The act has twice been reauthorized. The constitutionality of the statutory scheme has been upheld by the Supreme Court. Last year the legislation was permitted to lapse. It is proper that this committee is now moving to fill that void. It is my firm conviction that the law has been a good one, helping to restore public confidence in our system's ability to investigate wrongdoing by high-level executive branch officials.
Some outside person is absolutely essential.
Now, nearly two decades later, I could not state it any better. It is neither fair nor valid to criticize the act for what politics has wrought nor to expect the act to solve all our crises. The Iran-Contra investigation, far from providing support for doing away with the act, proves its necessity. I believe that this investigation could not have been conducted under the supervision of the attorney general and concluded with any public confidence in its thoroughness or impartiality. The reason that I support the concept of an independent counsel with statutory independence is that there is an inherent conflict whenever senior executive branch officials are to be investigated by the department and its appointed head, the attorney general.