before subpoenas were issued there was to be consultation with the Ranking Member. Both required that documents only had to be produced to the extent that they are not protected by grand jury secrecy rules and the production would not adversely effect an ongoing investigation. There has been no consultation with the Ranking Member on this resolution or on the issuance of these subpoenas.

Moreover, we have been given no assurance from Senator Specter that he will forego insisting on perusing grand jury material.

Furthermore, we have asked, but not received, any assurances that this campaign finance investigation will be tailored so as not to effect the national elections later this year. We have received no assurances that information and reports will not be released, for example, during the Democratic convention or right before the election in November. This investigation is a Republican investigation and since the Republicans control both the House and Senate, I expect this subpoena resolution to pass and to see this investigation continue unabated.

I will vote “no” to these resolutions.