Kenneth Starr’s Testimony Before The House Judiciary Committee – 7/7

This is the seventh of seven pages with the full text of Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr’s testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.

Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7

Kenneth Starr testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.

Transcript of House Judiciary Committee Hearing Following Starr’s Testimony.

HYDE: Everybody stay, please. The committee will stay. Maxine, don’t go.

(APPLAUSE)

HYDE: We’re going to have a meeting.

(APPLAUSE)

HYDE: Ladies and gentlemen, the committee hearing stands adjourned, but the committee will remain here for a very short meeting.

HYDE: Pursuant to notice and subject to the authority granted in H. Res. 581, I now move that the committee authorize the issuance of subpoenas for the following individuals: Daniel Geker (ph), Nathan Landow and Bob Bennett.

NADLER: Mr. Chairman, the room is not in order and I cannot hear you.

HYDE: Mr. Nadler.

NADLER: I said somebody is not in order and I cannot hear you.

HYDE: OK, I’ll try it again.

Pursuant to notice and subject to the authority granted in H. Res. 581, I now move that the committee authorize the issuance of subpoenas for the following individuals: Daniel Geker (ph), Nathan Landow, Bob Bennett.

NADLER: Mr. Chairman.

HYDE: Is there any objection?

Mr. Nadler.

NADLER: Mr. Chairman, I would like to know why this proposal. In particular, Mr. Geker (ph), I believe — I’m asking this as a question.

HYDE: Well, if the gentleman will permit me. If we have to go into it, we have to go into executive session to do that.

NADLER: Well, let me ask one question which you may not have to go into executive session.

HYDE: OK, what is it?

NADLER: Mr. Geker (ph), I believe, is Ms. Willey’s lawyer. If you want information about — I presume he may avail himself of attorney-client privilege claim. If you want — you might have to. If you need information about that, why call the lawyer? Why not call the witness directly?

HYDE: Well, I can’t answer that. But I will say the attorney-client privilege is not — does not overwhelm an impeachment committee. Is there any objection to the approval of the three subpoenas?

Mr. Scott.

SCOTT: Reserving the right to object. Mr. Chairman…

HYDE: Do you want to put your mike on.

SCOTT: Mr. Chairman, are we to assume by the issuance of these subpoenas that we are not confining the inquiry to the Starr allegations?

HYDE: What we’re doing is pursuant to the House — the House Resolution 581. It’s pursuant to that resolution.

SCOTT: Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object.

HYDE: The gentleman reserves the right to object.

SCOTT: Mr. Chairman, I would just say that at some point, I would appreciate it if we would focus the inquiry and the specific allegations so that we know what we’re investigating. We are now not focused on the Starr allegations. I have no idea what the allegations are going to be. And if we’re going to conduct an inquiry that we can conclude at some point in the foreseeable future, we have to focus the — to focus on certain allegations that might be impeachable offenses.

HYDE: Mr. Scott, this is focusing on material we have — the committee has received in executive session. We have this material.

SCOTT: Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation.

HYDE: I thank the gentleman.

Mr. Watt.

WATT: Reserving the right to object.

HYDE: The gentleman reserves the right to object.

WATT: The motion that I’m reserving — the unanimous consent request that I’m reserving the right to object to is to authorize the subpoenas, is that correct?

HYDE: Yes.

WATT: Mr. Chairman, I don’t…

HYDE: These are subpoenas for depositions.

WATT: I don’t feel like I can pass on that without having some background information. And I understand…

HYDE: We have to go into executive session.

WATT: I hate to put us to that burden, but I don’t know how I can pass on it without having some more information.

HYDE: We’ll go into executive session. We’ll have to clear the room.

NADLER: Wait, Mr. Chairman.

HYDE: What.

NADLER: Mr. Chairman, a question — why do we have to be in executive session to debate this?

HYDE: Because the material to explain the rationale for wanting these depositions is material that is in the — is executive material.

WATT: Well, with respect, Mr. Chairman,

HYDE: Just one at a time.

