Congressman John Conyers' Announcement of Democrats' Proposal for an Impeachment Inquiry Before the release of the transcripts of conversations between Linda Tripp and Monica Lewinsky, ranking House Judiciary member John Conyers announced the Democrats' proposal for an alternative to the Republican impeachment inquiry. In the statement below, Conyers called for a more focused, limited Clinton impeachment investigation. Following Conyers' statement is the text of the Democrats' proposal. October 2, 1998 My Democratic colleagues on the House Judiciary Committee and I are here today to announce a Democratic alternative to the Republican impeachment inquiry resolution that will be offered at the next meeting of the Committee on Monday. I would like to begin by introducing the principal authors of the Democratic alternative, Rep. Rick Boucher (VA), Rep. Zoe Lofgren (CA), Rep. Bobby Scott (VA), Rep. Maxine Waters (CA) and Rep. Jerry Nadler (NY). The Democratic alternative creates a process, grounded in the Constitution, that is: (1) focused, (2) fair, (3) expeditious and (4) deliberate. First, the Democratic alternative is focused. The scope of the inquiry would not be open-ended. It would, instead, be limited to the Referral by Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr, which, by the way, does not include Travelgate, Filegate, Whitewater or Campaign Finance. Second, the Democratic alternative is fair. Rather than holding hearings on the constitutional standard for impeachment after a vote is taken on conducting formal inquiry proceedings, as our Republican colleagues have suggested, we propose conducting hearings before a vote. While hearings have been announced by the Chairman, we still don't know if or when these hearings will actually occur. So far, this does not seem like a serious endeavor. Furthermore, it is somewhat puzzling that independent counsel Starr would send a Referral of allegations without lending even one page to the fundamental question of what is the standard for a high crime and misdemeanor. Third, the Democratic alternative is expeditious. It proposes two phases that begin on October 12th and end by no later than November 25, 1998. Without a date certain, this proceeding could turn into an expensive, two-year (or even longer) politicized, fishing expedition. Finally, the Democratic alternative is deliberate. It removes partisanship from the process and assures public credibility by providing a predetermined, logical sequence that is grounded in the Constitution.            Full Coverage Search Clinton in Crisis The Trial Trial Guide Evidence Guide Transcripts Video Discuss the Trial The Starr Report and Rebuttals Video Index Documents Starr Investigation Jones v. Clinton Whitewater Jones v. Clinton Whitewater The Democrats' Proposal for President Clinton's Impeachment Inquiry FAIR PROCEDURE AND PROCESS PLAN FOR AN INQUIRY MOTION It is hereby moved that the Committee recommend to the House of Representatives that the House authorize and instruct the Committee to take the following steps within the indicated time frames in the order, fully and fairly, to conduct an inquiry and, if appropriate, to act upon the September 9, 1998 Referral of the Independent Counsel ("the Referral") in a manner which ensures the faithful discharge of the Constitutional duty of the Congress, and concludes the inquiry at the earliest possible time: I. FIRST PHASE: October 12 - 23, 1998 Commencing on October 12, 1998 and concluding no later than October 23, 1998, the Committee shall take the following steps within the time allotted: 1. The Constitutional Standard for Impeachment. The Committee shall convene public hearings to review thoroughly and comprehensively the Constitutional standard for impeachment, most recently recognized by the U.S. House of Representatives in 1974. During these hearings, the Committee shall solicit testimony from America's most renowned scholars to understand more fully the Constitutional provisions, historical precedents and legal authorities relative to impeachment so that Members of the Committee may be better informed as to the Constitutional standard of impeachment. 2. Comparison of the Allegations to the Constitutional Standard for Impeachment. The Committee shall next convene public hearings to consider which allegations, if any, of the eleven (11) stated in the Referral, if subsequently proven, could rise to the Constitutional standard for impeachment. After the hearing, the Committee shall meet in public session to decide which of the allegation(s), if any, if subsequently proven, could rise to the Constitutional standard for impeachment. 3. Sufficiency of the Evidence Supporting the Allegations. If the Committee has determined that one or more of the allegations could, if subsequently proven, rise to the Constitutional standard for impeachment, the Committee shall convene public hearings for the purpose of determining whether a preliminary review of the evidence in the Committee's possession indicates the need for further proceedings with respect to those allegations contained in the Referral which have been found potentially to meet the Constitutional standard for impeachment. After the hearing, the Committee shall meet in public session for the purpose of determining which allegations of the Referral, if any, which have been determined to meet the Constitutional standard for impeachment are supported by sufficient evidence in the Committee's possession to justify further proceedings. If the Committee finds there is a necessity for further proceedings, it shall then be in order for the Committee to conduct formal inquiry proceedings. 4. Alternative Sanctions. If the Committee finds that none of the allegations could rise to the Constitutional standard for impeachment, or if the Committee finds insufficient evidence to justify further proceedings with respect to those allegations that could rise to the Constitutional standard of impeachment, it shall then be in order for the Committee to consider the propriety of the alternative sanctions. II. SECOND PHASE: October 26 - November 25, 1998 1. Formal Inquiry/Investigation. If the Committee orders a formal inquiry, the Committee shall conduct its inquiry, including any public hearings it deems necessary, commencing on October 26, 1998. 2. Consideration of Report and Recommendations. Following the conclusion of the formal inquiry, the Committee shall convene for the purpose of considering any recommendations it may commend to the House, including (1) any articles of impeachment, (2) alternative sanctions, or (3) no action. The Committee shall conclude this activity by November 17, 1998. 3. House Action. If the Committee recommends one or more articles of impeachment, or alternative sanctions, the House shall reconvene as soon as possible thereafter to consider the Committee's recommendations. The House shall conclude its consideration by November 25, 1998. 4. Enlargement of Time. If the Committee is unable to complete its assignments within these timeframes, a report to the House may be made by the Committee requesting an extension of time.