Mr. SENSENBRENNER. The gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. The Chair is about ready to make the most controversial statement of the day. The committee stands recessed until 8 a.m. tomorrow. [Whereupon, at 8:58 p.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at 8:00 a.m. on Wednesday, December 9.] IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY: WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1998 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, The committee met, pursuant to call, at 8:12 a.m., in room 2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Henry J. Hyde [chairman of the committee] presiding. Present: Representatives Henry J. Hyde, F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., Bill McCollum, George W. Gekas, Howard Coble, Lamar S. Smith, Elton Gallegly, Charles T. Canady, Bob Inglis, Bob Goodlatte, Stephen E. Buyer, Ed Bryant, Steve Chabot, Bob Barr, William L. Jenkins, Asa Hutchinson, Edward A. Pease, Christopher B. Cannon, James E. Rogan, Lindsey O. Graham, Mary Bono, John Conyers, Jr., Barney Frank, Charles E. Schumer, Howard L. Berman, Rick Boucher, Jerrold Nadler, Robert C. Scott, Melvin L. Watt, Zoe Lofgren, Sheila Jackson Lee, Maxine Waters, Martin T. Meehan, William D. Delahunt, Robert Wexler, Steven R. Rothman, and Thomas M. Barrett. Majority Staff Present: Thomas E. Mooney, Sr., general counselchief of staff; Jon W. Dudas, deputy general counsel-staff director; Diana L. Schacht, deputy staff director-chief counsel; Daniel M. Freeman, parliamentarian-counsel; Joseph H. Gibson, chief counsel; Rick Filkins, counsel; Sharee M. Freeman, counsel; John F. Mautz, IV, counsel; William Moschella, counsel; Stephen Pinkos, counsel; Sheila F. Klein, executive assistant to general counselchief of staff; Annelie Weber, executive assistant to deputy general counsel-staff director; Samuel F. Stratman, press secretary; Rebecca S. Ward, officer manager; James B. Farr, financial clerk; Elizabeth Singleton, legislative correspondent; Sharon L. Hammersla, computer systems coordinator; Michele Manon, administrative assistant; Joseph McDonald, publications clerk; Shawn Friesen, staff assistant/clerk; Robert Jones, staff assistant; Ann Jemison, receptionist; Michael Connolly, communications assistant; Michelle Morgan, press secretary; and Patricia Katyoka, research assistant. Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law Staff Present: Ray Smietanka, chief counsel; and Jim Harper, counsel. Subcommittee on the Constitution Staff Present: John H. Ladd, chief counsel; and Cathleen A. Cleaver, counsel. Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property Staff Present: Mitch Glazier, chief counsel; Blaine S. Merritt, counsel; Vince Garlock, counsel; and Debra K. Laman. Subcommittee on Crime Staff Present: Paul J. McNulty, director of communications-chief counsel; Glenn R. Schmitt, counsel; Daniel J. Bryant, counsel; and Nicole R. Nason, counsel. Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims Staff Present: George M. Fishman, chief counsel; Laura Ann Baxter, counsel; and Jim Y. Wilon, counsel. Majority Investigative Staff Present: David P. Schippers, chief investigative counsel; Susan Bogart, investigative counsel; Thomas M. Schippers, investigative counsel; Jeffrey Pavletic, investigative counsel; Charles F. Marino, counsel; John C. Kocoras, counsel; Diana L. Woznicki, investigator; Peter J. Wacks, investigator; Albert F. Tracy, investigator; Berle S. Littmann, investigator; Stephen P. Lynch, professional staff member; Nancy Ruggero-Tracy, office manager/coordinator; and Patrick O'Sullivan, staff assistant. Minority Staff Present: Julian Epstein, minority chief counselstaff director; Perry Apelbaum, minority general counsel; Samara T. Ryder counsel; Brian P. Woolfolk, counsel; Henry Moniz, counsel; Robert Raben, minority counsel; Stephanie Peters, counsel; David Lachmann, counsel; Anita Johnson, executive assistant to minority chief counsel-staff director, and Dawn Burton, minority clerk. Minority Investigative Staff Present: Abbe D. Lowell, minority chief investigative counsel; Lis W. Wiehl, investigative counsel; Deborah L. Rhode, investigative counsel; Kevin M. Simpson, investigative counsel; Stephen F. Reich, investigative counsel; Sampak P. Garg, investigative counsel; and Maria Reddick, minority clerk. OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN HYDE Chairman HYDE. The committee will come to order. If the panel would be kind enough to turn their nameplates around. You know who you are, we would like to know who you are. Thank you very much. Good morning. The committee will come to order. Today we will hear from the fourth panel of witnesses. Panel witnesses will each have 10 minutes to make a statement. After the testimony of the witnesses, members will be allowed to ask questions for 5 minutes. I ask that the members please pay attention to their time and be aware that their questions should be asked and answered within their 5 minutes. The reason for that is it takes over 3 hours to cover the members under the 5-minute rule. To make this meaningful, we have to watch our time. Immediately following this panel, the committee will receive the testimony of White House Counsel Charles Ruff. After his presentation, members will question Mr. Ruff under the 5-minute rule. After the members have questioned Mr. Ruff, the committee counsel may question him. Thursday morning, tomorrow morning, we will have a presentation by minority chief investigative counsel Abbe Lowell at 9 a.m. and a presentation by chief investigative counsel David Schippers at 1:00 p.m. Immediately following Mr. Schippers, we will begin consideration of a resolution containing articles of impeachment for our deliberation. We will hear opening statements from all members Thursday evening. Friday we will begin consideration and debate of articles of impeachment. At this point my thinking is to provide a 10-minute allocation for every member to make an opening-my present thinking is to allow 10 minutes for each member to make an opening statement. I think 10 minutes is adequate and in balance. I also know that you would like copies of any articles of impeachment that we may have. Let me just suggest to you, they are still works in progress. We think it improper, improvident, to issue any documents until we have heard the testimony. Changes are occurring as we speak. But as soon as we have a document that we feel fairly is a working draft that we can stand behind, we will get it to you. Mr. SCOTT. Will the gentleman yield? Chairman HYDE. I certainly will yield. Mr. SCOTT. As you know, Mr. Conyers and I wrote a letter asking for the specific articles to be available at least 48 hours before we had to take action on them. It would seem to me that if we are going to consider the factual basis and go through the record to determine what the facts are and to propose amendments and to determine whether or not, with specificity, they actually constitute impeachable offenses that we would need some period of time, and 48 hours before we start having to deal with them, I think, is a minimum amount of time. Will we have 48 hours before we have Chairman HYDE. The actual amendment process would not begin until Friday morning. We will try to get you something by early afternoon today. But they are still being drafted and I am unwilling to provide working papers and nothing more. We will give you a workable draft, fairly solid in terms of the final product, by early afternoon today. And you won't need the amending process until Friday morning. Ms. JACKSON LEE. Will the gentleman yield? Chairman HYDE. Yes. Ms. JACKSON LEE. I think you answered the question. If there were a desire to amend or to add to or to distract from, detract from this process of working together on these, it is an open process? Chairman HYDE. You mean, you want to help us draft articles of impeachment? Ms. JACKSON LEE. In the spirit of bipartisanship, I want to know if the opportunity is open. Chairman HYDE. Indeed, the amendatory process will permit you to draft them any way you would like and we will give them full consideration. Ms. JACKSON LEE. Or undraft them? Chairman HYDE. Oh, yes, undraft. Ms. JACKSON LEE. The final question, Mr. Chairman, is as you well know, the votes will probably come very late in the day or possibly Saturday. Would we have an opportunity for an explanation of our votes before we vote? |