WATT: … I don’t feel like I can vote — I can sit here and not object without understanding the rationale myself.

HYDE: I understand, and we’re perfectly willing to go into executive session.

WATT: I’m not trying to violate executive rule.

SCHUMER: Would the chairman yield?

HYDE: Yes, I would yield.

SCHUMER: I mean, look, it seems — I am befuddled by why we are doing this. I understand…

HYDE: We wish to take depositions of these three people.

SCHUMER: I understand that, Mr. Chairman.

HYDE: Well, we’ll explain that in executive session.

SCHUMER: If I might make my point, sir.

HYDE: Sure.

SCHUMER: Which is I think the public, most of which is wondering why this is dragging on and on, also has a right to know why we are doing this. So what I would suggest — what I would suggest is that we discuss as much of the rationale for this as we can out of executive session so the public can hear. And then, if there are any specific references as to why we have to go into executive — about materials that are gathered in executive session, we can go in for that portion.

HYDE: Mr. Schumer, we can’t discuss really anything around the edges even without transgressing on executive session material. So let’s just go into executive session.

SCHUMER: Well, then, what I would move, Mr. Chairman — I have no problem with us going into an executive session — but then I would like for us to be able to discuss the rationale for this without using executive session material in public session. And that’s the move I would — that’s what I would propose.

HYDE: Well, we can’t do it. We’re going to have to go into executive session.

SCHUMER: Well, now — you know…

HYDE: Well, now, come on, it’s — yes.

FRANK: I’d like to be heard on the motion.

HYDE: Yes, you may.

FRANK: Mr. Chairman, I know it’s late. But we didn’t decide — and you’ve been accommodating to us in some regards, but we didn’t decide to do this all in one day. And I do not think it is legitimate to constrain members by running too much in one day and then saying, oh, it’s getting late in the day. Then do it tomorrow.

We’ve been spending — many of us felt that we should have started this awhile ago. You waited until November 18 or 19, then you put it all in one day. It’s simply not legitimate then to argue the time constraint.

I think this committee has erred grievously going into executive session and discussing things in executive session that ought to be discussed publicly.

FRANK: It is very, very strange to have these arguments about the need for the public to know, et cetera, et cetera, and we do it all in secret.

This is the committee that released grand jury information onto television. We made history in denying what has traditionally been something that would be kept somewhat private, and we do this — we debated doing that in a private session.

There is simply a great abuse of this. And again, I have to say, then adjourn. Come back tomorrow; come back next week.

You know, as far as these depositions are concerned that were so important, I don’t know why they weren’t taken in September or October or earlier in November. I don’t know how they became an emergency overnight.

The fact is that you have, I think, overused the executive session. There are very important questions. And it is simply inconsistent to say this is a terribly important issue to the American people, people need to know about it, and we’ll go into secret and make all the decisions.

Virtually every decision this committee has made it has made in secret. And it is simply an inconsistent position to talk about the important public issues that are involved here by going into it in secret.

HYDE: All right. The gentleman…

FRANK: You want me to yield…

HYDE: … has made his point. The gentleman is…

FRANK: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, I think I have five minutes. I’m sorry. Look, I didn’t decide that we would try to do it all in one day. But having decided to do it all in one day, you can’t use that against us and you can’t use that to constrain things.

You know, isn’t it somewhat paradoxical — we talk about how important this issue is, we talk about this is such a fundamental constitutional question, but we’ve got to worry because it’s getting late? Then don’t schedule us so that you constrain the most important thing we could possibly be talking about by the clock. Then let it go over to tomorrow. Let it go over to the next week.

We should have been doing it a month ago.

(UNKNOWN): Mr. Chairman?

FRANK: But I will not be constrained by a self-imposed handicap of the clock. And I still do not think we should go into executive session without some justification as to why we have to go into executive session.

We’re not discussing national security. We’re not discussing anything that’s going to give anything away to anybody. We’re not tipping off anybody.

So I do not understand and I think we have a right to be told why we have to go into executive session.

(UNKNOWN): Mr. Chairman?

HYDE: I thank the gentleman. The — there is a motion before the committee…

(UNKNOWN): Mr. Chairman?

HYDE: … to authorize the issuance of these subpoenas, and the clerk will call the role.

CONYERS: Mr. Chairman?

FRANK: Mr. Chairman? There were members — point of order, Mr. Chairman.

CLERK: Mr. Sensenbrenner.

CONYERS: Mr. Chairman.

CLERK: Mr. Sensenbrenner votes aye.

Mr. McCollum.

CONYERS: Mr. Chairman…

FRANK: Mr. Chairman, don’t (OFF-MIKE) by cutting off members seeking recognition.

CLERK: Mr. McCollum.

CONYERS: Mr. Chairman.

CLERK: Mr. McCollum votes aye.

Mr. Gekas.

FRANK: Mr. Chairman, this is unworthy of you.

(UNKNOWN): I move to strike the last word.

FRANK: This is unworthy of you, Mr. Chairman.

HYDE: All right. Hold it.

FRANK: There were members seeking recognition.

HYDE: Just — calm down. Mr. Berman.

BERMAN: Mr. Chairman, earlier today you made a ruling which I agreed with on a point of order raised by the gentlelady from Texas that with respect to the jurisdiction into inquire the House had spoken. The House did not mandate this committee to investigate everything under the sun. It allowed this committee to conduct an inquiry on anything under the sun.

We have the authority to decide what we are going to inquire on and to limit within the House action what we’re going to decide on.

Mr. Schumer makes a point. There are two different distinctions. When you issue subpoenas for people involved in the Kathleen Willey case, the implication of that is that there is a decision that that becomes part of the impeachment inquiry.

Many — everyone on this side of the aisle felt at the time and voted to limit the inquiry to the Monica Lewinsky referral. The independent counsel has not made a referral on the Kathleen Willey case. He has not found that there has been substantial and credible information that conduct by the president that may justify impeachment — that finding has not been made and that referral has not been made, so that there is a bifurcation.

First, the issue of whether we go into this line of inquiry is something that should be discussed in open session. Then, if our position is lost, then in executive session, the justification for the subpoenas can be raised.

That’s the only — that’s the only question that I have, and that’s why I think we should be able to get the justification for the subpoenas if we decide we’re launching into that inquiry. And I sure hope we don’t.

SCHUMER: Could the — just would the gentleman yield, because I didn’t get to finish my point before.

Could the chair give us some, without treading on executive session or anyone’s confidentiality being disclosed, could the chairman give us some idea why these three people were chosen and not others and where the chair intends to take this — these depositions? What is the point?

We already have heard form Mr. Starr that he doesn’t think the Willey episode rises to a level of impeachment. In my judgment, he has a pretty low threshold for impeachment, and if he doesn’t think that the Willey affair does, then that’s pretty dispositive to me.

And here we are with three complete — you know, yesterday we heard talk of John Huang. It was very hard to figure out what that was all about. Now we’re hearing these three. One can only draw the conclusion, Mr. Chairman — Mr. Chairman, one can only draw the conclusion without hearing an explanation that the majority doesn’t quite know what to do here and is sort of prolonging this with whichever they — with whatever thing they can grab onto — because there’s no logic to this, at least to me. I’d like to hear it, and I think the public is entitled to hear it. And I think in this case it could well be argued that executive session is being used as a shield because there is no good explanation as to why these three people have been — are going to be deposed, why other people are not, and where the chair and where the committee intends to take the depositions of these three people. As again, on — in — at least particularly in an area where the — where the office of independent counsel has said there is no impeachable offenses as far as it can see.

HYDE: All right. The chair — the chair…

CONYERS: Mr. Chairman.

(UNKNOWN): Mr. Chairman.

HYDE: The chair will declare a five-minute recess.

(RECESS)

HYDE: The committee will come to order. The committee will come to order.

I move that pursuant to rule 11, clause 2(g)(1) this committee meeting be conducted in executive session. The clerk will call the roll.

(UNKNOWN): Move the previous question.

HYDE: It’s non-debatable.

CLERK: Mr. Sensenbrenner.

SENSENBRENNER: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Sensenbrenner votes aye.

Mr. McCollum.

MCCOLLUM: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. McCollum votes aye.

Mr. Gekas.

GEKAS: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Gekas votes aye.

Mr. Coble. Mr. Smith.

SMITH: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Smith votes aye.

Mr. Gallegly.

GALLEGLY: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Gallegly votes aye.

Mr. Canady. Mr. Inglis.

INGLIS: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Inglis votes aye.

Mr. Goodlatte. Mr. Buyer.

BUYER: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Buyer votes aye.

Mr. Bryant.

BRYANT: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Bryant votes aye.

Mr. Chabot. Mr. Barr. Mr. Jenkins.

JENKINS: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Hutchinson. Mr. Pease.

PEASE: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Pease votes aye.

Mr. Cannon.

CANNON: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Cannon votes aye.

Mr. Rogan.

ROGAN: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Rogan votes aye.

Mr. Graham.

GRAHAM: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Graham votes aye.
Ms. Bono.

BONO: Aye.

CLERK: Ms. Bono vote aye.

Mr. Conyers. Mr. Conyers.

CONYERS: No.

CLERK: Mr. Conyers votes aye.

Mr. Frank.

FRANK: No.

CLERK: Mr. Frank votes no.

Mr. Schumer.

SCHUMER: No.

CLERK: Mr. Schumer votes no.

Mr. Berman. Mr. Boucher.

BOUCHER: No.

COMMITTEE: Mr. Boucher votes no.

Mr. Nadler.

NADLER: No.

CLERK: Mr. Nadler votes no.

Mr. Scott.

SCOTT: No.

CLERK: Mr. Scott votes no.

Mr. Watt.

WATT: No.

CLERK: Mr. Watt votes no.

Ms. Lofgren.

LOFGREN: No.

CLERK: Ms. Lofgren votes no.

Ms. Jackson Lee.

JACKSON LEE: No.

CLERK: Ms. Jackson Lee votes no.

Ms. Waters. Mr. Meehan. Mr. Delahunt.

DELAHUNT: No.

CLERK: Mr. Delahunt votes no.

Mr. Wexler.

WEXLER: No.

CLERK: Mr. Wexler votes no.

Mr. Rothman. Mr. Barrett.

BARRETT: No.

CLERK: Mr. Barrett votes no.

Mr. Hyde.

HYDE: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Hyde votes aye.

BERMAN: Mr. Chairman.

HYDE: The gentleman from California, Mr. Berman.

BERMAN: Mr. Berman votes no.

CLERK: Mr. Berman votes no.

HYDE: The gentlelady from California, Ms. Waters.

WATERS: No.

CLERK: Ms. Waters votes no.

HYDE: Mr. Chabot.

CHABOT: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Chabot votes aye.

HYDE: Mr. Canady.

CANADY: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Canady votes aye.

HYDE: Mr. Goodlatte.

GOODLATTE: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Goodlatte votes aye.

HYDE: Have all voted who wish? Mr. Hutchinson.

HUTCHINSON: Aye.

HYDE: Mr. Meehan.

CLERK: Mr. Hutchinson votes aye.

MEEHAN: No.

CLERK: Mr. Meehan votes no.

HYDE: The clerk will report.

CLERK: Mr. Chairman there are 19 ayes and 15 noes.

HYDE: And the motion is agreed to and the House — that is the committee will stand at ease while we clear the room.

SCHUMER: Point of order before that, Mr. Chairman.

HYDE: Yes, Mr. Senator. What.

SCHUMER: Mr. Chairman, according to the rules, at least a cursory review of the rules, a move to go into executive session is indeed debatable. It is indeed debatable and you said it was not debatable.

HYDE: I was so informed by staff.

SCHUMER: Well, could counsel make a ruling on that please and point to the relevant part of our rules which shows that it is. I mean, now we’re really flying by the seat of our pants.

HYDE: All right. No…

SCHUMER: (OFF-MIKE) did. And I just made a point of order.

HYDE: Your point of order is well-taken. It is debatable. I was informed it was not.

SCHUMER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

HYDE: But if — do you want to debate this some more now?

SCHUMER: Yes.

HYDE: Well, you’ve already spoken, so Mr. Nadler …

(UNKNOWN): Move the previous question.

HYDE: … is recognized. We’ll undo the roll call. We’ll dump the roll call and we’ll start again.

CONYERS: (OFF-MIKE) the roll call.

HYDE: Ms. Jackson Lee will be next. Go ahead, Mr. Nadler. I’m all ears.

(UNKNOWN): We voted, but we’re going to undo it.

CONYERS: (OFF-MIKE) regular order (OFF-MIKE)

HYDE: The room won’t be cleared until we go into executive session.

NADLER: I didn’t ask it to be cleared. I simply asked it to be quiet.

HYDE: OH, quiet. I see.

NADLER: Mr. Chairman, we should not go into executive session until a reason is given as to whether — as to why we are going into executive session, No. 1. No. 2, before we go into — before we talk about these subpoenas, we should have some basic idea of why we’re being asked for these subpoenas — specifically, a subpoena apparently relating to the Kathleen Willey affair, which, as Mr. Schumer pointed out, the special prosecutor says raises no questions that rise to the level of possible impeachable offenses. And so I would want to know, does this relate to the Willey affair, if it doesn’t, does it relate to something else. And why are we being asked for this? And I can’t believe that some reason can’t be given in public session. Secondly, if we are to have a motion to go into executive session, I would ask that the motion say go into executive session, then come back into open session so we can address whatever it is we can address publicly because I believe we owe that to the public.

HYDE: Will the gentleman yield?

NADLER: Yes.

HYDE: The gentleman can make that motion when we’re in executive session.

NADLER: No, I think we ought to make that motion before — that ought to be a condition of our going into executive session.

HYDE: Well, I don’t agree.

NADLER: Because if you make that motion in executive session and it’s voted down, we can’t even say it was voted down.

HYDE: That’s true.

NADLER: And that’s not right.

HYDE: The gentleman has it exactly right.

NADLER: But it’s not the right thing to do, the right way to conduct our business.

HYDE: OK. Are you through?

NADLER: I would move to amend the motion, then.

HYDE: I hear you. Thank you.

NADLER: I move to amend the motion…

BUYER: (OFF-MIKE) parliamentary inquiry.

HYDE: Mr. Buyer has a parliamentary inquiry.

NADLER: Could I…

BUYER: Parliamentary inquiry…

HYDE: I’m sorry. Do you have more to say?

NADLER: (OFF-MIKE) the amendment before his parliamentary inquiry.

HYDE: I’m sorry. What.

FRANK: You don’t have to (OFF-MIKE) for a parliamentary inquiry.

NADLER: Could I finish stating the amendment before Mr. Buyer’s parliamentary inquiry?

HYDE: Surely. You can finish anything…

NADLER: I move — I move to amend the motion that after we go into executive session, when the executive session is completed, we come out and resume regular session and then discuss the matter of the proposed — of the proposed subpoenas to the extent we can in public session and that the vote on those subpoenas be held in public session.

HYDE: The clerk will call the roll. You have heard the motion. Oh, you want to talk on the motion. Ms. Jackson Lee. Well, the amendment to the motion — that’s right. Yes, Ms. Lee.

JACKSON LEE: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to associate myself with the words of Mr. Nadler for two reasons and his motion, and I will speak globally to the issue.

One, Mr. Chairman, you were quoted as saying that in spite of the resolution passed dealing with how we would proceed in this impeachment process, that you looked to the end of ’98 to complete this process. I think it is important for the American people to know where we’re going with this process; how long; how many people will be caught up in our web. And clearly I think to go into executive session will preclude us from discussing this in an open manner as to whether this is going to go on and on and on and on.

