Pelosi: Contempt Vote Part of Effort to Restore Checks and Balances

Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

From the Speaker on this morning’s vote:

“The contempt proceedings in the House Judiciary Committee today are part of a broader effort by House Democrats to restore our nation’s fundamental system of checks and balances.

“The Constitution gives the Congress a crucial role in overseeing the Executive Branch in order to protect the American people against overreaching, incompetence, and corruption. I am hopeful that today’s vote will help the Administration see the light and release the information to which the Judiciary Committee is entitled.

“For the last six years, under Republican leadership, Congress failed to conduct its proper oversight role, resulting in fiascos such as the mismanagement of our Iraq policy, widespread corruption by contractors such as Halliburton, and the failed response to Hurricane Katrina.

“Congress will act to preserve and protect our criminal justice system and to ensure appropriate Congressional oversight in all areas essential to the well-being of the American people.”

As we noted earlier, the word is that a vote on this in the full House is unlikely before the August recess, pushing it back to September.

House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) followed up the House vote this morning with a letter to White House counsel Fred Fielding, saying that he still hoped the two sides could come to an agreement. That letter is below.

The letter:

July 25, 2007

BY FAX AND U.S. MAIL

Mr. Fred F. Fielding
Counsel to the President
Office of the Counsel to the President
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20530

Dear Mr. Fielding:

I am enclosing with this letter a copy of the report and resolution approved by the House Judiciary Committee today recommending that the House of Representatives cite Joshua Bolten and Harriet Miers for contempt of Congress for refusing to comply with the subpoenas issued to them on June 13. As I explained before the Committee’s vote, I regret that the Committee has had to take this step, and continue to hope that we can resolve with you the Committee’s need for information from the White House in our investigation. Indeed, as the Congressional Research Service noted in a recent report, in each of the eight cases in which House Committees alone have found executive branch officials in contempt for refusing to comply with subpoenas based on executive privilege since 1975, there was “full or substantial compliance with the demands of the committee” after the vote.

Many possible paths are available to reach an agreement in this matter. Senator Leahy and I previously suggested that we begin by the White House providing copies of documents reflecting communications outside the White House, which was part of your offer in March. With respect to the Department of Justice, we and the Senate Judiciary Committee have conducted some 12 on-the-record interviews, and have subsequently called only one of those interviewees to testify before a Committee. Just recently, in an attempt to resolve executive branch confidentiality concerns about documents relating to the tragic death of Corporal Patrick Tillman, the White House made available over 400 pages of documents for staff review to assess relevancy and to narrow differences between the White House and the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

As we have repeatedly explained, we stand ready to discuss these and all other possible constructive paths to resolve our need for information from the White House in the U.S. Attorneys matter. But make no mistake: If the White House continues to refuse to engage in any discussions beyond repeating its unacceptable “take it or leave it” offer, and if Mr. Bolten and Ms. Miers continue to refuse to comply altogether with our subpoenas, we will have no choice but to enforce those subpoenas by all appropriate legal means. In our system of government, no one is above the law.

Sincerely,

John Conyers, Jr.
Chairman

Enclosure
cc: The Honorable Lamar S. Smith
The Honorable Linda T. Sánchez
The Honorable Chris Cannon

Latest Muckraker
1
Show Comments
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: