Terror Panel Loses Support: Daschle Against Creating New Committee

With Senate leaders still at loggerheads over the issue, the effort to create a select terrorism committee appears to have hit a dead end, at least in the near term.

Majority Leader Thomas Daschle (D-S.D.) has decided against supporting any of the proposals for investigating terrorism, with a specific emphasis on the events of Sept. 11, through either a select committee or a bipartisan commission.

Instead, Daschle believes the existing standing committees have done an excellent job in holding hearings related to terrorism and crafting legislation to deal with the issue.

"At least for now, the current committee structure is working well," said Molly Rowley, a Daschle spokeswoman. Daschle believes forming a select committee is "an interesting idea" but not necessary given the quantity and quality of legislation passed since Sept. 11, Rowley added.

That position leaves Daschle at odds with Minority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.), who is "still in favor" of establishing some form of special committee to conduct the probe, according to Lott spokesman Ron Bonjean.

Lott has said he believes one special or select committee can serve as a clearinghouse for terrorist-related information, preventing the several dozen committees and subcommittees with some jurisdiction on the issue from tripping over one another.

Lott has even floated the idea of setting up a GOP-only committee or task force to investigate terrorism, but no decision has been reached on that idea.

Daschle's decision to forgo a select committee marks a sharp contrast to political sentiment shortly after the terrorist attacks, when many Senators were leaning toward supporting the idea but arguing over who should serve on such a panel.

Supporters are still holding out hope that Daschle will eventually come around to the idea, and Senators and staff have talked about reaching a consensus proposal that will help push leaders into a deal to conduct a wide-ranging probe.

But even the most optimistic among them doubt that an agreement can be reached this year because of a crunched timeline that is barely leaving enough room to finish the appropriations process and pass a stimulus package before Christmas.

"All those things are coming on the docket before this bill," said Sarah Ross, spokeswoman for Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), who has introduced legislation establishing a select committee. "There's just not a lot of attention on that right now, unfortunately. A priority hasn't been established on setting a new committee."

"Time is running out to get anything done this year," said Rich Masters, communications director for Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), sponsor of another committee proposal.

There has been no talk from Senate leaders about moving forward with the new committee in many weeks, according to a half-dozen Republican and Democratic aides.

Now 11 weeks since the deadly attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, opinion is divided about the prospects of ever establishing a new panel. Some aides suggested that eventually the Senate will need to have some formal expression of its outlook on the most deadly attack ever on U.S. soil, and that the passage of time would lead to a more thoughtful, sober and less emotional probe. Others worried that the longer the delay, the more likely it is that no comprehensive probe is ever conducted.

On the House side, Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) took an anti-terrorism task force and made it an official subcommittee of the Select Intelligence Committee, led by Reps. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) and Jane Harman (D-Calif.).

But some lawmakers and aides are already beginning to question how effective a subcommittee can be in handling such a broad topic and whether it will have enough clout to tackle such an important task. Those questions are likely to grow now that Chambliss is running for Senate, a costly campaign that will require a large amount of time on the fundraising circuit.

The leading House proponent for establishing a select terrorism panel has been Republican Conference Chairman J.C. Watts (Okla.), who still mentions the proposal at leadership meetings "a couple times a month, at least," aides say.

Watts believes House committees are already covering too much of the same ground. According to an estimate from Watts' office, 77 different hearings have dealt with terrorism and homeland security since Sept. 11.

One key impediment to creating a special panel in the Senate has been the Democratic committee chairmen and some GOP ranking members who don't want to yield any power to a new committee, according to numerous Senators and aides. To ameliorate those concerns, some insiders have floated the idea of creating a "super committee" on terrorism that would include the chairmen and ranking members from relevant panels such as Intelligence and Judiciary.

But Lott and others have previously signaled that they would oppose that approach because it would eliminate junior Senators such as Roberts, who has been leading the push for a select terrorism committee for years. It would also put more on the plate of already-busy chairmen. As Lott put it in a prior interview, "I'd like to make sure we have people who have the expertise and the time."

Regardless, Daschle feels that the existing committees have demonstrated their ability to conduct serious enough legislation in this time of crisis, pointing to Judiciary's passage of an anti-terrorism bill and Commerce, Science and Transportation's completion of airline security. The existing committees, Rowley said, "are capable of more than we realized on Sept. 11."

Daschle has left open the possibility of revisiting the select committee issue in the future if existing panels lose their ability to deal with terrorism issues, Rowley said.

Three leading proposals have emerged in the Senate to investigate terrorism. Landrieu would establish a 12-member panel made up of rank-and-file Senators appointed by Lott and Daschle, with a jurisdiction to specifically investigate Sept. 11 and the events leading up to the four hijackings.

Roberts would set up a committee with a broader territorial landscape and a mandate to recommend legislative initiatives to strengthen U.S. defenses against domestic-based terrorism. Daschle and Lott would co-chair the panel.

Sen. Robert Torricelli (D-N.J.) has asked colleagues to support setting up a public-private "board of inquiry" - of the 12 members, the Torricelli board would have two Senators, two House Members and eight private citizens appointed by Congressional leaders and President Bush. With full subpoena power, the board would be required to report back to Congress within one year of its inception about "systemic problems" in intelligence and counter-terrorism units, according to a Torricelli "Dear Colleague" letter sent out in mid-October. "Until there is a thorough review of the actions of our intelligence and counterterrorism agencies and steps are taken to correct any shortcomings," Torricelli wrote, "the people of our nation will never feel safe."

One wonders why this can of worms is not being opened, could it be the chief terrorist supporter Mrs. Hitlary Rotten Clintoon has some reservations about investigating this?

Probably waiting till his wife is lobbying for this or is offered a piece of the pie somehow.

I firmly believe that our congressional leaders need to take a trip to say, Kahndabar or better yet Jalalabad. How do I start a fundraiser to send Daschle and select others to personnally go check out the situation? I mean for our country's sake, since they are so all knowing..............

Thank God Congress is not creating another "Special Commission" to investigate 9/11. Everyone knows the simplest way to kill the truth is to give it over to politicians for "investigation." For once, and maybe only once, I have to agree with a Democrat.(I had to hold my hand from shaking while typing that statement.)

That should be the red flag on this!! WHY not have a select committee? Chances to get air time on TV, many senators would LOVE to be on this committee, especially those running for re-election as democrats, who need a law and order image. This is a strange decision on his part, and bears further watching.

It is doubtful that Daschle could even get a security clearance if he were applying for a low level government job. He assumes he will have automatic re-election because he is a good campaigner and pork barrel politician. He assumes his constituents are too dumb to care about anything else he actually does in his high profile Senate leadership position. Another South Dakotan named George McGovern assumed the same thing. Remember him?

When ever this happens you know something needs to be covered up, the truth may just be uncovered and these Rats don't want that to happen.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.