We have determined today that the witness, Mr. Starr, has indicated that certain referrals would not come here. Are we now encouraging him to bring other referrals that he has not even contemplated or has already indicated there is no basis?

And so I would just argue that we are not, if you will, providing the direction and allowing for discussion on the direction by going into executive session, and calling witnesses, of course, that we don’t know, and for what basis we’re calling them.

And I would ask, Mr. Chairman, that we not go into executive session on these matters, and maybe find out as a whole where we’re going and when we’ll be able to complete this matter in a timely manner. I yield back.

HYDE: The gentleman from Indiana.

BUYER: Mr. Chairman, I am somewhat bewildered and confused. Someone asked a parliamentary inquiry. We had a motion here before the committee. I moved the previous question, and then we had a vote.

Now, I’d like to ask the parliamentarian, why would that vote not stand.

HYDE: I’ll answer that — because I told them that the motion was not debatable, and I was wrong. It was debatable. So I did not want to ram through something under the mistaken ruling of the chair that it was not debatable. That’s why. I made a mistake.

BUYER: Then I’ll move the previous question on Mr. Nadler’s amendment to the…

HYDE: The gentleman moves the previous question. All those in favor say “aye.”

COMMITTEE MEMBERS VOTING AYE: Aye.

HYDE: Opposed, nay.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS VOTING NAY: Nay.

HYDE: The ayes have it and the previous question is moved. The question now occurs on the motion of Mr. Nadler to — when we go — to go into executive session, but then to hold an open session thereafter.

NADLER: And to vote in the open session.

HYDE: And to vote in the open session. What will we vote on?

NADLER: The vote — after the discussion …

HYDE: OH, you want the — I understand. You vote on the subpoenas. I hear you.

NADLER: Let me clarify. The debate would be in the closed session.

HYDE: OK.

NADLER: We come out and debate whatever was open to vote in the open session; then we would have the vote in the open session.

HYDE: We understand Mr. Nadler’s motion. All those in favor say “aye.”

COMMITTEE MEMBERS VOTING AYE: Aye.

HYDE: Opposed, nay.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS VOTING NAY: Nay.

HYDE: Roll call.

CLERK: Mr. Sensenbrenner.

SENSENBRENNER: No.

CLERK: Mr. Sensenbrenner votes no.

Mr. McCollum. Mr. Gekas.

GEKAS: No.

CLERK: Mr. Gekas votes no.

Mr. Coble.

COBLE: No.

CLERK: Mr. Coble votes no.

Mr. Smith.

SMITH: No.

CLERK: Mr. Smith votes no.

Mr. Gallegly.

GALLEGLY: No.

CLERK: Mr. Gallegly votes no.

Mr. Canady.

CANADY: Mr. Canady votes no.

Mr. Inglis.

INGLIS: No.

CLERK: Mr. Inglis votes no.

Mr. Goodlatte.

GOODLATTE: No.

CLERK: Mr. Goodlatte votes no.

Mr. Buyer.

BUYER: No.

CLERK: Mr. Buyer votes no.

Mr. Bryant.

BRYANT: No.

CLERK: Mr. Bryant votes no.

Mr. Chabot.

CHABOT: No.

CLERK: Mr. Chabot votes no.

Mr. Barr. Mr. Jenkins.

JENKINS: No.

CLERK: Mr. Jenkins votes no.

Mr. Hutchinson.

HUTCHINSON: No.

CLERK: Mr. Hutchinson votes no.

Mr. Pease.

PEASE: No.

CLERK: Mr. Pease votes no.

Mr. Cannon.

CANNON: No.

CLERK: Mr. Cannon votes no.

Mr. Rogan.

