Hyde Backs Inquiry on Impeachment

A week before the House Judiciary Committee is scheduled to vote on the matter, Chairman Henry J. Hyde (R-Ill.) on Monday said for the first time that he believes there is evidence to justify a formal investigation into the impeachment of President Clinton for committing perjury and attempting to hide his involvement with Monica S. Lewinsky.

Hyde, who until now had been careful not to tip his hand, revealed that he supports an impeachment inquiry even if all of the panel’s 16 Democrats vote against it next week.

“I should think there is enough to warrant an inquiry,” he said.

Hyde also added, in a rather disparaging contrast, that a vote against moving forward could be seen as political cowardice.

“The question facing the committee is quite simple, really,” he said. “Do the allegations against the president merit further investigation? Should we inquire further into these allegations or refuse to take a closer look and just shut down?”

Democrats, able to count the 21 to 16 party-line split in the committee, responded that Hyde’s decision was expected.

“That wouldn’t come as any surprise to our members,” shrugged Jim Jordan, spokesman for Democratic committee members.

Independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr’s report listed 11 possible grounds for impeachment: five counts of perjury, five counts of obstruction of justice and one count alleging that Clinton abused his presidential power in attempting to hide his relationship with the former White House intern.

Hearings Planned on Constitution

Hyde also announced that he has asked a fellow committee member, Rep. Charles T. Canady (R-Fla.), who chairs the subcommittee on the Constitution, to begin hearings with experts on what is an impeachable offense for a president.

Hyde said that he wants to hear back from Canady “as soon as practicable,” noting that he believes the full committee never would agree on a standard for impeachment.

He recalled that even in the hearings into the Watergate scandal of the Nixon administration, Judiciary Committee Chairman Peter W. Rodino Jr. (D-N.J.) could not get a consensus on when a president should be removed. He said that the Founding Fathers who framed the Constitution were careful to keep that definition elusive.

“I think Chairman Rodino said it best in 1974 when he observed that the framers did not write a fixed standard,” Hyde said. “They wanted a standard sufficiently flexible to meet future circumstances, based upon a full development of the facts.”

In coming days, there will be a number of significant developments in the House investigation of Clinton, as outlined in the report by Starr.

Another 3,000 to 5,000 pages of material are expected to be released Thursday. These documents are likely to include transcripts of the secret Linda Tripp-Lewinsky audiotapes, as well as grand jury testimony by presidential friend Vernon E. Jordan Jr. and Clinton’s personal secretary, Betty Currie.

Also this week, senior Judiciary Committee lawyers will visit Starr’s office to see additional material that Starr has not sent to Congress.

The lawyers, representing both Republicans and Democrats, will review the material to determine, “if there are any other documents . . . relevant to the Lewinsky matter,” Hyde said. On Monday, the committee will meet in open session and, after hearing from staff lawyers, will begin deliberating and voting on whether to recommend a formal impeachment inquiry. On Oct. 9--the target adjournment date for Congress--the full House is expected to vote on that recommendation.

Hyde Targets Feinstein’s Comments

With such a brisk timetable, Hyde intimated that Democrats should become more fully engaged in the process rather than complaining. He specifically blasted Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) for complaining on a television talk show Sunday that Democrats on the committee were not being given the proper resources to investigate the Starr referral.

She is wrong, Hyde said, and her comments were “wildly unfair and inaccurate.” He added: “I just really resent it. We’re trying to be fair,” he added. “That doesn’t mean we lay down and play dead. We’re still the majority. We can’t let them run the committee, much as they would like to. But we’re being fair.”

At the White House, presidential spokesman Mike McCurry reacted favorably to Hyde’s contention that he intends to run a fair investigation.

“Actions are more important than words,” McCurry said. “But the reassurances given by the chairman today were welcome.”