Clinton must face heat for actions

Tuesday, March 4, 1997

RESPONSIBILITY:

President needs to address question about illegal coffees, stays
in Lincolin bedroomJennifer

Nelson

By now, most Americans are acquainted with the fact that since
1993, 938 people have slept at the White House at the invitation of
the President. Until recently, it has been unclear whether allowing
guests to spend the night in the Lincoln bedroom was simply a means
of extending hospitality to old friends, or whether it was part of
a concerted effort to gain campaign contributions from wealthy
potential donors.

However, after the submission of subpoenaed Oval Office memos to
Congress, everything has been made clear. It is evident that Bill
Clinton played a first-hand role in coordinating events intended to
raise money for the Democratic Party. Comments he wrote in memos to
his chief of staff, Harold Ickes, show that the coffees and stays
in the Lincoln bedroom were deliberate fund-raising attempts that
the president not only had knowledge of, but endorsed. One message
requests that the staff "get other names at 100,000 or more," for a
coffee while another mentions that the White House is "ready to
start overnights right away."

These statements show that these were business, and not social,
functions, because they were planned out too far in advance and
focused principally on the collection of money. Despite this fact,
I have not seen any sign of outrage from the American people. A
recent poll conducted by the Los Angeles Times revealed that less
than half of the Americans surveyed believe that Clinton was wrong
to permit large contributors to sleep in the Lincoln bedroom. More
than half don’t think that the issue is "relevant to his character
and his job."

Unfortunately, this shows that Americans are either not well
versed in federal law or are indifferent towards the illegal
behavior of their president. Federal law states that public
structures, such as the White House, cannot be used as locations
for the solicitation of campaign contributions. Clinton’s coffees
and overnight stays were obviously in direct violation of this
regulation. It is ludicrous to believe that the president’s breach
of federal authority is an irrelevant issue.

Of course, Democrats should be pleased that their hurried
attempts to mask the corruption of Clinton’s fund-raising tactics
have been successful. Instead of agreeing with Republicans that
serious questions have been raised about the specific conduct of
the president, they have attempted to broaden the scope of any
impending investigation in order to better camouflage the illegal
nature of his behavior. While Republicans have called for a direct
probe of the coffees and overnight stays, Democrats have threatened
to block its funding unless congressional fund-raising practices
are also investigated.

This is obviously little more than a ruse to expand the campaign
contribution spotlight so that it does not shine so heavily upon
Clinton. Now that the incriminating messages he scrawled upon White
House memoranda have been publicized, he can no longer hide under
the cover of the Democratic National Committee. Americans should
recognize this latest ploy as a last-ditch attempt to avoid
responsibility for his actions.

It is understandable that Clinton is concerned. The law that the
president broke exists for an important reason. While we all know
that politicians cater to the wishes of vital campaign
contributors, offering overnight stays to wealthy individuals in
such a symbolic area of the White House crosses the line. I am
confused by the lack of outrage, because I am sure Lincoln is
turning over in his grave.

Janet Reno recently decided that it would not be necessary to
appoint special counsel to investigate the issue of Democratic
fund-raising. However, this was prior to the surfacing of evidence
which revealed Clinton’s direct involvement. Because there is
clearly cause for ethical concern, and because Reno is both a
member of the president’s party and his appointee, she should
immediately designate an impartial independent counsel to handle
this very important case.

For the moment, there is no need to investigate all of Congress
or to impose a smaller budget or close deadline on the probe. The
only evidence of illegal campaign contributions that has come to
light strongly implicates Clinton, and him only. There is no
rational excuse for broadening the investigation, except to create
confusion in the mind of the public. The only purpose this action
would serve would be to waste time, money and effort while
detracting from the investigation of a tremendously important
issue. The spotlight must continue to shine on the president alone
until this issue is resolved.