August 3, 1990 CCONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 22181 borrowing authority on August 15. LaFalce Leach (IA) Smith, Robert Then the Federal GovernmentDixon would Price Lancaster Ravenel Lewis (CA) (OR) Lantos Lewis (FL) Snowe be obliged to defaultDonnelly on its obligations Rahall Ray Downey Rangel Lehman (CA) Regula Lightfoot Solomon if Congress does Durbinnot act before it Richardson Lent Rhodes Livingston Spence leaves for our break.Dwyer Roe Levin (MI) Ridge Lukens, Donald Stallings Levine (CA) So, to make absolutelyDymally sure that this Rose Rinaldo Machtley Stangeland Edwards (CA) RostenkowskiLewis (GA) Ritter Marlenee Stearns does not occur and Emersonwith all our other Roukema Lipinski Roberts Martin (IL) Stump attendant problems,Engel we certainly do Rowland (GA)Lloyd Rogers McCandless Sundquist not need one of thisEspy dimension, were Roybal Long RohrabacherMcCollum Tallon Evans Sabo Lowery (CA) Ros-LehtinenMcCurdy Tanner we not to pass thisFascell temporary debt Saiki Lowey (NY) Roth McEwen Tauke ceiling. So I wouldFazio urge Members to Sarpalius Luken, Thomas Rowland (CT)McMillan (NC) Tauzin close ranks Feighan Savage Madigan Russo Meyers Taylor and support this tempo- Manton Miller (OH) Thomas (CA) rary extension. ByFish October 1, Sawyer Sangmeister Flake let us Scheuer Markey Saxton Moorhead Traficant see where we are. Hopefully,Flippo the sub- Schiff Martin (NY) Schaefer Murphy Upton mitters will have gottenFoglietta together, and Schumer Martinez Schneider Myers Valentine Matsui reached an accord toFord an (TN) agreement so Serrano Schroeder Neal (MA) Visclosky Frank Sharp Mavroules Schulze Neal (NC) Vucanovich that by October 1,Frenzel we can put every- Sikorski Mazzoli SensenbrennerNielson Walker thing to bed before Frostwe face what could Sisisky McCloskey Shaw Packard Weber very well be an unconscionableGallo seques- Skaggs McCrery Shays Pallone Weldon McDade Parris Whittaker ter. Gejdenson Skeen Shumway Gephardt Skelton McDermott Shuster Pashayan Wyden Mr. ARCHER. Mr.Geren Speaker, I yield Slaughter (NY)McGrath Slattery Paxon Yatron back the balance of Gibbonsmy time. Smith (FL)McHugh Slaughter (VA)Penny Young (AK) McMillen (MD) The SPEAKER Gillmorpro tempore (Mr. Smith (IA) Smith (NE) Petri Young (FL) Gingrich Smith (NJ)McNulty Smith (TX)Pickett HOYER). Under theGlickman rule, the previous Smith (VT)Mfume Smith, DennyPoshard question is ordered Goodlingon the bill and the Solarz Michel (OR) Quillen amendment. Gordon Spratt Miller (CA) Smith, Robert Gradison Staggers Miller (WA) (NH) The question is onGray the amendment Stark Mineta offered by the gentlemanGreen from Illinois Stenholm Moakley JOT VOTING-13Bevill Hall (TX) Molinari [Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI].Guarini Stokes BilirakisRobinson Leath (TX) Hall (OH) Studds Mollohan Condit Lehman (FL) The amendment was agreed to. Montgomery Schuette Hamilton Swift CrockettWatkins Nelson PARLIAMENTARYHarris INQUIRY Synar Moody Ford (MI) Pursell Hatcher Thomas (GA)Morella Mr. WALKER. Mr.Hawkins President, the Thomas (WY)Morrison (CT) O 1530 question was on theHayes amendment (IL) and Torres Morrison (WA) not on the bill? Hayes (LA) Torricelli Mrazek The Clerk announced the following Murtha The SPEAKER Hefnerpro tempore. The Towns pair: Hertel Traxler Nagle On this vote: gentleman is correct,Hochbrueckner the question was Udall Natcher on the amendment.Horton Unsoeld Nowak Mr. Nelson of Florida, for, with Mr. Pur- Hoyer Vander JagtOakar sell against. The question is on the engrossment Oberstar Hughes Vento his vote from and third reading ofHunter the bill. Volkner Obey Mr. BATES changed The bill was orderedHyde to be engrossed Walgren Olin "yea" to "nay." and read a third time,Jenkins and was read Walsh Ortiz Mr. TORRES changed his vote from the third time. Johnson (CT) WashingtonOwens (NY) "nay" to "yea." Johnson (SD) Waxman Owens (UT) The SPEAKER Johnstonpro tempore. The Weiss Oxley So the bill, as amended, was passed. question is on passageJones of (GA) the bill. Wheat Panetta The result of the vote was an- Jones (NC) Whitten Parker The question was taken; and the Patterson nounced as above recorded. Jontz Williams A motion to reconsider was laid on Speaker pro temporeKanjorski announced that Wilson Payne (NJ) the ayes appeared toKaptur have it. Wise Payne (VA) the table. Mr. WALKER. Mr.Kastenmeier Speaker, I object Wolf Pease Pelosi to the vote on the groundKennedy a quorum is Wolpe Kennelly Wylie Perkins PERSONAL EXPLANTION not present and makeKildee the point of Yates Pickle order a quorum is notKleczka present. Porter Kostmayer The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evi- NAYS-172 HON. WILLIAM LEHMAN dently, a quorum is not present. Craig OF FLORIDA The Sergeant at Arms will notify Applegate Grant Crane IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES absent Members. Armey Gunderson Dannerneyer The vote was takenBaker by electronic HammerschmidtDarden Friday,August 3, 1990 device, and there were-yeasBallenger 247, nays Hancock DeLay Mr. LEHMAN of Florida. Mr. Speaker, al- Bartlett Hansen DeWine 172, not voting 13, asBarton follows: Hastert Dickinson though I was present and voted during roilcall [Roll No.Bates 313] Hefley Dorgan (ND) No. 313, for some reason my vote was not re- Bentley Henry Dornan (CA) corded electronically. I want the RECORD to YEAS-247Bereuter Herger Douglas Dreier show that I was indeed present and voted BoehlertBroomfield Hiler Brown (CO) Hoagland Duncan "yes." Ackerman Chapman Boggs Dyson Bonior Bryant Holloway Alexander Clarke Buechner Hopkins Early Anderson Clay Borski Eckart Bosco Bunning Houghton GENERAL LEAVE Andrews Clement Burton Hubbard Edwards (OK) Annunzio Coleman (MO)Boucher English Boxer Byron Huckaby Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I ask Anthony Coleman (TX) Callahan Hutto Erdreich Archer Collins Brennan Fawell unanimous consent that all Members Brooks Campbell (CA) Inhofe Aspin Conte Campbell (CO) Ireland Fields have 5 legislative days in which to Atkins Conyers Browder Gallegly Brown (CA)Clinger Jacobs revise and extend their remarks on the AuCoin Coyne Coble James Gaydos bill just passed. Barnard Davis Bruce Gekas BustamanteCombest Kasich The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bateman de la Garza Cooper Kolbe Gilman Beilenson DeFazio Cardin Gonzalez HOYER). Is there objection to the re- Carper Costello Kolter Bennett Dellums Coughlin Kyl Goss quest of the gentleman from Florida? Berman Derrick Carr Grandy ChandlerCourter Lagomarsino There was no objection. Bilbray Dicks Cox Laughlin Bliley Dingell 22182 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 GET OUT OF THE HALLWAYS Leader of the House and the Minority ous question shall be considered as ordered AND LET US VOTE Leader of the Senate, shall notify the Mem- on the bill and amendments thereto to final bers of the House and the Senate, respec- passage without intervening motion except Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. Speaker, I ask tively, to reassemble whenever, in their one motion to recommit. for this 1-minute because I think it is opinion, the public interest shall warrant it. time to restore some dignity to this The concurrent resolution was O 1540 House and make it possible for Mem- agreed to. