New Plan Is Offered for Special Counsels

With the much-maligned independent counsel law now near death, one of the attorney general’s most strident critics on Capitol Hill proposed an alternate plan Monday giving the Justice Department “unbridled discretion” to decide how top-ranking officials are investigated.

But there is a caveat: The plan from Sen. Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.), the powerful head of the Senate Government Affairs Committee, gives Congress the power to approve--or reject--the investigative procedure beforehand. And that oversight role could prove troublesome to Justice Department officials.

The comments from Thompson, whose panel recently held hearings on the independent counsel law, all but assure that the power for appointing and monitoring outside counsels will revert to the Justice Department. But the limits of the department’s power are likely to be hotly debated in the coming months.

The current law is expected to expire on June 30, with politicians on both sides of the aisle gladly wishing it what Thompson called “a decent burial.”

Authority, Budgets Go Unchecked

It has been roundly criticized for giving unchecked authority and budgets to independent counsels such as Clinton adversary Kenneth W. Starr and Lawrence E. Walsh, who investigated the Iran-Contra affair.

Thompson said the “elaborate framework” of the law--with a complex triggering mechanism that requires the Justice Department to make recommendations to a special judicial panel--also has insulated the attorney general from accountability for her decisions.

The senator has attacked Atty. Gen. Janet Reno for refusing to seek an independent counsel to probe alleged campaign finance abuses in the 1996 Clinton-Gore campaign.

The complexities of the current law, he said, have given her “a certain amount of cover” in such politically volatile decisions “because if she can say that all of the ‘I’s are not dotted and all the ‘T’s are not crossed, then she is basically home free.”

Thompson’s solution is to put the decision-making authority back in the attorney general’s hands.

Under his plan, the attorney general would have the authority to appoint a special counsel who would answer to her.

If allegations of wrongdoing are raised against a high-ranking government official, she would determine whether a special counsel should review the matter, what the limits of the investigation should be, how long it should continue and whether the counsel should be removed, he said.

That direct line of responsibility, Thompson said, would make the attorney general more accountable to the American public in the often divisive task of deciding “how should our public officials be behaving.”

Thompson’s proposal appears similar to a plan that the Justice Department itself put forth in April for restoring authority to the attorney general in appointing and overseeing special counsels.

But the Thompson plan differs in one key respect by requiring the attorney general to submit a plan for the special counsel procedure within 60 days and giving Congress the authority to approve or reject it.

The Justice Department received a copy of the Thompson proposal late Monday and plans to study its ramifications. But one official who asked not to be identified stressed that under the department’s reading, the expiration of the independent counsel law on June 30 would restore administrative authority for the special counsel process to the Justice Department, and Congress would not have the power to regulate it.

Joseph E. diGenova, a former independent counsel during the George Bush administration, said Thompson’s plan is laudable because it “underscores the accountability of the attorney general to make these decisions.”

In giving Congress some say in the matter, “it’s making sure that [the attorney general] does what she says she’s going to do,” diGenova said.

A few senators have indicated they may still try to salvage some form of the current law to ensure the independence of any investigations.

But Thompson said he believes there is strong support in the Senate for his approach. He said he will try to tack it on as an amendment to an appropriations bill that may be considered on the Senate floor in the next three weeks. The House, meanwhile, has not considered a successor to the current law.

Starr’s Inquiries to Continue

As a practical matter, officials say the June 30 deadline should have no direct impact on Starr’s office as its books remain open on various issues surrounding President Clinton, including the Whitewater affair and the president’s conduct in the Monica S. Lewinsky episode.

Under a grandfather clause, Starr’s office can continue its investigations indefinitely, whether or not the independent counsel law is renewed this month.

*

Video of Sen. Fred Thompson’s (R-Tenn.) comments regarding the independent counsel law are available on The Times’ Web site: https://www.latimes.com/counsel