Fight Brews Over Budget for Senate Donor Probe

WASHINGTON —  A Senate committee voted Wednesday to spend as much as $6.5 million to investigate the growing furor over campaign finance abuses--more than the combined cost of Senate inquiries into Whitewater and Iran-Contra and nearly as much as the chamber spent on Watergate.

But the Republican-backed budget for the investigation was opposed by all seven Democrats on the 16-member Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, laying the groundwork for a fierce partisan battle on the Senate floor next month.

“I believe it’s an excessive amount to spend on what appears to be an open-ended inquiry,” said Sen. John Glenn (D-Ohio), who proposed a $1.8-million budget instead.

Despite their differences on the spending amount, Republicans and Democrats agreed to conduct a broad bipartisan review of campaign contributions during the 1996 federal elections--including, but not limited to, the foreign money controversy involving the White House.

A joint statement said that the panel will look into the effect of foreign contributions on the American political system, conflicts of interest involving federal officials, illegal blending of fund-raising with official government business and possible improprieties by tax-exempt organizations, unions and corporations.

Sen. Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.), the committee chairman, said that the investigation will encompass donors from 11 countries and the presidential campaigns of Bill Clinton, Bob Dole and Ross Perot.

“It’s really unprecedented what we’re charged with looking at,” Thompson said. “Serious matters.”

Still to be resolved are how long the investigation will last and what operating rules will be for Republicans and Democrats on the committee. Although senators insisted that they want to work with a spirit of cooperation, signs of strain are evident.

Democrats want to be present for all depositions and interviews. Thompson, however, argued that such a procedure would bog down the investigation, which could involve as many as 80 attorneys, investigators and other staff members tracking information as far away as Indonesia, China, Paraguay and Russia.

Thompson has agreed that representatives of both parties should be present during official depositions, but he has said that they should attend only the most important interviews.

Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) said that Democrats will fight the $6.5-million budget, which he called “extraordinarily expensive” and will press for fair procedures and a schedule that winds up the investigation by the end of the year.

Daschle suggested that the Democrats might filibuster the issue on the Senate floor, which means that Republicans, who have a 55 to 45 advantage, would have to muster 60 votes to prevail.

Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) said that he would seek to avoid “a rock-throwing, protracted, expensive process.” But he accused Democrats of trying to have it both ways by pushing to increase the scope of the investigation at the same time they try to reduce the budget.

In attempting to trim the $6.5-million budget proposed by Thompson, Democrats noted that the Senate Whitewater investigation cost $1.8 million over 2 1/2 years. The Senate review of the Iran-Contra scandal cost $2.2 million, although separate House investigations boosted total congressional spending to more than $5 million.

The Watergate investigation received an initial authorization of $1.8 million, adjusted for inflation. But the Senate boosted that budget repeatedly during the course of the 18-month inquiry, eventually spending about $6.8 million in 1996 dollars.

Glenn suggested that the committee request $1.8 million to start and return to the Senate when it requires additional funds.