Advertisement

Senate Panel Won’t Probe Entry on Gramm in Packwood Diary

Share
From Associated Press

The Senate Ethics Committee will not pursue an entry in Sen. Bob Packwood’s diaries, in which he asserted that Sen. Phil Gramm intended to send GOP money to Packwood in violation of contribution limits.

“The committee has reviewed this matter and has concluded that no further action will be taken by the committee,” concluded a letter to Gramm (R-Tex.) on Thursday from Chairman Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Vice Chairman Richard H. Bryan (D-Nev.).

Packwood (R-Ore.) announced his resignation last week after the ethics panel voted, 6 to 0, to expel him for sexual and official misconduct. The wrongdoing included Packwood’s altering of his diaries when he learned that they would be subpoenaed.

Advertisement

The committee released more than 10,000 pages of investigative documents, including the diaries.

A March 6, 1992, entry described a meeting Packwood had with Gramm, who now is running for his party’s presidential nomination. In 1992, Gramm headed the GOP’s Senate Campaign Committee.

Packwood said the Texan promised to funnel $100,000 in party “soft” money to Packwood’s campaign--funds that can be used only for party-building activities such as get-out-the-vote drives.

“What was said in that room would be enough to convict us all of something,” Packwood’s diary entry said. It added:

“He [Gramm] says, now, of course, you know there can’t be any legal connection between this money and Sen. Packwood, but we know that it will be used for his benefit.”

Gramm was referred to as Senator X, although he and Packwood acknowledged that the reference was to the Texan.

Advertisement

Gramm wrote the committee last week that the diary entry “reflects an obvious misunderstanding of the election law that governs contributions by party committees.”

The Ethics Committee report said that Packwood testified that the conversation with Gramm reflected no illegalities, that the entry was in jest and that nobody in Gramm’s position would take such a risk.

Advertisement