The Senate Ethics Committee today opened politically-charged hearings into links between five senators and the owner of a failed savings and loan and the panel's chairman bluntly told the lawmakers that many people believe ``you sold your office.'' Four of the so-called Keating Five looked on as Sen. Howell Heflin said, ``many of our fellow citizens apparently believe that your services were bought by Charles Keating, that you were bribed, that you sold your office, that you traded your honor and your good names for contributions and other benefits.'' Sens. John McCain, a Republican from Arizona, and Democrats John Glenn of Ohio, Donald W. Riegle Jr. of Michigan and Dennis DeConcini of Arizona each listened intently as Heflin spoke in his gravely Southern accent. Sen. Alan Cranston, D-Calif., who is undergoing prostate cancer treatment, did not attend. All five deny any wrongdoing. Committee counsel Robert Bennett jostled a boxed puzzle before the committee members as he began his opening statement, saying he would provide them with a picture that later pieces of evidence would fill in. Bennett said Cranston, DeConcini and Riegle ``were important players'' in helping Keating in his ``all-out war'' with federal regulators. He said McCain and Glenn played lesser roles. Bennett said he did not contend it was improper for the senators to hold meetings with federal regulators, but that it was up to the panel to decide whether their actions were improper. He said ``there can be no doubt'' that the intent of each of the five senators was to help Keating when they met with federal regulators in 1987. The five senators received a total of $1.3 million in campaign contributions or donations to their favored causes from Keating and his associates. All contacted federal regulators on behalf of Keating at a time when the government was considering whether to seize the Lincoln Savings and Loan Association, an Irvine, Calif.-based thrift institution. The thrift later collapsed at an estimated cost to the taxpayers of $2 billion. Heflin told the five they would have the chance to say whether the donations ``influenced your actions in any way.'' He said lawmakers' activities legitimately include helping their constituents and overseeing government institutions and added that there is room for disagreement about conclusions in the case. Bennett said the evidence will be clear despite the refusal of Keating to answer questions during the Senate inquiry. Keating has been indicted in California on state securities fraud charges and is awaiting trial. ``One could ask the question, `If Mr. Keating were here, would you believe what he had to say anyway?''' Bennett said. The five senators have become a symbol of the massive savings industry collapse, and the outcome of the ethics hearings could intensify the political ramifications of what so far has been a bipartisan scandal. In addition, the case has highlighted a political system that gives lawmakers great latitude in contacting federal regulators on behalf of constituents, at the same time they are dependent on campaign contributions to mount their political campaigns. The hearings stemmed from a complaint last year by the citizens group Common Cause. ``It's not just the five senators but the whole Senate whose integrity and credibility is on the line,'' said Fred Werthheimer, the organization's leader. Heflin and others on the panel said the case should not create a standard that bars members of Congress from intervening with federal agencies on behalf of constituents or campaign contributors. ``A standard of conduct which would preclude members of Congress from intervening on behalf of individuals who happened to have contributed to or raised funds for their campaign is nonsensical and unworkable under existing law,'' said Sen. Warren Rudman, R-N.H. Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., another member of the committee, complained that panel has taken too long with the case. ``We should have already taken certain ... actions,'' he said. Heflin, D-Ala., defended the panel's decision to hold the hearings against charges of partisanship. ``On all the votes taken by the committee ... not one was divided along partisan lines,'' he said. With documents stacked several inches high on a table covered with green felt, Heflin framed the issue that the ethics panel will have to grapple with: ``The allegation in this case, that an individual used his wealth to get preferential treatment from government officials in the performance of their official duties, raises questions which are as old as history, and issues that bear on the balance of power among the branches of the federal government. The committee could vote to rebuke any of the five or recommend a more serious punishment to the full Senate. Each senator has denied any connection between Keating's money and their meetings with regulators. The basic issue is whether any violated Senate rules against exerting improper influence in return for compensation. All except Riegle attended an April 2, 1987, meeting with Ed Gray, then the top thrift regulator. All five attended another meeting a week later with San Francisco-based bank examiners who revealed that potential criminal actions by Lincoln were involved. McCain's top aide, Chris Koch, said McCain would make the case that he ended his friendship with Keating on March 24, 1987, when Keating asked the senator to negotiate with regulators on his behalf. ``There's no smoking gun on Don Riegle,'' the Michigan senator's lawyer, Thomas Green, said before the hearing. He contended that Riegle's meeting with regulators was unrelated to a fund-raising effort Keating directed for Riegle. DeConcini wrote a letter to about 5,000 supporters this week denying wrongdoing. ``You may hear derogatory statements about me and my office, but I can assure you that I have not betrayed my public trust, nor do I intend to be intimidated from assisting constituents in their dealings with our government,'' DeConcini said. Glenn has said in the past that he had no discussions on behalf of Lincoln after the 1987 meeting when regulators said criminal charges were possible. Cranston's spokesman, Murray Flander, said Cranston contends, ``I pocketed no money, I broke no law, I violated no Senate rule. Those are undisputed facts.''