ROGAN: Mr. Chairman, regrettably before voting, I simply want to make sure I’m clear on Mr. Nadler’s motion. And I apologize for the confusion, but the noise and the rapidity in which this was moving was so quickly I wasn’t able to get clarification to my satisfaction. Is the motion that we’re debating upon now whether to debate the issuance of subpoenas in executive session…

NADLER: Can I clarify the amendment again?

HYDE: Yes, please.

NADLER: The amendment says we will go into — if the amendment is adopted, we will go into executive session. We will discuss whatever we discuss in executive session. Then we’ll come out and resume the public session, debate whatever we can debate in the public< session, and then vote in the public session.

ROGAN: With that elucidation, Rogan votes no.

CLERK: Mr. Rogan votes no.

Mr. Graham.

(UNKNOWN): Mr. Barr.

GRAHAM: No.

CLERK: Mr. Graham votes no.

Ms. Bono.

BONO: No.

CLERK: Ms. Bono votes no.

HYDE: Mr. Barr.

CLERK: Mr. Barr votes no.

HYDE: Mr. McCollum.

MCCOLLUM: No.

CLERK: Mr. McCollum votes no.

HYDE: Clerk will report.

(UNKNOWN): Do I get to vote?

(LAUGHTER)

(APPLAUSE)

HYDE: Haven’t you ever heard of cut to the chase?

(LAUGHTER)

(UNKNOWN): (OFF-MIKE)

HYDE: Clerk will continue to call the roll, and don’t let me try that again.

CLERK: Mr. Conyers.

CONYERS: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Conyers votes aye.

Mr. Frank.

FRANK: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Frank votes aye.

Mr. Schumer.

SCHUMER: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Schumer votes aye.

Mr. Berman.

BERMAN: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Berman votes aye.

Mr. Boucher.

BOUCHER: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Boucher votes aye.

Mr. Nadler.

NADLER: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Nadler votes aye.

Mr. Scott.

SCOTT: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Scott votes aye.

Mr. Watt.

WATT: Pass.

CLERK: Mr. Watt passes. Ms. Lofgren.

LOFGREN: Aye.

CLERK: Ms. Lofgren votes aye.

Ms. Jackson Lee.

JACKSON LEE: Aye.

CLERK: Ms. Jackson Lee votes aye.

Ms. Waters.

WATER: Aye.

CLERK: Ms. Waters votes aye.

Mr. Meehan.

MEEHAN: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Meehan votes aye.

Mr. Delahunt.

DELAHUNT: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Delahunt votes aye.

Mr. Wexler.

WEXLER: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Wexler votes aye.

Mr. Rothman.

ROTHMAN: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Rothman votes aye.

Mr. Barrett.

BARRETT: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Barrett votes aye.

Mr. Hyde.

HYDE: No.

CLERK: Mr. Hyde votes no.

(UNKNOWN): Mr. Chairman.

HYDE: The gentleman from North Carolina.

WATT: I vote aye.

CLERK: Mr. Watt votes aye.

Mr. Chairman, there are 16 ayes and 21 no’s.

HYDE: Mr. Nadler’s motion is defeated. The question occurs now…

FRANK: Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman.

HYDE: For what purpose does the gentleman seek recognition?

FRANK: To offer an amendment.

HYDE: The previous question has been moved.

FRANK: I haven’t heard the previous question moved.

(UNKNOWN): (OFF-MIKE) previous question.

FRANK: Excuse me. I sought recognition to offer an amendment.

HYDE: Well, you’re not recognized for that purpose. Let’s, let us move on. Jerry, come on.

(UNKNOWN): No, I think…

(UNKNOWN): Mr. Chairman, I move the …

NADLER: (OFF-MIKE) is not a dilatory amendment (OFF-MIKE).

HYDE: You have spoken on this question already.

NADLER: No, it’s a new amendment. It’s not the same question.

(UNKNOWN): Mr. Chairman.

HYDE: What’s your amendment?

NADLER: My amendment is simply, Mr. Chairman, that the ayes and nays on the issuance of the subpoenas and the ayes and nays on a motion — will the ayes and nays on the issuance of the subpoenas be made public as cast in executive session?

