Wampum

by Dwight Meredith

George W. Bush has never much liked the idea of the 9-11 Commission.

For many months after the attack, he opposed the creation of a commission to conduct an independent investigation.

He agreed to the formation of the Commission only after the politically potent voices of the families of the 9-11 victims were heard.

He made sure that legislation creating the Commission limited the investigation to 18 months.

The administration agreed to provide only $3 million for the entire investigation. As I have shown before, that budget pales in comparison to other investigations. In inflation adjusted dollars, the administration deemed that investigating the 9-11 attacks needed about 1/7th of the amount spend investigating whether or not Mike Espy illegally got football tickets (he was acquitted) and about ¼ the amount spent by the Danforth Commission investigating Waco.

To win the approval of the families, the administration agreed to allow them to select one of the Republican appointed commissioners. When they selected an independent Republican, former Senator Warren Rudman, the While House then reneged on the agreement and refused to have Senator Rudman on the Commission.

Most recently, we learned that the Commission is not receiving the cooperation of the administration in providing certain documents:

The chairman of the federal commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks says that the White House is continuing to withhold several highly classified intelligence documents from the panel and that he is prepared to subpoena the documents if they are not turned over within weeks…

The commission, which has a membership that is equally divided among Republicans and Democrats, was created by Congress last year over the initial opposition of the White House. The law creating the panel requires that it complete its work by next May, a deadline that commission members say may be impossible to meet because of the Bush administration's delays in turning over many documents.

Mr. Kean's comments on Friday came as another member of the commission, Max Cleland, the former Democratic senator from Georgia, became the first panel member to say publicly that the commission could not complete its work by its May 2004 deadline and the first to accuse the White House of withholding classified information from the panel for purely political reasons.

"It's obvious that the White House wants to run out the clock here," he said in an interview in Washington. "It's Halloween, and we're still in negotiations with some assistant White House counsel about getting these documents — it's disgusting."

It is apparent that the Bush administration has been less than enthusiastic about the work of the commission. Is it fair, however, to draw the conclusion that the administration is trying to hide damaging information?

To answer that question, we turn to some of the most perceptive observers of executive branch behavior. First up is Cal Thomas:

The … game plan has been clear for some time. It is a two-track defense: The first is to stonewall, releasing documents under subpoena at the last minute to avoid being cited for contempt of Congress or violating court orders. Track two is to delay, delay, delay in hopes that the public will lose interest, or that the administration's … term will expire before any guilt may be found. In basketball, it's called freezing. When you are faced with a superior team, you get ahead in points and then hold on to the ball without taking a shot, letting time expire. Investigators need the legal equivalent of the 24-second clock to keep things moving.

If the administration has nothing to hide, it should welcome a complete investigation of all its activities … But, of course, its foot-dragging actions demonstrate it has much to hide.

Next up is Rep. Dan Burton:

The White House is behaving exactly the way they do when they know they've done something wrong and they've been caught with their hand in the cookie jar.

Third, is former Senator Al D’Amato:

SEN. D'AMATO: Well, I'm still hopeful that the President would understand that if, indeed, he pushes us to take this matter to the Senate floor and then ultimately to the courts, people are going to say, why? … That is absolutely disingenuous on their part. It might take us months. And what this is, is an effort to delay… to run the clock out on this, and we certainly could not accept that. And once again, I say, that if the President has nothing to hide, make the notes available, we'll end this.

Former Vice President Dan Quayle agrees:

Why is he invoking executive privilege? Because he has something to hide.

Now, perhaps it is unfair to quote those folks as they were discussing the Clinton administration and not the George W. Bush administration. In the end, though, I find myself in the awkward position of agreeing with America’s scold, Bill Bennett:

I do not believe this President. . . . This is the reaction of a man who I believe has something to hide.