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. bers of this body to come to the floor A motion to reconsider was laid on HOYER). The gentleman from Michi- and vote without going through what the table. gan [Mr. BONIOR] is recognized for 1 has become a virtual gauntlet of noisy, hour. determined, grabbing, partisan, hot Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, for the rude PROVIDING FOR CONSIDER- and bothered, and, sometimes, cus- crowd that is clogging the entrance of ATION OF H.R. 5400, CAMPAIGN purpose of debate only, I yield the this Chamber on this side and that COST REDUCTION AND tomary 30 minutes to the gentleman side. REFORM ACT OF 1990 from Tennessee [Mr. QUILLEN], pend- ing which I yield myself such time as I Mr. Speaker, 3 years ago for security Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, by direc- consume. reasons we emptied the entranceways tion of the Committee on Rules, I call may to this Chamber. We were worried up House Resolution 453 and ask for Mr. Speaker, campaigns cost too about the safety of Members. We its immediate consideration. much. Spending on elections is out of asked the Sergeant at Arms to clear The Clerk read the resolution, as fol- control for both incumbents and chal- the hallway, and he did. lows: lengers. Mr. Speaker, this is the people's H. RES. 453 We are forced to spend too much money under our current House. I have no quarrel with anyone Resolved, That at any time after the adop- time raising who wants to visit with me or any tion of this resolution the Speaker may, system of electoral financing. Member in my office, on the grounds, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule XXIII, de- In 1988, there were 20 House races in the Halls, in the Speaker's Recep- clare the House resolved into the Commit- which cost at least $1 million. Today, tion Room, in the trees, behind the tee of the Whole House on the State of the the average Senate campaign costs $4 bushes, wherever. I do not care. How- Union for the consideration of the bill (H.R. million. it has been 5400) to amend the Federal Election Cam- It is time for a change. ever, Mr. Speaker, the way paign Act of 1971 and certain related laws to today and on previous occasions, we clarify such provisions with respect to Fed- In the last decade, the cost of televi- cannot even get through the hallway eral elections, to reduce costs in House of sion advertising has tripled. The aver- to vote without endangering life, limb, Representatives elections, and for other age campaign now spends half its cufflinks, earrings, and going through purposes, and the first reading of the bill funds on advertising. a tackle drill like the Washington Red- shall be dispensed with. All points of order It is time for a change. skins. against consideration of the bill are hereby The American people will no longer hallways, and let us waived. After general debate, which shall be tolerate business as usual. Get out of the confined to the bill and the amendments vote. made in order by this resolution and which It is time for a change. shall not exceed two hours, to be equally di- Today we have a chance to consider PROVIDING FOR ADJOURNMENT vided and controlled by the majority leader legislation, H.R. 5400, which will re- and the minority leader, or their designees, structure the business of electing Con- OF THE HOUSE FROM FRIDAY, the bill shall be considered for amendment AUGUST 3, 1990, TO WEDNES- gress. under the five-minute rule. It shall be in Changing the rules of the game is DAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1990, AND order to consider an amendment in the ADJOURNMENT OR RECESS OF nature of a substitute consisting of the text uncomfortable. It leads to uncertainty. THE SENATE FROM ANY DAY printed in part one of the report of the But there can be no doubt. Strong BETWEEN AUGUST 3 AND Committee on Rules accompanying this res- campaign finance reform legislation is AUGUST 10, 1990, TO SEPTEM- olution as an original bill for the purpose of a must. BER 10, 1990 amendment under the five-minute rule, said H.R. 5400 is a good bill. substitute shall be considered as having It establishes a $550,000 spending Mr. GRAY. Mr. Speaker, I offer a been read, and all points of order against limit for each election cycle. Of that privileged concurrent resolution (H. said substitute are hereby waived. No total, no candidate could accept more Con. Res. 360) and ask for its immedi- amendment to said substitute shall be in order except (1) the amendments printed in than half of their funds from PAC's. ate consideration. It closes the soft money loophole by The Clerk read the concurrent reso- part two of the report of the Committee on Rules which shall be considered en bloc and prohibiting presidential candidates lution, as follows: (2) an amendment in the nature of a substi- from soliciting or receiving any soft H. CON. RES. 360 tute submitted to the Congressional Record money, and requires full disclosure of Resolved by the House of Representatives of August 2, 1990, by Representative Michel soft money spending in federal elec- (the Senate concurring), That when the of Illinois. The amendments shall be consid- tions. House adjourns on the legislative day of ered in that order and shall be debatable for Friday, August 3, 1990, it stand adjourned one hour each, equally divided and con- It would allow small-donor PAC's to until 12 o'clock meridian on Wednesday, trolled by the proponent and a Member op- contribute up to $5,000 per election, September 5, 1990, or until 12 o'clock merid- posed thereto. The amendments shall not but limit high-donor PAC's to $1,000. ian on the second day after Members are no- be subject to amendment and all points of And finally, H.R. 5400 would tighten tified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of order against the amendments are hereby the regulations on independent ex- this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs waived except those under clause 7 of rule penditures, and