August 4, 1994 - Part 12
August 4, 1994 - Part 12
(23:50:08) Mr. NUSSBAUM. Well, thank you, Senator. Senator BENNETT. You've come in here and told us exactly where you stand and we haven't had the lapses of memory nearly as much as the kind we've had from some others. Maybe it has to do with the fact that you don't work for the Government anymore and your job is not in jeopardy. I would just like to make a few observations, I associate myself completely with the Chairman's opening statement. This Committee feels very strongly about the issue of RTC independence, In my opening statement to the hearings that was my central focus because at that time I didn't understand any of the rest of this stuff -that we've now come to understand. I was offended by the testimony of one of the RTC employees, that the RTC has been more politicized in this Administration than in previous ones. There were several who testified to that. Mr. Altman, of course, denied it, but the career RTC employee had that feeling. That may ,be part of the reason behind the Chairman's passion because this Administration allowed Mr. Altman to remain in a position where structurally the independence of the RTC was compromised. What should have been a 2-week, 3-week arrangement until somebody was found and confirmed turned into a year and a half ,Of built-in conflict of interest, in terms of this Committee's interest; that is, that the two should be independent. You're not responsible for that. It's too late to do anything about it now, but understand that's a large reason why the Chairman was as passionate as he was in MY view and one of the reasons why I identify with him. Now the other half of his statement about the recusal issue, I'm .not a lawyer. I think I can understand the English language withOut having been to law school. Turn to page 13 of your statement. Mr. NUSSBAUM. Yes. Senator BENNETT. You're quoting the OGE guidelines and you very passionately say this means the official has a duty to do his or her duty and you've been very passionate about that. The last 492 phrase of that guideline referring to employees are expected to perform their duties unless there is a reason their participation, "ill the last phrase, will result"- this is the English language I think 1 understand----"will result in an appearance of conflict significantly detrimental to the public's legitimate perception of the fairness of the governmental processes involved." Now Secretary Altman made the decision that his involvement in this would result in an appearance of conflict that would be significantly detrimental to the public's perception of the fairness of this thing and he came to the White House to announce that decision, He had already checked with Secretary Bentsen, and Secretary Bentsen has testified that if he had been in Mr. Altman's position, he would have recused himself. So what you're really saying here, Mr. Nussbaum, in your passionate statement that every official should do his duty and we need to enforce that throughout the whole Administration' and this is something you would absolutely establish is that if Secretary Bentsen had asked you for advice, you would have told him do your duty and stay there. My only comment is I think Secretary Bentsen's advice was the correct one. I think subsequent events have demonstrated that Secretary Bentsen's instincts were the correct ones and Mr. Altman's instincts were the correct ones before something happened at the White House to turn him, and that's why I find myself in agreement with the Chairman's position. Thank you. Mr. NUSSBAUM. Can I respond? Senator BENNETT. Absolutely. Mr. NUSSBAUM. I don't believe Mr. Altman made a decision nor did he say he made a decision when he came to see us, that his continuing to act would result in an appearance of conflict significantly detrimental to the public's legitimate perception of the fairness of the governmental processes involved. He didn't make such a decision. He said just the opposite in effect. What he said to me is that he had consulted ethics people and they told him that he was not legally or ethically required to recuse himself.