When I got my first call about this, my reaction is what I said to the gentleman that called me, that I would hate for the almost 4 years that I worked there to do what I thought was good for America to be summed up in what I consider this, and it is just my own feeling, a waste of taxpayers dollars, and I said this to Mr. Rogers yesterday because I think about all of the poor Indian kids that need education, the diabetes on reservations, et cetera, and that I would love to see taxpayers' dollars go to that. I would come here and answer truthfully, though, but I feel very angry because it is like the tribes now are the ones that are paying a price for something. I am not absolutely sure what all is going on, but the statement that I would say that everybody knew that I never believed that the Indians have to pay to play because I felt that they have paid historically and that finally they were at a table and being treated fairly and equitable. So for me, 543 tribes the day I started and when I left it was roughly about 560, plus the Federal-the tribes that are trying to get federally recognized, and so treated all of them as respected governments and their leaders and that was why I did not deal with lobbyists and lawyers. And so when I come, I am going to always respond as openly and as honestly as I can to the best of my recollection, but we didn't deal with politics. As a matter of fact, the President of the National Congress of American Indians was a Republican, but he always operated as a tribal leader and so when I met with them I never worked with a group of people before that-politics was never an issue. And so I am almost offended because I think that this has been unfortunate, but I also respect the fact that everybody here, including the three of you, are doing the job that you have to do and so I will not change. And I laughed because I hadn't seen a lot of these. I never thought that there was any need to keep any of this because I never thought I would go from what I did to here. And then I sum up by saying that I was away from my husband for almost 4 years, and I spent a lot of time working. So I spent no time dealing with this kind of stuff. I was just working, and I worked around the clock, and the tribes knew they could call me any time they wanted to. And all I kept thinking was, I have two grandkids, that one day all of us would be at a point of fairness, equity, and I felt good about it. Now, I was-I mentioned yesterday, I don't think I will ever write another memo and I am not sure I ever want to work in government again because I find this just appalling, and then I found it appalling because I started thinking when I got the call, I had lost a lot of money but I didn't care because I thought I was working for a good reason. But all of a sudden when I got the call, I am like what am going to do, when I got the letter? So I didn't even think about getting legal representation. I was just going to come, but when I talked to the Senate because I don't look at life like that, and I don't look at this like that, and someone said you just need-I don't understand the legal process and that's why I never dealt with lobbyists-not lobbyists, but really lobbyists that were lawyers. And so here I am, and then I decided I said why should I pay for doing what I consider just doing right because you can never find-if you do it right, there is never any wrong and right. And so I am going to come, I am going to answer some things I recall, and when I sit here, I can't remember, you know, word for word because I was dealing with—I mean all I kept thinking was, I really came here and worked my blank off, that's all I thought. I mean, I worked. And I treated the tribes and the mayors and the black mayors, the gay-elected officials, I treated everybody the same. And so now I am having to remember something that I know that, you know, I hear the word "perjury" and so I am thinking, oh, I need to make a correction when you ask me have you talked about it and I say, oh, my gosh before this goes off I want to tell you that, yes, I did, I talked to somebody, my husband. Because I worry about all of these things. Then I am thinking, why am I here? Why am I here? And, you know, I don't want to look at the other stuff because I wasn't there and so my only point is that I hope what we did and I hope when this administration is over that when another administration takes over that they bring the first Americans right back to where they belong, where they deserve to be and where they have earned the right to be, and that this to me is almost insignificant to the bigger picture. And believe me, I understand what you have got to do and so I am not here to pass judgment on anybody, but just to say that I didn't have any ill conversations with the Secretary, with Mr. Lindsey, with Mr. Specter, Arlyn Ackley or anybody, and that to the best of my knowledge that's what I have answered, and that's all I want to do. Question. Let me just make a note for the record on behalf of the Democratic members of the committee. We certainly think there is no reason why you should be here, there is no reason why you should be caught up in this and it is an unfortunate consequence of the slime job that's going on by this committee that you are here. But nevertheless, let me just note that your record of public service is an unblemished one, Ms. Avent. It is a record of distinction and one that you can be proud of and we have seen nothing to suggest to the contrary. Let me just wrap up with one question that you may or may not know the answer to: You had a firm policy of no contacts with lawyers or lobbyists that you implemented during your tenure in governmental affairs. Do you know if your predecessors in the Bush administration had a similar policy of no contacts with lawyers or lobbyists? Answer. I mean, I don't—I mean, I have had friends in every administration and one of my dearest and closest and best friends was the director of this office under President Bush, and I would think that we come from the same backgrounds, that she would have been as open, honest and direct as I was and I assume most people in the job. I think most people in government do a good job. Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. Well, thank you again. And at this point I have no further questions. Mr. WILSON. I just have one question and one observation, and normally I wouldn't waste more of your time but because there is a written record I feel compelled to make one observation, and that is it is my understanding that the Department of Justice Attorney General Janet Reno is also investigating the circumstances that now we call the Hudson Dog Track. I used to work for a former Attorney General and I have great respect for the Department of Justice as an institution and I have great respect for the individuals in the Department of Justice. We are investigating Secretary Babbitt and the Hudson Dog Track matter. Attorney General Janet Reno is investigating Secretary Babbitt and the Hudson Dog Track matter. It is my understanding from what Mr. McLaughlin says that it is the position of Representative Waxman and the Minority staff that Attorney General Janet Reno is thus attempting to slime Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. That is an inaccurate statement, Mr. Wilson. The statement is that I, Andrew McLaughlin, consider this to be an embarrassment to the United States Government, that this committee is engaged in a partisan slime job. Your so-called investigation Mr. WILSON. I will just finish my statement. Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. Your so-called investigation of Mr. Babbitt is one piece of a larger slime job. That's the words of your own former boss, Mr. Wilson. Those are not my words. Mr. WILSON. It is not the words of my boss, and I see no difference between an investigation that the Attorney General of the United States is carrying on and that we are carrying on, and if you characterize this an investigation of the Hudson Dog Track matter as a slime job, which you have done, then you are thus, by reasonable analogy, characterizing the investigation of the Attorney General. I am going to finish this, and I will allow you to make your statement. Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. I will make the statement that it is your investigation that is a slime job, Mr. Wilson, your investigation. I have confidence in the Department of Justice and in the FBI, which you people apparently do not have, in second-guessing findings of the the factual findings of the FBI and the legal conclusions of the Attorney General. It is your investigation which is an embarrassment to this democracy. EXAMINATION BY MR. WILSON: Question. Ms. Avent, I apologize. Notwithstanding the fact that this is an inconvenience to you and we all recognize that, have you been treated with courtesy and professionalism in your dealings with the Majority staff Question. Thank you very much. On behalf of both myself, Mr. Dold and the Majority staff, I appreciate your taking the time to come here and I thank you very much for your statements. Answer. Okay. [Whereupon, at 11:45 a.m., the deposition was concluded.] [The exhibits referred to follow:] I just got a call from Bruce in reference to a person named Pat O'Connor, whom I don't know, who has called me on numerous occasions. Unfortunately, I was on my reservation circuit, so I asked both Jay Campbell and Katy Button in my office to call and advise him I was travelling and that before I could respond personally, I would need a letter from one of the tribal leaders he was representing explaining their situation and/or their concerns. Following the legal advice we have received concerning these kinds of issues, I have not and would not speak with him, or any lobbyist or lawyer. Irrespective of lawyers and lobbyists say they know personally in the Administration my first responsibility is to take care of the pres. because I am aware of the politics and the press surrounding this particular situation, it is in our best interest to keep it totally away from the white house in general, and the pres in particular. This is such a hot potato (like Cabazon) -- too hot to touch. The legal and political implications of our involvement would be disastrous. I am on my way into a meeting with five of our strongest tribal leaders (because of their significant voter turnout), who have already gone ballistic about other tribal governments who have greater access to the Administration because of their ability to pay hired guns (as they call them) and their belief that this unfairly gets things to happen. They believe that when the President said "Government-to-Government" and "respect for tribal consultation" that it meant directly with them. They consider the lobbyists and lawyers trying to access us as staff they (the tribal leaders) pay and that their responsibility is to report and advise them (the tribal leaders), and as tribal leaders elected by their membership, they will do the business of tribal governments directly with our government. This puts us in a Catch-22. To ensure we don't get caught in this web, I treat all 550 elected tribal leaders the same (I deal directly with them on behalf of the President). Harold, my goal is to clean up as much as I can clean up (seven reservations in less than ten days) prior to the April 28th meeting. We are 98% there. I do not want this situation to be part of or anywhere near the meeting on the 28th. This is a Department of Interior and Justice Department and that's where it should stay. Finally, the fact that he would even suggest i would discuss anything remotely connected to Indian gaming tells me he is not truly connected to Indian country (all 550 federally recognized tribes know I don't do gaming and say it). Both Domestic Policy and Intergovernmental Affairs deal with this issue in this manner. I explained this to Bruce and he understands the way I operate and I assured him I would make the call directly to advise the party that called. I will do this as soon as my meeting is over. I'll call later and give you an update. The press is just waiting for this kind of story. We don't need to give it to them. One last concern leading into Friday, but I am working on that now. Because of the diversity and complexities within Indian Country and the constant changes in elected leadership, there is no lobbyist or lawyer that I will put before my responsibility to the President and his commitment to Indian Country (April 29, 1994). CC: Maggie Williams Cheryl Mills EOP 069071 This e-mail is to fill you in more detail about a call that " Pat O'connor is a lobbyist that represents a number of gaming tribes in Wisconsin and Minnesota. He is also, I believe, a DNC trustee of some sort. He is working on some off-reservation gaming project (dog racing I think) called "the Hudson Project, which under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act will need Secretary Babbitt's approval to go forward, since it is off reservation gaming. Pat called Loretta last week on this issue. As you know, last year WH counsel advised Loretta that she should not meet with lobbyists or lawyers on Indian issues. Also, on April 29, the President signed a memorandum stating his strong support for the government-to-government relationship with the Tribes and direct consultation (which they hold us to in every letter they send!!). We get hit hard by Tribal leaders when we meet with Lobbyists, since many times the tribal leaders are not even aware that the lobbyists are calling us on their behalf. Loretta was out of town when Pat called, but asked Jay and Katy Button on her staff to return the calls from Pat, informing him that he needed to have the Tribal leader(s) that he represent send in whatever request that they had, and that she would work with the leaders directly. This is her standard response in these situations. After several calls trying to get around Jay and Katy, on Wednesday of last week Pat sent in a memo from him (not from the Tribal leaders as requested) to Loretta asking to talk to her about intervening with Secretary Babbitt to allow this Hudson project to be able to do off-reservation gaming. This fax also EOP 069076 |