discourage negative first; and that when the Senate recesses or XVI. The amendments en bloc printed in campaign advertising. on Rules shall adjourns on any day from Friday, August 3, the report of the Committee the rule we will consider 1990, to Friday, August 10, 1990, pursuant to not be subject to a demand for a division of Under a motion made by the Majority Leader, or the question in the House or in the Commit- today, we will also make in order the his designee, it stand in recess or stand ad- tee of the Whole. At the conclusion of the Synar-Obey amendment. It would fur- journed until 10 o'clock ante meridiem on consideration of the bill for amendment, the ther restrict PAC contributions to Monday, Septemter 10, 1990, or until 12 Committee shall rise and report the bill to only 40 percent of the half-million- o'clock meridian on the second day after the House with such amendments as may dollar limit, and cut individual contri- Members are notified to reassemble pursu- have been adopted, and any Members may butions to $500. ant to section 2 of this concurrent resolu- demand a separate vote in the House or any Perhaps most importantly, it would tion, whichever occurs first. amendment adopted in the Committee of SEC. 2. The Speaker of the House and the the Whole to the bill or the amendment in provide a match of up to $100,000 in Majority Leader of the Senate, acting joint- the nature of a substitute made in order as public financing for contributions of ly after consultation with the Minority original text by this resolution. The previ- $50 or less. August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOLTSE 22183 We will never break the addiction to membership that it is folly, folly, folly ed the right of the minority to offer a electoral fundraising until we have to bring this measure up today under motion to recommit with instructions. public financing. this rule. I voted against this rule in Just one, in 8 years. The rules of the game must be made the Rules Committee and I will vote Mr. Speaker, how times have fair, even as we allow for maximum against this rule on the floor of the changed. Since the beginning of the participation in our democratic House. 99th Congress in 1985, the House has system. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the passed 41 rules which restrict this tra- H.R. 5400 will help us end the gentleman from New York [Mr. SOLO- ditional minority right. The rule today money chase that threatens our politi- MON]. is the 12th such rule this Congress, cal process. Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I and Mr. Speaker, it has handcuffed It is good government, good politics, thank the ranking Republican leader this minority by depriving us of this and common sense. for yielding me this time. right. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 453 Mr. Speaker, I would join with the Mr. Speaker, I will close by citing a is a modified closed rule that waives ranking Republican on the Rules personal illustration of why what we all points of order against consider- Committee to denounce this travesty are doing here today is so wrong. I ation of the bill. here on the floor today. This rule have not told our colleague, the gen- Debate time is divided between the should be defeated soundly. If the rule tleman from Florida [Mr. BENNETT], majority leader and does the minority manage to get approved, then the who is sitting in the front row here, leader or their designees. bill itself, H.R. 5400, ought to be de- that I am going to do this, but with The rule makes in order the amend- feated, too. the gentleman's indulgence I ment in the nature of a substitute now The distinguished would Republican whip, like to tell the House something printed in the report accompanying the gentleman from Georgia about [Mr. him. this resolution as original text. Gener- GINGRICH], said it very well yesterday The gentleman from al debate is limited to 2 hours. in his testimony at the Rules Commit- Florida [Mr. No amendment to the substitute is tee: BENNETT] is one of the most senior and in order except: First, the Synar-Obey To consider a so-called reform bill at respected Members of this House. He amendments en bloc, and second, the the 11th hour under this kind of a has more character and integrity than Michel amendment in the nature of a closed rule suggests that the need for most of the rest of us put together. substitute. Each amendment is debata- reform goes far beyond the issue of Last November, when the Rules Com- ble for an hour. campaign financing. mittee considered the congressional The amendments are not subject to And he was so right. ethics reform package, the gentleman amendment, and all points of order Mr. Speaker, this bill was introduced from Florida [Mr. BENNETT] requested against their consideration are waived on Wednesday evening. It was not con- permission to offer an amendment except for clause 7 of rule 16, pertain- sidered by any committee of original that would ban-listen to this- ing to germaneness. jurisdiction. As a matter of fact, prior Member-controlled PAC's from The rule provides for one motion to to its introduction on Wednesday, it making contributions to other Mem- recommit. had not even been seen by any Mem- bers. House Resolution 453 permits imme- bers except those who are privy to the O 1550 diate consideration of one of the most inner sanctum of the Democrat Party important pieces of legislation we will leadership. He was fluffed off by the Committee consider in this Congress. Mr. Speaker, it goes without saying on Rules and told to come back when I urge my colleagues to support it. that the prospects of such a partisan the campaign finance reform bill was Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield document actually getting enacted going to come up. So he came back myself as much time as I may use. into law are very slim indeed. yesterday, almost a year later, and he Mr. Speaker, the rule has been ably Do you really want campaign was fluffed off again, this highly re- explained, but I think here at this late reform? But that is not the issue right spected Member. hour of the day when we are supposed now. What is the issue is the contin- That is what is wrong with this to adjourn for a district work period, ued abuse and the trivialization of the whole process here today. This exer- bringing such mammoth legislation to rules and procedures of this House. cise today is a wretched travesty. This the floor is really asinine. How long is this going to go on? Here rule should be defeated. We should We all want campaign reform, but we are, confronted again with yet an- come back on this