Date: 1982-06-21
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. this past weekend. and again this morning. there have been more pubItshed reports about the Raymond Donovan case. This mornings Washington Post revesled additional information about this subject which was apparently known to the White House but was withheld from the Senate before Mr. Donovan was confirmed as Secretary of Labor. The article reports that an allegation that Mr. Donovans company was "closely aligned with the Vito Genovese family of the Mafia" was "deleted from documents made available to the Senate Labor Committee before Donovans confirmation * Of course. Mr. President. this is not the first occasion when we have heard that Information about Mr. Donovan was withheld from the Senate. The most flagrant example of this kind of activity was revealed last Tuesday. June 15.4982. when the Washington Post reported that: "The incoming Reagan White House was informed by the FBI last year. on the first day of Secretary Raymond J. Donovans Senate confirmation hearings. that Donovan had close personal and business ties with known" organized crime figures. That information was never provided to the Senate until June 11. 1982. approximately 16 months after Mr. Donovan was confirmed. It was that informationthat the FBI had apparently reached a conclusion that Mr. Donovan had "close personal and business ties with known" organized crime figuresthat prompted my Democratic colleagues and me to conclude that Mr. Donovan should be asked to "step aside" until these matters have been cleared. I understand Mr. Donovan will be making a statement this afternoon. and I trust it will reflect the Presidents agreement with us that it is in the best interests of the country for Mr. Donovan to "step aside" while these very serious charges are being investigated. But I rise today. Mr. President. not to speak primarily on the subject of the allegations which have been made about Mr. Donovan. but about a much more serious problem which these continuing stories present. If these articles are accurate. then the Senate as an institution. and the country. have been done a terrible disservice. To put it most succinctly. the Senate has been obstructed in the proper discharge of its constitutional responsibilities. Article II of the U.S. Constitution requires the Senate to consent to the appointment of "officers of the United States" such as Mr. Donovan. Article II of the Constitution provides the very bedrock for what has become known as the Senate confirmation process. The history of the exercise of this great power reflects that the Senate very rarely withholds its consent from Presidential appointments. believing. as I do. generallyalthough I did not in this particular casethat the President of the United States is usually entitled to select his own people to help him govern the Nation. I did not vote for the confirmation of Mr. Donovans nomination. Consistent with this philosophy. I point out that since this administration took office. 2.672 nominations have been submitted to the Senatenot including military. foreign service. and routine public service appointments. I have voted against only 7 of the 2.672. As I indicated by those seven votes. I believe there are rare caser. extreme cases. where the Senate has the duty. and the obligation. to withhold its consent where the facts warrant our so doing. But. Mr. President. our responsibilities can be fairly and faithfully discharged only if we have the facts upon which to make an informed judgment. The recent developments which have been disclosed in the Donovan case make it clear that the Senate did not have the facts. The Senate has been abused. and the confirmation system has been abused. if all of this extremely relevant information has been withheld. Senator KENNEDY and Senator EAGLETON have appropriately insisted that the withholding of information in the Donovan case must be investigated by the Senate Labor Committee. and assurances have been given that such an investigation will be conducted. But my concern. Mr. President. goes far beyond the Donovan case. My concern is an institutional concern and reflects what I see as a need for immediate and effectivp steps which must be taken by this body to insure that these kinds of situations will not be allowed to recur. My concern involves the necessity for the Senate to act. not only to protect the integrity of the confirmation process. but also to assure the American people that we are adequately fulfilling our constitutional role of advising and consenting to the appointments of all the top officials who govern us as a nation. As a first step. I will soon be introducing legislation which will insure that all relevant information bearing upon a nominees fitness and qualifications for high Government office is obtained and transmitted to the Senate prior to confirmation. It makes a mockery of the process for the information to be submitted to the White Housesuch information as has been reported in the pressand not to be submitted to the Senate. as the body which must act on a nomination. Additional steps might also be necessary to affix clearly the responsibility and accountability of particular execlitive officers of our Government to insure that such information is not withheld. That information should not be withheld from the Senate. under any administration. under any President. regardless of what party is in power. It might also be helpful to centralize this process in the Senate by the assignment of new responsibilities to the Office of the Senate Legal Counsel with respect to information to be obtained regarding all Presidential nominees. The legislation which I will be offering might require amending the present Ethics in Government Act. the same law which requires the public filing of financial disclosure statements by members of the executive and legislative branches. and the same law which established the machinery for the appointment of a special prosecutor in cases involving criminal wrongdoing by political appointees. I have recently been critical of the present administration for reports that the administration wishes to weaken or repeal various provisicons of the Ethnics in Government Act. I understood that they oppose the special prosecutor requirement. and. reportedly. they are said to be studying proposals to weaken the public disclosure requirements. It seems clear to me that. contrary to the current administrations position and especially in view of the developments over the past several weeks. that act deserves not to be repealed. not to be weakened. but. if anything. to be made tougher. As I have indicated. that act is the mot fundamental reform that grew out of the Watergate episode. I will resist any efforts to weaken or repeal it. and I urge my colleagues to join me in the effort. Mr. President. I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished Senator from Wisconsin .