EMERSON DISCUSSES BAD CHECKS

U.S. Rep. Bill Emerson stressed Wednesday that he was never notified of six instances where he had written bad checks at the House Bank between January 1989 and last September.

And, in a conference phone call from Washington with newspapers in his 8th District Wednesday, the congressman maintained that he first became aware of the bad checks on Monday, when he contacted the House Ethics Committee.

"I never received any records or phone calls ever resembling that I had an insufficiency of funds or an overdraft," said Emerson.

Emerson said he learned recently that the House sergeant at arms, who oversaw the House Bank, had routinely allowed members to overdraw up to one month's salary without notifying them. He said that his six overdrafts were never near one month's salary.

On Tuesday, Emerson released a statement that he had been advised by the ethics committee that he had six overdrafts totaling $26,345.

Last Friday, thinking that he had not had any bad checks, Emerson said he asked the ethics committee for a letter exonerating him. On Monday, returning to Washington after a weekend in the district, Emerson said he asked about the status of the letter and was told by the panel that he might have some problems.

"Between Monday and Tuesday we tried to discern where the problems were," said Emerson.

Emerson provided copies of a letter dated Oct. 3, in which he was advised by former sergeant at arms Jack Russ that his office had reviewed Emerson's bank account records from July 1, 1989, through June 30, 1990, and found that checks drawn on the account never exceeded the balance of available funds.

Russ recently resigned as a result of the bank scandal.

One of the six bad checks fell during that period; two were before the time period and three were afterwards.

Lloyd Smith, chief of staff to Emerson, said the letter from Russ and the monthly bank statements that were sent out were all the written evidence the congressman had indicating that he did not have any bad checks.

"There is no indication on any of these bank records that he ever had any insufficient funds," said Smith.

Emerson said he was "shocked" to learn of the bad checks. He stressed his desire to make full disclosure and be upfront on answering questions about the matter.

"I think a lot of other members are as shocked as I am shocked," said Emerson.

He termed the overdrafts "six very honest mistakes."

Said Emerson: "I think there is a concern among the public-at-large about whether or not they have the full facts in this matter. I didn't even have an inkling of this until Monday when I returned from the district."

In a statement released Wednesday afternoon, Emerson said that had he banked at another institution he would have been assessed a penalty on the overdrafts. As a way of paying a fee, Emerson said he would donate $25 per check to the Emerson Congressional Scholarship Fund, which he created from the 1987-'88 pay raise that he did not take.

"I have maintained since September (when the House Bank scandal was uncovered) that you should give the people the full facts, tell the exact circumstances of what you did and when, and they can discern between innocent error and willful abuse," he said.

Emerson said: "I want to be totally forthcoming. I feel like I have worked very diligently to be forthright with the people. I didn't hide anything when I had a drinking problem and I didn't fudge on the congressional pay raise. As an elected official I feel I have a responsibility not only to avoid impropriety but also the appearance of impropriety. I am honest and work hard to do everything I can in the most honest and forthright way possible."

Emerson cited the report of the bipartisan House Ethics Committee that investigated the matter, indicating that the House Bank was not run like a regular bank, that records were poorly kept, and there were no formal guidelines or professional procedures for operating it.

Emerson's pay check was deposited electronically in the account on the first day of the month. He said the bank did not make loans, but was rather a disbursing office that offered check-cashing services as a convenience for members.

Five of the six checks were written to his wife, Jo Ann. Emerson said he used the account to write one big check each month to his wife for household and mortgage expenses, and then covered other personal expenses.

The other check was written in April 1989 while Emerson was in Ethiopia on a trip with the House Select Committee on Hunger. A colleague, the late Rep. Mickey Leland of Texas, chairman of the committee, needed some money, and since he had checks with him Emerson cashed one for him as a favor. The check for $2,280 was presented to the House Bank for payment on April 24, 1989, but at the time he had $2,100 in the account. On May 1, 1989, his monthly pay check was deposited, making the check good.

Emerson said he failed to notify his office that the check had been written to insure that it was covered.

Smith said expenses for operating his congressional office are separate.

Checks written to his wife were presented to the House Bank for payment on Jan. 31, 1989; Aug. 31, 1989; Jan.. 31, 1991; July 31, 1991; and Aug. 30, 1991. They were all covered one day later when his check was deposited, except last September when on Labor Day weekend his check was not posted until Sept. 3.

"On 34 of the 39 months Jo Ann deposited the check on the first of the month rather than the last day of the month," said Emerson.

Asked whether the media and public are blowing the rubber-check incidents out of proportion, Emerson replied, "I think there is so much confusion out there it is impossible to tell."

He said the most serious infractions considered by the ethics panel were the 24 members who wrote checks for more than twice their salary eight times within the 39-month period.

Emerson said he does not know anything about the circumstances of the major offenders.

He said the House Bank is a patronage operation run by the majority party. Emerson said he recently learned that three years ago the controller general of the United States went to the speaker and advised him of the pending mess in the bank. The speaker talked with the sergeant at arms about it but nothing was done, he said.

"Until last fall House Republicans were not aware of the problems with the bank," said Emerson. He said the same is true of the rumors about distributing cocaine through the House Post Office.

Last week, as the House debated whether to disclose the names of all members who had overdrawn checks instead of the most serious offenders, Emerson said he voted four different times for full disclosure.

Under the legislation that was passed, full disclosure will be the name of the member and the number of checks that were overdrawn.

Emerson said he wanted to go beyond the intent of the legislation and that is why he released the total amount of the checks, the check numbers, the dates presented to the bank for payment, and the date they were covered.

"This goes way beyond what the House resolution calls for," said Smith. "This goes the extra mile so everyone knows we are serious about full disclosure."