floor and let Mem- why cram it down our throats with no other closed rule, a rule that denies bers like me offer an amendment to opportunity to amend? It should be the minority its instructions, a right to wipe out all PAC's, from unions, from brought to the floor of the House offer a motion to recommit with in- corporations, from anybody. Let us get under an open rule. structions, a right that we have had some real reform on this floor. And let I pleaded with the Rules Committee since 1913; and those rules have not us debate it out here honestly and to grant an open rule and made a been changed in this House. openly. motion for an open rule, but it was de- I noted yesterday during the debate I hope we defeat this rule. feated. on the rule for the civil rights bill that Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, for pur- Mr. Speaker, I also made a motion the precedent which permits the mi- poses of debate only, I yield 5 minutes that we postpone action in reporting nority to offer a motion to recommit to the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. the rule, and that was defeated. with instructions in all rules, open or OBEY]. Haste makes waste. I personally closed, goes back to 1913. I said fur- Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the want campaign reform, but why not ther that it has only been recently gentleman for yielding me this time. hammer out a nonpartisan campaign that this precedent has been regularly Mr. Speaker, let me simply say that reform where Republicans and the reversed. I have been involved in campaign fi- Democrats can all get together? Why Let me cite some statistics, and be- nance reform efforts in this place for fight about it? lieve me, you gentleman on that side the last 15 years. The last campaign I recommend that we defeat this of the aisle who really should be fair, reform bill which passed the House rule so that we can come back after must listen. In the 95th Congress, the bore my name. It was the Obey-Rails- our August work period and get down 96th Congress, the 97th Congress, and back amendment, and I am proud of to the business of passing a meaning- the 98th Congress, between 1977 and that. ful campaign reform bill. 1985, this House considered a total of The fact is that that 15 years of ex- Mr. Speaker, I have several requests 696 rules. Only one of those rules, just perience on this issue has taught me a for time, but I want to stress to the one rule in a period of 8 years, restrict- lot of things, and it has enabled me to 22184 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 take with a grain of salt a lot of what I essential that you keep these alterna- head of the Manhattan district attorney's sex hear on this issue. tives together as packages. That is crimes unit. I simply would like to strongly sup- why this rule makes sense. It protects The bill requires attackers to make financial port this rule and tell the Members the intellectual integrity of the Re- compensation to their victims, and for the first why I think this kind of a rule is es- publican package. It protects the intel- time would make victims of violence based on sential to move reform forward. lectual integrity of the Democratic their gender eligible for the compensatory and First of all, I want to ask the ques- package, or of the Swift package, I punitive damages available to others whose tion: Who is kidding whom? There is should say, the original bill off which civil rights have 'been violated. The bill pro- literally no one in the House for whom we are both working, and it protects vides grants to governments in areas of high I have more respect than the distin- the integrity of the Democratic alter- intensity crime to develop effective law en- guished minority leader, and I heard native to the Swift package. forcement and prosecution strategies to him suggest in the Committee on We will be able to choose between combat violent crimes against women and Rules, and I heard others suggest three packages. The debate will deter- creates a commission to study violent crime from the minority side of the aisle, mine who wins the debate, who per- against women. that we ought to slow this down, we suades enough Members to win votes These and the other provisions of this bill ought not do this this week, we ought on this floor. But the idea that we will be effective only if they are copied and to wait until we get back from the should somehow proceed under an adopted by every State. They certainly will August recess. I would not mind that open rule is ludicrous if you have fol- make a difference to the victims in my con- comment if I had not read in the lowed the history of reform as long as gressional district if New York adopts similar papers, just Monday of this week, sto- I have. legislation. ries indicating that the Republican Every major reform in this House, This year, Arthur Shawcross leadership was fully prepared to make whether it be campaign finance legis- was arrested and indicted an attack on the Democratic Party in lation or changes in the way we run for murdering 10 women in the Rochester area. this House if we did leave without this House itself, every major step for- Outrage mounted when it passing campaign reform. ward in improving the rules of the became known that in 1972, Shawcross had It seems to me that in the eyes of House or the rules under which we been convicted of raping and murdering a little the minority we are damned if we do campaign has come under structured girl, sent to prison, and paroled after only 15 and damned it we don't, so as long as rules so that we cannot play the game years. He was on parole for other crimes that is the case, we might as well do. of pulling out this piece there and this when he committed the 1972 murder. Had We might as well move forward and piece there and destroying the integri- New York State enacted legislation like the bill pass this bill while we have a chance. ty of the process in the first place. we are introducing today, sentencing guide- The second point I want to make is So I congratulate the Committee on lines would have required that Shawcross simply this. The argument is made, Rules for coming up with this rule. I have served at least 18 years for the rape and "Oh, gee whillakers, we have got to think it is essential that we do this, if murder. He would still be in prison now, and have an open rule so that we can we are really going to move reform the 10 women he is accused of murdering really scrub up these alternatives and forward. might still be alive today. improve them." I have been around I urge the Members to vote yes on This July, the