|
 he
word in Washington was that David Walker, head of the General Accounting
Office, would wait until after the State of the Union address to
announce that he plans to sue Vice President Dick Cheney for information
about outsiders who were consulted by Cheney's energy task force
as it created the national energy policy. The word was right; Walker
gave the administration a 16-hour reprieve before announcing the
lawsuit.
"All of
our attempts to reach a reasoned and reasonable accommodation, including
reducing the scope of our request, have been rebuffed," Walker
says in a detailed and combative statement released Wednesday afternoon.
"This will be the first time that GAO has filed suit to enforce
our access rights against a federal official."
Walker's statement
confirms that the GAO was preparing to go to court in the days preceding
September 11, but decided to hold off to avoid interfering with
the administration in the days following the terrorist attacks.
Walker also says the recent decision by four Democratic senators
to support the GAO's request — among those senators were Government
Affairs Committee chairman Joseph Lieberman and Permanent Subcommittee
on Investigations chairman Carl Levin, the two lead investigators
of the Enron affair — played an important role in the GAO's
decision to go ahead. "The recent bankruptcy of Enron has served
to increase congressional interest in energy policy, in general,
and [task force] activities, in particular," Walker writes.
"This, plus the Senate's expected consideration of comprehensive
energy legislation this session, reinforces the need for the information
we requested concerning the development of the National Energy Policy
proposal."
Although Walker
insists the GAO is "only seeking limited information"
about the task force, recent statements by Lieberman and Levin suggest
that much more is at stake. "Who helped shape the administration's
energy policy?" the senators asked in a recent letter to Walker.
"How did participants get invited and what interests did they
represent? What did they recommend? What changes did they request?
The American public deserves answers to these questions."
For now at
least, there is no indication that Cheney is inclined to negotiate
any sort of settlement with the GAO. The vice president, and the
president himself, have insisted that there is an important legal
principle at stake. "This is part of how you make decisions,
to call people in and say, 'What's your opinion,'" the president
said on Monday. "And in order for me to be able to get good,
sound opinions, those who offer me opinions, or offer the vice president
opinions, must know that every word they say is not going to be
put into the public record....We're not going to let the ability
for us to discuss matters between ourselves to become eroded."
What remains
unclear, however, is whether the White House might be inclined to
negotiate with a Senate committee, should Lieberman, Levin, or some
other chairman move to subpoena the information. So far in its dispute
with the GAO, the White House has not asserted executive privilege
(rather, it contends that the GAO simply does not have the authority
to demand such information). Whether the president would assert
the privilege against a Senate committee is not known.
What is clear
is that a number of Republicans on Capitol Hill are dismayed by
the White House stance. They know that Democrats plan to use the
Cheney matter against them in upcoming debate over an energy bill
— This bill was written in secret sessions with lobbyists from
Big Oil! — and they are not particularly enthusiastic about
supporting the White House on the issue of secrecy. In fact, it
appears to some observers that Cheney's position is so politically
unwise that it must be the result of an actual belief in principles,
and not political calculation — something that leaves Republicans
on Capitol Hill feeling both refreshed and uneasy.
|
