Senator holier than thou is not unblemished

Take the other day, when he furrowed his brow and dourly lectured Attorney General Janet Reno for not naming another independent counsel, this one to investigate President Clinton’s fund-raising activities.

"You have conflicts of interest," Sen. Hatch intoned, his voice properly grave and senatorial, as he imputed sinister motives and flawed ethics to the attorney general.

Oh?

Well, now, speaking of "conflicts of interest." The moralizing Sen. Hatch was nailed by The Wall Street Journal on July 9 for having what reasonable people would clearly call a whopper of a conflict of interest.

To wit:

Sen. Hatch is part owner of 118 acres whose values will soar because of its proximity to a huge new Snowbasin resort being developed as a site for the winter Olympics of 2002.

But there’s more:

The ski resort development (and Sen. Hatch’s potential profit on nearby land) is made possible by – surprise! – a special bill hatched by none other than Sen. Hatch to open public lands to the rags-to-riches Sun Valley entrepreneur Earl Holding – who (another surprise!) donates money to Sen. Hatch’s political campaigns.

So, there you have it: while accusing Attorney General Janet Reno of "conflicts of interest" for not appointing an independent counsel to probe President Clinton’s fund-raising, Sen. Hatch concocts legislation that (a) creates possible windfall profits for him and (b) enriches a political campaign contributor.

When asked about this by the Journal reporter, the senator who remembers abstract minutia about government lapsed into the blank stare that most politicians have cultivated for such occasions.

Gosh and jeepers, Sen. Hatch purred, he didn’t even know he still owned the land.

Sure.

Unquestionably, Earl Holding’s grandiose Snowbasin plans for 1,320 acres he acquired from the Forest Service through Hatch’s legislation in exchange for unidentified land he owns elsewhere will benefit Utah’s economy: he plans 800 condos, 600 upscale homes and several hotels. Environmentalists, however, cringe at the thought of trees being toppled to make way for buildings.

More to the point, however, is the privileged standard under which Sen. Hatch and his 99 colleagues operate. They routinely accept big campaign donations, then artfully contrive wordy bills or amendments to bills to benefit their benefactors, then disguise their motives as selfless service to the public’s interests.

Cynics watching this mechanism at work might well wonder what’s the difference between campaign donations and bribes.

Since senators investigate themselves, the likelihood of any of them being punished for doing what they all do is laughable.

Imagine howls of outrage from Sen. Hatch and other senators if the likes of a Kenneth Starr hauled senate staffers in front of a grand jury, like presidential Secret Service agents, and asked what they heard their bosses say or saw them do while making deals to benefit themselves and their contributors.