Rochester Democrat and here long enough to know that the the rule. Chronicle ran a superb, thought-provoking best way you guarantee that reform is Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I yield five-part series on violence against women. killed is to have an open rule, because such time as she may consume to the For six months, reporters Susan McNamara campaign finance systems are very gentlewoman from New York [Ms. and Deborah Fineblum Raub researched much like ecosystems. They are very SLAUGHTER]. these articles, interviewing experts on law, complicated. One piece of the environ- Ms. SLAUGHTER of New York. Mr. counselors, victims, and violent men who ment depends upon another, just as Speaker, I rise in strong support of have attacked women. I commend these re- one piece of campaign finance legisla- this rule. I urge its adoption for the porters, the newspaper, and photographer tion depends upon how it fits in with improvement of the political process. Karen Mitchell for devoting so much time and another piece. And the surest way to Mr. Speaker, today I am proud to introduce space in the paper to promoting public aware- kill any meaningful reform is to let with Representative BARBARA BOXER the Vio- ness of this critical issue. Democrats pull out by a vote a key lence Against Women Act. Through this legis- The series highlights the extent of the prob- piece in a Republican package, or to lation we are taking a tough stand against this lem, the many effects of violence against let Republicans pull a key piece out of heinous but all-too-common type of violent women, and the avenues available for help. It a Democratic package. That is the way crime. sympathetically and concisely discusses the you destroy the cohesion and the in- In the United States today, a woman is facts and feelings of victims such as Kathy telligent rationale which has gone into beaten every 18 seconds; raped or attempted Corey, who was brave enough to come for- building both the Republican and the to be raped every 3/2 minutes; and murdered ward and prosecute the man who raped her in Democratic approaches. by a husband or boyfriend every 6 hours. In 1977, and who now volunteers to counsel The other point I would simply like 1989 alone, the Rochester police in my own other rape victims on how to recover from this to make is this: We are here trying to district reported 3,886 domestic violence of- terrible crime. The series echoes the reasons change the existing law, because the fenses. Rape is the fastest growing crime in why last year and again this year I introduced Supreme Court did not operate under our country, and it's estimated that 50 to 90 legislation designating October as National a closed rule. The problem is that the percent of all rapes are never reported to the Domestic Violence Awareness Month. If we public today seems to think that the police. In Rochester, calls to a rape crisis hot- can begin talking about the dimensions of the Congress designed the existing system. line have increased an average of 15.3 per- problem we can begin pursuing a solution. We did not. We designed the reform cent each year from 1980 to 1989, and 47 I recommend the Democrat and Chronicle package, and then what happened is percent of the callers do not report the attack series to anyone interested in learning about the Court picked a little piece here to the police. These shocking statistics the extent and horror of violence against and it picked a little piece there, it demand that our judicial system enact legisla- women. Because this issue is so important, kept these, it threw out those, and it tion on the Federal and State level to break and because this series so eloquently exam- produced a system which makes no in- this cycle of violence against women. ines violence against women, I am including in tellectual sense. The Violence Against Women Act increased the RECORD excerpts from this extraordinary That is why it is necessary, if you Federal penalties and sentences for those series. are going to have a system which convicted of sex offenses. It doubles sen- I hope that Congress will set an example to makes sense to the taxpayer and gives tences for repeat offenders. This is critical be- States by toughening Federal law setting the middle class people an even break in cause rape is the crime with the highest rate consequences for those who attack women influencing events on this floor, it is of recidivism, according to Linda Fairstein, the and by working with local police to stop the August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 22185 problem. We can do that by passing the Vio- thumb" derives from an old English law Korn said the shelter provides not only "a lenca Against Women Act. that says a man may beat his wife, as long setting that is indignant that a woman [From the Rochester Democrat and as the stick is no thicker than his thumb, should be subjected to this crime" but coun- Chronicle, July 11, 1990] she said. seling support to help her make decisions "And, even though the law now tries to and an opportunity to be with other women MANY SHARE A CYCLE OF PAIN protect a woman against violence in her in the same situation. (By Deborah Fineblum Raub) home, the same people who will intervene The National Crime Survey reports about This was absolutely the last time she when someone attacks a stranger on the 2.1 million women were beaten in their would let her husband beat her, Gloria said, street, will still turn aside if it's a man hit- homes between 1978 and 1982. Deborah eyes puffy and red from a night of crying. ting 'his' woman." White of the National Coalition Against Do- But, she admitted, she has said that Domestic violence is a crime that tends to mestic Violence in Washington, D.C., esti- before. victimize a woman over and over again; on mates the current number of abused women In fact, after every beating she swears the average, a woman returns to an abusive nationally between 3 million and 4 million she'll never let it happen again. Then, in husband or boyfriend five to 10 times, Korn each year. the morning, thinking about her children's said. "Some women are beaten for months, "For many years our judicial system did need for their father, her own financial others for years before they say, 'No not put an end to it. They called it a family helplessness, and the fervor of her hus- more.'" feud and looked away. Now it's against the band's apologies, she forgives him . .. again. Why do women caught in this cycle law but the attitude remains." Ayala Gabri- And the cycle of domestic violence begins remain? Terry Servis, former Monroe el, University of Rochester