REVIEW & OUTLOOK
The Waxman House Rules
Are Bush and Cheney hiding something--or standing on principle?
We have a deal for Congressman Henry Waxman: If Vice President Dick Cheney releases the list of everyone he's ever discussed energy policy with, then will Mr. Waxman disclose the name of every campaign donor he's ever met with?
Come to think of it, why not expand this arrangement so every Member of Congress discloses everyone he has ever met while writing legislation? Republican Senator Orrin Hatch could also tell us what he discussed with Netscape, Sun Microsystems and Novell executives while preparing for his anti-Microsoft hearings. Democratic Senator Tom Daschle could release the notes from his meeting with Homestake Mining reps before stumping for a $1 billion subsidy for its South Dakota gold mine. The list could certainly be educational.
But of course the Members would decline, on the grounds that they need to be able to have wide-ranging, candid meetings to formulate good legislation. They sure don't want every conversation made public, and especially not chats with, heaven forbid, big-time political donors and "special interests." And they'd be right, just as President Bush was right yesterday when he called Mr. Waxman's demands to see records of his energy task force "an encroachment on the executive branch's ability to conduct business."
Keep in mind the kind of records Mr. Waxman and his political handmaiden, the General Accounting Office, are after. They have nothing to do with a judicial proceeding or a legal case; this is no Watergate or Whitewater. The notes and records have to do with the formulation of legislation, which is what the energy task force put together. Mr. Waxman has sought this for months but the issue was of such little note that it went away until Enron's collapse gave the California liberal a new political hook.
Not that even Mr. Waxman is saying there's any link between the Cheney task force and Enron's collapse. His gripe is that after meeting with Enron officials, as Mr. Cheney has acknowledged doing six times, the vice president then somehow skewed his proposals to benefit Enron.
Now, the energy task force's proposals are hardly secret; they have been sent up to Congress for all to see. And let's concede that energy proposals favoring more energy production are bound somehow to favor an energy company like Enron, though they sure didn't save it from bankruptcy. But even Mr. Waxman, in a January 16 letter to Mr. Cheney, points out that "the policies in the White House energy plan do not benefit Enron exclusively. And some may have independent merit."
If Mr. Waxman had his way, every conversation that every White House official had with anyone would be made available to Congress. Presidents of the right and left have complained that a legacy of past investigations means they can no longer put anything in writing; the Waxman rules would guarantee that they could no longer have truly private meetings.
Mr. Waxman insists that his request is no different than GOP claims to open up Hillary Clinton's ill-fated health-care task force. But there is a difference: the law. Mrs. Clinton set up a body involving non-government officials that was arguably subject to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which explicitly requires public meetings. As we said at the time, that law may well be unconstitutional. But it does exist, and Mrs. Clinton tried to evade it. The Cheney task force was a governmental body to which this law doesn't apply.
The other apt distinction here is whether the GAO and Mr. Waxman even have a proper legal claim. As a Member of the House minority, Mr. Waxman certainly doesn't. As for the GAO, while it is an arm of the Congress, the President appoints the Comptroller General (in this case, Clinton appointee David Walker) and there is a real issue of its subpoena power. Even if a court finds that GAO does have that power, then a President still has the right formally to claim executive privilege down the road.
But of course this dispute isn't just about the law. It is also about politics, and the appearance of "stonewalling," which is precisely the appearance that Mr. Waxman wants to convey to the public. Messrs. Bush and Cheney surely understand that by not releasing all energy task force records they will pay some political price, as every Beltway cable-TV genius is telling them.
Which makes it all the more intriguing that they're still willing to resist. Either they have something to hide, which on the evidence in this case is highly doubtful, or maybe, just maybe, they really believe what they say about preserving the power of the executive branch to deliberate in confidence.
