Published: Thursday, February 28, 1991
Page: 1A
By: By Sharyn Wizda WASHINGTON BUREAU
NEWS
"The Senate Ethics Committee today confirmed what I have said from the very beginning, namely, that in the case of Lincoln Savings, my conduct was proper and ethical in every respect," Glenn said after the committee released its decision. "I have been vindicated."
The committee also exonerated three other senators involved in the investigation - Dennis DeConcini, D-Ariz.; Donald Riegle, D-Mich.; and John McCain, R-Ariz.
But the committee found "substantial credible evidence" that Alan Cranston, D-Calif., acted improperly, and resolved to further probe Cranston's actions.
The committee's findings are the result of two months of hearings to determine whether the senators acted improperly in intervening with federal regulators on behalf of Keating's failed Lincoln Savings and Loan. Keating donated $1.3 million overall to the senators' campaigns.
All five senators met with Keating and enforcement officials while regulators were investigating Lincoln.
The committee found that while Glenn "exercised poor judgment" in arranging the Keating-Wright lunch, the Ohio Democrat's participation did not go beyond serving as a host. The January 1988 lunch took place eight months after Glenn learned regulators were recommending a criminal investigation of Lincoln.
Glenn took issue with the committee's characterization of his involvement with the Keating-Wright lunch and has maintained in the past that he has done nothing wrong.
The committee used relatively moderate language in dealing with Glenn and McCain, but had harsher words for DeConcini and Riegle.
The committee called DeConcini's aggressive intervention with regulators "inappropriate." It said both DeConcini and Riegle showed insensitivity in their dealings and that their conduct appeared improper, although it fell short of actual impropriety.
Both, however, said they found the committee's decision fair.
Cranston's fate is still to be determined.
According to the committee, he "engaged in an impermissible pattern of conduct in which fund raising and official activities were substantially linked."
Before continuing their probe, the committee must send their specific charges to Cranston and allow him to respond. Cranston also has the option of allowing the committee to make a recommendation for action to the Senate based solely on the evidence already presented.