anthropology again in the night of Gloria's suburban County assistant district attorney, said, "It's professor. Rochester home. tough to explain why some women permit Of this number, the Bureau of Justice "Everything will be fine for a while, then this to go on. But some feel trapped. They Statistics identifies 57 percent of the beat- it starts all over," she said. have no other visible means of support, they ings are done by spouses and ex-spouses. The accusations: "I'm a lousy mother, I'm may have children, they may feel there is Boyfriends and exboyfriends make up an- a lousy housekeeper and cook, I'm being un- no alternative." other, uncalculated, percentage of the na- faithful * * * I am a nothing." And then Alternatives for Battered Women runs tional total. come the beatings. one of approximately 1,200 domestic-vio- The leap in the numbers of reported cases Cheryl and Jill are seated near Gloria (not lence shelters across the United States. The stems largely from increased community their real names) in the living room of the not-for-profit service also provides a 24-hour pressure on police to make more arrests, Alternatives for Battered Women shelter. hotline for abused women, ongoing support better community education, and more shel- "'You're just a nothing,' that's exactly groups and individual counseling, and tem- ters and services for abused women, White what my boyfriend says to me before he porary housing for battered women and said. "So, even though it's still a stigma, slaps me around," said Cheryl. their children. more are coming forward," she said. "But These women are not alone. Domestic vio- "They're more fortunate (in Rochester) it's also true that we have just become a lence-committed by a husband or boy- than those in rural areas, where there's usu- more violent society, with the incidence of friend, ex-husband or ex-boyfriend-is the ally no support at all for abused women, and this kind of crime up." most common violent crime against women. they're better off than the ones living in big In her office, Brigitte Abraham of the Consider the following: cities where the services they have are over- Monroe County District Attorney's Domes- Domestic violence is the most frequent whelmed," said Korn. tic Violence Bureau sees "a steady rise in cause of injury to women, more prevalent The shelter, which occupies an upper felony assaults and murders that are domes- than auto accidents, rapes and muggings floor of a downtown Rochester office build- tic violence." combined, according to former U.S. surgeon ing, houses as many as 26 women and chil- And she's glad that women are reporting general C. Everett Koop. dren at a time, serving nearly 500 each year. more than in the past. "The difficulty is Men commit 91 percent of all assaults on Security is a primary concern, with dead that these are very isolating crimes. It's hu- their spouses or ex-spouses. bolts on Twenty percent all doors, closed-circuit television miliating because it says that you were of visits by women to cameras focused on the foyer. stupid enough to pick somebody who beats emergency medical services are caused by "The battering. ultimate need here is for safety," the poop out of you." Korn said. "This is a place where a woman On an average day, Rochester police re- DOMESTIC ABUSE IS ALL TOO COMMON can relax enough to tackle the critical issues ceive 10 calls reporting domestic violence, Forty percent of divorce cases in the New she needs to resolve." said Sgt. Steve Di Gennaro, who is in charge York State cite physical violence as the Only at the shelter could Jill escape from of the family victim service section there. reason for termination of marriage. her boyfriend's beatings. "I kept going More than a year ago, the department Four women die each day in the United home because I'm not safe on the streets, adopted a pro-arrest policy, one that gives a States from domestic abuse. but I'm not safe at home either." police officer on a domestic violence call the In the 10 months of 1989 for which fig- Jill said that the battering began after she right to arrest the abuser, even if the victim ures were compiled the Rochester Police gave birth to their first child. That's not un- is reluctant to press charges. This is within Department reported 3,886 domestic vio- common, Korn said, adding that it's often the officer's power if he or she sees physical lence offenses, up from 2,071 in 1988. "And during pregnancy or after a baby is born evidence of abuse. Previously, abusers were these number are just a fraction of all the that the violence starts. arrested only when the victim agreed. women who get abused; most of them don't Battering du:ing pregnancy is the subject "So the officer's hands were tied," said Di ever report to authorities," said Diana of an ongoing study by researcher Judith Gennaro. Now, under the pro-arrest policy, Compos, project director for the state-side McFarlane at Texas Women's University in the abuser can be removed from the home, Spanish-language domestic violence hotline. Houston. McFarlane is the recipient of a defusing-at least temporarily-a violent sit- Experts say that even those episodes of Centers for Disease Control grant used to uation. domestic violence that are reported are just track the pregnancies of 1,200 women in two "Pro-arrest policies mean that police are beginning to be perceived as crimes. "For states. Results from preliminary research looking at these cases in a different way," many years our judicial system did not put show that a woman battered during preg- said Abraham. The change is responsible in an end to it. They called it a family feud nancy has four times the chance of deliver- part for the increase in the number of do- and looked away," said University of Roch- ing a low birth-weight baby-one at risk for mestic violence calls to police, she added. ester anthropology professor Ayala Gabriel. early death or complications-as a woman "More women are calling now as society "Now it's against the law but the attitude not battered. She is also more likely to mis- doesn't condone it as much as it used to." remains. We've only just begun to take the carry. Becky McCorry heads Family Crisis Inter- laws seriously." "Ours is the first study to track women vention Team (FACIT), a program of the The lag in societal attitudes has frustrat- through their pregnancies and document Rochester Police Department that sends ed Phyllis Korn every day of the last 10 the effects of abuse on them and their mental health professionals into homes torn years that she's worked as executive direc- babies. What we're hoping is that the study by domestic violence. "Pro-arrest