McDermott Will Quit Panel Over Speaker Flap

WASHINGTON — As the FBI opened an investigation into the controversy over a clandestine tape recording of a telephone conversation involving House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) said Tuesday that he will quit the House Ethics Committee.

The announcement by McDermott, who has been identified as the source of the leak of the recording to the press last week, did little to clarify the outlook on when or how the underlying ethics case against Gingrich will be disposed.

For one thing, McDermott’s offer to remove himself came with a key condition: He would depart only if a committee Republican also recuses himself or herself from the Gingrich matter, thus preserving on the panel what McDermott called “the historic equal ratio.” Currently, the committee consists of five Republicans and five Democrats.

The controversy’s dimensions further enlarged on Tuesday as FBI Director Louis J. Freeh disclosed that he has ordered an immediate investigation into the circumstances of the eavesdropping, which may be a criminal violation.

McDermott’s decision to remove himself capped a furious day of angry exchanges between Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill.

Without admitting involvement in the taping incident, McDermott used incendiary language in his resignation statement to denounce the GOP. He charged that Republicans have “perverted” the ethics process to “obstruct every reasonable effort to get at the truth” in the two-year-old case against Gingrich.

The Seattle Democrat, who had chaired the ethics panel until the GOP captured the House in 1994, characterized his resignation and words as “a matter of conscience,” taken to call public attention to “the subversion of the independent, fair ethics process.”

While not addressing how he received the tape or if he had provided it to the press, he said that he delivered it to the Ethics Committee because, in his view, the conversation showed that Gingrich had breached his agreement not to orchestrate a response to the ethics case against him.

McDermott blasted the committee chairwoman, Rep. Nancy L. Johnson (R-Conn.), for refusing to accept the recording and instead sending it to the criminal division of the Justice Department.

House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) quickly issued a statement praising McDermott’s six years of “distinguished” service on the committee and appeared to concur with his searing criticism of the GOP’s conduct in the Gingrich matter.

In addition, Democrats said that they intend to introduce a resolution on the House floor next week seeking to condemn the actions of Johnson for conduct that they said violated House rules, according to Rep. Vic Fazio (D-West Sacramento), the Democratic caucus chairman.

Earlier in the day, House Republicans charged that other Democrats besides McDermott may have known about the possibly illegal tape recording and they called on law enforcement officials and Democratic House leaders to expeditiously determine the precise circumstances under which the tape was made and how it ended up in the hands of the news media.

A Florida couple, who are activists in the Democratic Party, admitted on Monday that they had taped the Dec. 21 conversation between Gringrich and his GOP confidants--inadvertently broadcast on their police scanner because one of the Republicans was talking on a cellular phone. The couple said that then, at the recommendation of their own congresswoman, Democratic Rep. Karen L. Thurman, they handed the tape over to McDermott.

House Democratic leaders agreed that there should be a full investigation of the eavesdropping incident--but, they insisted, all in due course and apart from the ethics case against Gingrich.

“This is a serious federal and state felony matter,” said Rep. Bill Paxon (R-N.Y.), an ardent Gingrich defender.

Paxon demanded to know whether Rep. David E. Bonior (D-Mich.), Gringrich’s most dogged nemesis, had a role in the controversy. But Bonior, the second-ranking House Democrat, denied direct involvement.

Paxon also disclosed that Republicans are contemplating filing charges with the House Ethics Committee against McDermott. The matter also has been turned over to the Justice Department’s public integrity section for investigation.

In addition, Paxon said, Republicans are conducting legal research to determine if they might be entitled to monetary damages under civil law.

The underlying case against Gingrich, a Georgia Republican, involves a college course that he taught in 1993-95 with financial support from a nonprofit foundation. The ethics panel’s investigative subcommittee has found--and Gingrich has admitted--that he violated House rules by providing false information about the course’s relationship to his political activities and by failing to ensure that he complied with federal laws prohibiting the use of tax-exempt contributions for partisan purposes.