HYDE: All right. The gentleman’s motion is not in writing, but that’s all right. We’re accommodating tonight. You’ve heard the motion. All those in favor say aye.

MEMBERS: Aye.

HYDE: Opposed nay. The ayes have it.

(UNKNOWN): Move the previous question.

(UNKNOWN): Mr. Chairman.

HYDE: Yes.

(UNKNOWN): I have a motion that this committee now move to executive session.

HYDE: All those in favor of the motion say aye.

MEMBERS: Aye.

HYDE: Oppose nay.

MEMBERS: No.

HYDE: The ayes have it.

FRANK: Roll call.

HYDE: Roll call. Roll call.

CLERK: Mr. Sensenbrenner.

SENSENBRENNER: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Sensenbrenner votes aye.

Mr. McCollum.

MCCOLLUM: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. McCollum votes aye.

Mr. Gekas.

GEKAS: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Gekas votes aye.

Mr. Coble.

COBLE: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Coble votes aye.

Mr. Smith.

SMITH: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Smith votes aye.

Mr. Gallegly.

GALLEGLY: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Gallegly votes aye.

Mr. Canady.

CANADY: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Canady votes aye.

Mr. Inglis.

INGLIS: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Inglis votes aye.

Mr. Goodlatte.

GOODLATTE: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Goodlatte votes aye.

Mr. Buyer.

BUYER: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Buyer votes aye.

Mr. Bryant.

BRYANT: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Bryant votes aye.

Mr. Chabot.

CHABOT: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Chabot votes aye.

Mr. Barr.

BARR: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Barr votes aye.

Mr. Jenkins.

JENKINS: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Jenkins votes aye.

Mr. Hutchinson.

HUTCHINSON: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Hutchinson votes aye.

Mr. Pease.

PEASE: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Pease votes aye.

Mr. Cannon.

CANNON: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Cannon votes aye.

Mr. Rogan.

ROGAN: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Rogan votes aye.

Mr. Graham.

GRAHAM: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Graham votes aye.

Ms. Bono.

BONO: Aye.

CLERK: Ms. Bono votes aye.

Mr. Conyers.

CONYERS: No.

CLERK: Mr. Conyers votes no.

Mr. Frank.

FRANK: No.

CLERK: Mr. Frank votes no.

Mr. Schumer.

SCHUMER: No.

CLERK: Mr. Schumer votes no.

Mr. Berman.

BERMAN: No.

CLERK: Mr. Berman votes no.

Mr. Boucher.

BOUCHER: No.

CLERK: Mr. Boucher votes no.

Mr. Nadler.

NADLER: No.

CLERK: Mr. Nadler votes no.

Mr. Scott.

SCOTT: No.

CLERK: Mr. Scott votes no.

Mr. Watt.

WATT: No.

CLERK: Mr. Watt votes no.

Ms. Lofgren.

LOFGREN: No.

CLERK: Ms. Lofgren votes no.

Ms. Jackson Lee.

JACKSON LEE: No.

CLERK: Ms. Jackson Lee votes no.

Ms. Waters.

WATERS: No.

CLERK: Ms. Waters votes no.

Mr. Meehan.

MEEHAN: No.

CLERK: Mr. Meehan votes no.

Mr. Delahunt.

DELAHUNT: No.

CLERK: Mr. Delahunt votes no.

Mr. Wexler. Mr. Wexler.

WEXLER: No.

CLERK: Mr. Wexler votes no.

Mr. Rothman.

ROTHMAN: No.

CLERK: Mr. Rothman votes no.

Mr. Barrett.

BARRETT: No.

CLERK: Mr. Barrett votes no.

Mr. Hyde.

HYDE: Aye.

CLERK: Mr. Hyde votes aye.

Mr. Chairman, there are 21 ayes and 16 no’s.

HYDE: And the motion is carried and the House will go into — the committee will go into executive session. And we will stand at ease until the room is cleared.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email