provides tor of Alternatives for Battered Women in will encourage all health professionals to the support an abused woman needs, be- Rochester. "Traditionally domestic violence ask questions about abuse of the women cause the dynamics of control in domestic has been viewed by society as just a domes- they see, pregnant and otherwise," McFar- violence means that most women are too tic squabble, something that's OK as long as lane said. "Only then can we educate paralyzed to make the decision to have the it's kept behind closed doors." women about the risk of violence in their batterer arrested." It's an attitude that's been absorbed so lives and help them stop the cycle of domes- But McCorry said that pro-arrest is only deeply that it is reflected in the English lan- tic violence. Knowledge is power, it really the first step. "Sometimes people think that guage, she added; the expression "rule of is." the arrest stops a problem. It doesn't. Long. 22186 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 term counseling-separately for batterer It is this fear that forces many men to In all categories of violent crime, women and victim-is what's needed." worry about wives, girlfriends and daugh- are victims in numbers disproportionate to Korn said judges "are a key link." ters-when they work late, when they jog, the crimes they commit. A woman is more "I think many of our judges are heads- when they go shopping in the evening. than twice as likely to be murdered as to and-shoulders above those in other areas, It is a fear so ingrained that many women murder. She is 12 times more likely to be a but we still need to establish a greater un- don't even recognize it. Yet it amounts to a victim of domestic violence than an abuser. derstanding of the domestic violence cycle denial of women's basic rights to life, liberty Ninety-nine percent of serial killers are with them." and the pursuit of happiness. men; between 80 and 90 percent of victims Sheer volume is the primary challenge "I'm not rich but I have the right to live of serial killers are women. facing those courts that deal with domestic safely in my own neighborhood, to pick up Between 1977 and 1986, the number of violence, said Judge Leonard Maas, who has the paper and not read that someone in my rapes reported to police was up 43 percent, been a Monroe County Family Court judge family is dead," said Denise P. Logan, of making it the fastest growing type of violent for nine years. "The number of our cases Rochester, in a speech at the "Take Back crime in the United States. has mushroomed completely." the Night" rally and march downtown in Nationally between 1978 and 1982, 2.1 mil- Maas said his court regularly issues tem- February. Logan's cousin, Kimberley Denise lion women were battered at least once. porary orders of protection to keep the Logan, was found murdered last year on However, it's hard to estimate how many abuser out of the home. "And matters are Meigs Street. There have been no arrests in battering incidents occur locally. Four juris- brought back to court in a relatively short the case. dictions in Monroe County don't keep time." But there is room for improvement in "This is not a look-the-other-way issue," records of family trouble or domestic dis- the way the courts deal with battered she said. "It's time to get busy." turbance calls. The Rochester Police De- women, he said, adding that he's looking Violence against women, whether it's partment reports as many as 10 arrests a forward to reading recommendations forth- murder, rape or domestic violence, doesn't day, with most of the violence directed coming from the New York State Commis- occur in a vacuum. The crime doesn't stop against women. sion on Domestic Violence. with the victim; it touches everyone, from Experts say that illegal drugs also may ac- Despite a legal system and community family and friends to the larger community. count for some of the violence against agencies working to be responsive to bat- women. tered women, many women remain in their LEGACYOF FEAR CONSTRICTS THE WORLD FOR "They definitely contribute to the climate violent homes. WOMEN of violence," said Phyllis Korn, executive di- "It's a cycle; by the time a relationship However, it is hardly a 20th-century phe- rector of Alternatives for Battered Women has escalated to violence, a women's self- nomenon, psychologists say. The image of in Rochester. "I would never say that drugs esteem is very low," Korn said. "She thinks the cave man with the club dragging around or alcohol or stress make people violent but it's her fault. She's heard, "If you hadn't a woman by a hank of hair may not be far for those who need to control others, it been a whore, if you weren't ugly, if dinner off the mark. The violence is probably as makes things much worse." was ready on time, if the house was old as relationships between men and But American culture should share some straightened, I wouldn't have to do this for women. of the blame for the climate of violence, too. so long; she feels she's worth nothing." "It's a fairly traditional thing for women "We call ourselves peace-loving but it's a Jill, however, talking about her life in the to be beaten, killed and raped," said Leslie cliche. Look at our heroes," said psycholo- shelter's living room, wiped her eyes, blew R. Wolfe, executive director of the Center gist Elaine F. Greene, who has a private her nose and made a quiet resolution to for Women's Policy Studies in Washington, practice in Brighton. "Over the decades, we fight back. D.C. have admiration for macho figures- "I'm not going to stand there and take it "As depressing as that fact is, it's true. Batman, Superman, Rambo." anymore," she said. "Each time he's tried to The serial killer in Rochester sounded like Even in romantic films, the depiction of make up, I've fallen for it. The message we Jack the Ripper. We're talking about a con- dominant men and submissive women may get from the legal sysem is that beating tinuum here." give mixed messages. your woman is a little bit acceptable, but The issue has become a popular one in "You've seen the old movies, where a I'm realizing that nobody deserves to be some political circles. woman is slapped across the face and beat." It was more than a decade ago-before it brought to her senses, or where she's picked was fashionable for male politicians to ad- up and carried off as she beats her little FEAR SHRINKS A WOMAN'S WORLD dress the subject-that Rep. George P. fists on the man's back," said Ayala H. Ga- Miller, D-Calif., first spoke out on violence briel, assistant professor of anthropology at (By Susan McNamara) against women. He