Republicans Call Democratic Briefing by Wright Lawyer Possible Secrecy Violation

A series of briefings for House Democrats and party activists by the lawyer representing embattled Speaker Jim Wright (D-Tex.) came under Republican fire Tuesday as a possible violation of the House Ethics Committee’s secrecy rules.

Minority Whip Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), who brought the original ethics charges against Wright, said that the one-sided disclosure of details of the case to Democratic lawmakers who may be called on to pass judgment on the Speaker is tainting the process that is now under way in the committee.

Rep. John T. Myers (R-Ind.), ranking GOP member of the ethics panel, also criticized the briefings by the Speaker’s attorney, William C. Oldaker.

“We extended the courtesy of our committee” to Oldaker, Myers said. “When he discusses what took place there, he’s in violation of House rules.”

But Oldaker, Wright’s aides and influential Democratic supporters outside Congress defended the briefings. Former party chairman John C. White said that it is about time the Speaker began fighting back to protect his reputation.

“What do they expect?” White asked in a telephone interview. “Gingrich has been throwing grenades for 10 months and the Speaker is supposed to sit there and take it? That’s nuts.”

Oldaker has become the latest center of controversy in the politically explosive, 10-month-old investigation of Wright, the nation’s highest-ranking Democratic official.

The ethics panel’s long-awaited decision on whether to approve formal charges against Wright may be put off until next week, according to committee members.

If, as widely anticipated, the panel issues a “statement of possible violations” by Wright, he then would have a chance to present a defense before the committee gives its verdict or recommends any penalty. A decision by the House to reprimand or censure Wright could force him to resign as Speaker.

Oldaker was allowed to listen to a lengthy confidential presentation to the committee by its special counsel, Richard J. Phelan.

Starting last week, Oldaker has conducted a series of meetings with more than 50 of the 260 Democrats in the House. At those briefings, he presented a written, point-by-point rebuttal of charges that the Speaker broke House rules of conduct.

A copy of the Oldaker report was obtained by The Times.

Oldaker denied that he had violated a pledge of confidentiality, saying only that he had promised not to talk to reporters. Ethics Committee Chairman Julian C. Dixon (D-Los Angeles) agreed that Oldaker has a right to defend the Speaker “in the way that he sees fit.”

Marshal Lynam, Wright’s chief of staff, said that there is nothing improper about responding to allegations of misconduct through special briefings for House Democrats by Oldaker.

Jack Valenti, president of the Motion Picture Assn. of America, said that he attended one of the briefings and that no “inside information” was presented that had not been discussed already in the newspapers or on television.

“This terrorizing attack on the Speaker is very painful,” Valenti said. “I felt comforted by seeing everything laid out in an orderly fashion.”

The argument over Oldaker’s briefings flared as the ethics panel resumed its closed-door deliberations Tuesday on whether Wright’s extensive business dealings with a Texas friend and bulk sales of his book of memoirs violated House rules.

The committee already has decided tentatively that Wright was at fault for failing to report an $18,000 annual salary received by his wife, use of a car and a cut-rate apartment as gifts from Ft. Worth developer George A. Mallick Jr., according to a source familiar with the proceedings.

Wright is accused of using an 117-page book he wrote entitled “Reflections of a Public Man” to circumvent House rules on outside income and of accepting financial favors from Mallick, who is suspected of having a direct interest in legislation.

According to the document prepared by Oldaker, committee counsel Phelan is alleging that Wright’s wife, Betty, did not earn the $18,000 annual salary she received between 1981 and 1984 from Mallightco, an investment company co-founded by Wright and Mallick.

Illegal Gift Alleged

Phelan is alleging that the salary constituted an illegal gift to the Wrights in excess of the $100 limit on gifts that House members can receive from persons with a direct interest in legislation.

In addition, the document shows, Phelan claims that Mallick had “direct interest” in three different types of legislation: federal development grants for revival of the old Ft. Worth stockyards, a proposed bail-out for the savings and loan industry, and legislation governing his holdings in real estate as well as oil and gas investments.

The document also confirms previous reports that in Phelan’s view, Wright sold his book in bulk quantities to lobbying groups, such as the Teamsters Union and an oil industry association, to circumvent the $2,000 limit on honorariums received by House members from outside sources. Book royalties are not subject to any limit under House rules.

Although Wright’s attorney alleges in the document that the Speaker “had no knowledge” of the bulk purchases, Wright acknowledged recently that he encouraged an aide to sell 504 books to Southwest Texas State University rather than accept an offered $3,000 speaking fee that exceeded the honorarium limit.