The next step is for James M. Cole, the former federal prosecutor hired by the ethics panel to conduct its investigation of the speaker, to deliver his report to the full Ethics Committee. Cole is under orders from Johnson to finish the report by Thursday. After that, the panel is expected to conduct public, televised hearings on what punishment to impose on Gingrich.

However, the panel has not said exactly when Cole’s report would be released or when the hearings would take place. The sessions could occur on the weekend, when the proceedings would likely be overshadowed by the presidential inauguration festivities.

After the hearings, the full committee is supposed to deliberate in closed session on what punishment to recommend to the House. Republican leaders are determined to have the House vote on the panel’s recommendation by Tuesday.

Johnson issued a statement Tuesday night decrying the “angry partisanship” that has erupted over the taping incident. But she said that she would not allow the newest controversy to “divert” her committee. “We are moving forward to provide full public disclosure of every aspect of this case, to be followed by a hearing and a vote on the House floor,” she said.

Still, at least for now, the flap over the taped telephone call has all but overshadowed the ethics case against Gingrich.

Instead, as one GOP leadership aide put it: “Tapegate is the story. Whatever Newt did was kind of murky. What McDermott did was clear-cut.”

Congressional analyst David Mason agreed. “McDermott has certainly handed Gingrich and the Republicans a great gift,” said Mason, vice president for government affairs at the conservative Heritage Foundation.

Fazio said that McDermott’s impending departure would allow the Ethics Committee to return the focus of its inquiry to the Gingrich case. McDermott chose to step down, Fazio said, because “he realizes that [his role] has become a diversion . . . a distraction which is being used by the Republican leadership to change the subject.”

Meanwhile, the manufacturer of the Radio Shack police scanner used by the Florida couple--John Martin, a school custodian, and his wife, Alice, a teacher’s aide--to monitor the Gingrich strategy session confirmed Tuesday that the device could have picked up the conference call, even though it was not designed to do so.

The Martins have said that the 200-channel police scanner they purchased from Radio Shack regularly picked up such calls without any alterations on their part. Radio Shack includes instructions with its scanners recommending that users avoid listening to cellular telephone conversations.

Times staff writers Janet Hook, Marc Lacey and Richard A. Serrano contributed to this story.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Who’s on the Panel

A look at the House Ethics Committee, which is investigating the Newt Gingrich ethics case:

REPUBLICANS

Chairwoman Nancy L. Johnson of Connecticut: Abruptly postponed up to five days of public hearings on the Newt Gingrich affair. She said the postponement would give the committee’s counsel time to prepare his report.

Lamar Smith of Texas: The newest member of the Ethics Committee. He has declined to comment on the case, citing the need to read the thousands of pages of documents.

Porter J. Goss of Florida: He joined the panel’s Democrats in attempting to extend the case until early February but later backed GOP leaders, who insisted on Jan. 21 deadline.

David L. Hobson of Ohio: Although he voted to reelect Gingrich as House speaker, he has said he would vote against him on a panel if Gingrich was found to have committed a serious offense.

Steven H. Schiff of New Mexico: He originally joined the panel’s Democrats in attempting to extend the case until early February but eventually backed his party’s position.

****

DEMOCRATS

Ranking minority member Jim McDermott of Washington: After revelations that he leaked a tape recording of a strategy session between Gingrich and GOP leaders, he says he will depart only if the Republicans keep a 50-50 party split on the committee.

Benjamin L. Cardin of Maryland: He has been an outspoken critic of Johnson’s decision to postpone public hearings.

Robert A. Borski of Pennsylvania: He has one more term to serve on the ethics panel.

Thomas C. Sawyer of Ohio: He has urged his colleagues against rushing to a hasty decision on the Gingrich issue.

Nancy Pelosi of California: She has stressed the need to avoid partisanship in the case even as she has criticized the panel’s Republicans for altering the schedule.

Researched by D’JAMILA SALEM-FITZGERALD / Los Angeles Times