Prepared Floor Statement of Senator Chuck Grassley
Attorney General Holder’s Responses to Questions for the Record from Monday, November 9, 2009
Mr./Madam President, I’m here to discuss a very important matter that I intended to discuss in the Judiciary Committee last week, but did not have an opportunity to raise. It’s about oversight of the Department of Justice and the responses provided by Attorney General Holder to questions from the Judiciary Committee.
Two weeks ago, Chairman Leahy and I sent a letter to the Attorney General asking him to stand by his statements made during his confirmation and answer a number of outstanding requests for information. That list includes questions submitted by members of the Judiciary Committee to an FBI oversight hearing over a year and a half ago. We all can agree that no Committee should not have to wait that long to get those answers.
Last Friday, the Judiciary Committee received answers from Attorney General Holder following his June 17, 2009 testimony. I hoped he would uphold his commitment he made during his confirmation hearing to respond “fully…and in a timely fashion” to the Judiciary Committee’s inquiries.
The questions I submitted to Attorney General Holder addressed a number of important issues, including a series of twenty-four questions I related to the Department’s involvement with the termination of Inspector General Gerald Walpin at the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS). The answers I received were totally inadequate.
Instead of answering the twenty four questions, the Department responded with a five paragraph recitation of publicly available facts and information. The Department also said it would respond under separate cover the to the document requests. I appreciate that the Department’s comments that it intends to respond to my requests, but I’m very concerned this is more of the same problem the Chairman and I are trying to get at with our letter from two weeks ago.
My questions were more than just requests for documents and asking for a recitation of public facts. They were serious inquires about the role the acting U.S. Attorney played in the termination of the Inspector General. I requested specific answers to questions that have arisen in my investigation. For example, I asked about communications between the U.S. Attorney and the Office of Professional Responsibility and whether the referral by the U.S. Attorney complied with the ethical requirements outlined in the U.S. Attorneys manual for misconduct by non-Department of Justice Attorneys or Judges. While this is just one example of the questions I asked, none of the questions were specifically answered.
While the Department did say it was going to provide the documents I requested under separate cover, the response seems to indicate that all my questions were answered. They were not answered and I intend to get these answers. This is a prime example of what is wrong with the inadequate responses to all of our questions; they avoid the question and filibuster with public facts.
I have previously stated that unless the Department of Justice starts answering our questions completely and in a timely manner, I am going to start holding up nominees. I’ve done nothing but patiently work in good faith with the Chairman and the Department to get answers. Yet, despite my threats, it’s business as usual at the Department.
This culture of not answering questions timely, answering in an evasive manner and punting document requests to future “separate cover” letters is unacceptable. We have a constitutional duty to oversee the bureaucracy and the Executive Branch is thumbing its nose at us. I know Chairman Leahy agrees that Oversight is an important part of what the Judiciary Committee does and I hope he’ll continue to work with all members to get answers from the Attorney General.
I’m tired of wasting time having to raise these concerns publicly, but shaming the Department is the only way they seem to respond—and even that isn’t really working.
This administration rode into town on a campaign of accountability and transparency. Attorney General Holder told all of us that he respected Congressional oversight. Yet, in his first set of oversight questions submitted by the Committee, he gave us the same non-response responses we’ve seen from the Department. That’s not accountability or transparency the American taxpayers deserve.
This is yet another public warning to the Department, it’s time to start responding fully to our questions in a timely manner or face the consequences. I hope the Attorney General and his staff will hear this and provide complete answers to our questions prior to his scheduled appearance in the Judiciary Committee later this month. I know Senator Kyl, the distinguish Minority Whip and member of the Judiciary Committee is also here to express his concerns regarding his unanswered questions and I yield to him. Thank you.