says he was accused by a the University of Rochester. "The myth is Last December at a local shelter for bat- colleague of "trying to take the fun out of that women love it. Violence and sexuality tered women, a woman recalled the indigna- marriage." get mixed, and a myth is propagated." tion her husband felt as he read newspaper Miller is chairman of the Select Commit- The case against pornography is even accounts of Rochester's serial killer. tee on Children, Youth and Families of the more dramatic. Research studies haven't "'Geez,' he'd say, 'I can't believe the cops U.S. House of Representatives. Among the always agreed that depicting women in non- are letting this guy run around killing committee's work was the 1987 hearing on violent ways in pornography causes antiso- women.' " "Women, Violence and the Law" in Wash- cial behavior. However, most experts agree When she asked how that violence dif- ington, D.C. that pornography portraying sex in combi- fered from the violence he inflicted on her, "Violence against women is an everyday nation with violence-sadomasochistic he replied, "That's different. You're my occurrence in America," he says. But despite themes, bestiality and portrayals of rape, wife and I can do what I want to you." great strides in the last decade or so, "there for example-does contribute to an individ- Violence against women takes many is still much work to be done." ual's tendency toward aggression. forms-from a gruesome death at the hands Last month, congressional hearings were Other possible effects include stimulation of a serial killer to rape in a woman's own held in Washington on legislation calling of rape fantasies, an increased callousness home by her husband. for tougher penalties for violence against about rape, loss of compassion for women as In the United States, a woman is beaten women. rape victims, and greater acceptance of so- every 18 seconds. Every 31/2 minutes, a The proposed bill would make gender-re- called rape myths-for example, that woman is a victim of rape or attempted lated violence a civil rights violation, enti- women "ask for it." rape. Every four hours a woman is mur- tling the victim to sue for punitive damages. Another serious concern is that men, dered. Every six hours a woman is murdered Also, $300 million in grants would be provid- women and children of all ages and back- by a husband or boyfriend, according to the ed to create a commission on violence grounds are becoming inured to all kinds of U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics and the against women. violence, including violence against women. Federal Bureau of Investigation. Consider these statistics: The average 18-year-old, for example, will And while some crimes can be committed More than half of all violent crimes watch an estimated 16,000 murders on TV in as easily against men-and men, in fact, are against women are committed by people his lifetime. American culture is rife with crime victims more often than women-few they know. Yet, according to the Office for incidents of violence in favorite pastimes- would argue that men feel the same fear as Victims of Crime of the U.S. Department of from sports to rock concerts-and in the women. Justice, violent acts against women are the language-including vengeful slogans on T- It is this fear that forces women, not men, crimes least likely to be reported. shirts and bumper stickers. to live in a smaller world: one that is bright- A girl who was 12 years old in 1989 has a That worries many of those who are ly lit after sundown, one that has deadbolt 73 percent chance of being a victim of vio- touched by the phenomenon-women's ad- locks and security alarms, one that encour- lent crime-rape, robbery or assault-some- vocates, law enforcement officials, mental ages travel in groups, not alone. time in her life. health practitioners, social workers, shelter August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 22187 and crisis center workers, as well as the vic- more--every one deserving a full country. And you call that campaign tims and their families. debate on its own right. reform? "We're much too comfortable with vio- I have got opinions on all of them. I lence," said Harry Reis, professor of psy- To expect anybody to believe that is chology at the University of Rochester. have got amendments just like the ignorance. The American people are "There has been a lot of research done on gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. not that stupid. This time you have desensitization. Essentially, every time OBEY], who got his through. I would gone too far, and everybody knows it. people see or hear of a violent act it makes like to introduce those amendments. I Let us vote against this rule. them that much more used to it. We know bet eveyone here has an amendment. Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield that was the case in Rochester with the None of us had that chance. 9 minutes to the gentleman from Cali- serial killings. If these were 14-year-old girls My dear friend, from good neighborhoods, imagine the out- the gentleman from fornia [Mr. THOMAS]. rage." Illinois [Mr. MICHEL], introduced 10 Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr. The mind also distances itself from fear of separate bills for each point in this Speaker, the gentleman from Michi- crime by blaming the victim. package. We should be able to debate gan [Mr. BONIOR] started the discus- "The victim gets re-victimized by society, and vote on each one of those, but this sion on the rule saying that campaigns and the scenario gets played out again and rule forces us to say yes or no on all of cost too much. In the most compre- again and again," said Kathy Cottrell, as- them at one time. The same for the hensive survey to date on American sistant director of Rape Crisis Service of task force bill and the Synar-Obey Planned Parenthood of Rochester and the opinion about the question of money Genesee Valley Inc. "The most famous ex- substitute. It is absurd. It is unfair to and politics, a study financed by, for ample is the woman jogger (in Central the House. It is unfair to the public. example, among others, People for the Park) who was brutally raped and very Mr. Speaker, this is a terrible rule. I American Way, and we will not mis- nearly killed. She was blamed for her own ask the Members of the House to be take them for the Heritage Founda- sexual assault. I've heard this a million fair, vote it down, vote no. tion; it is a comprehensive poll. And, times: 'It would never happen to me. I My dear friend, the gentleman from yes, the American people said that wouldn't jog there.' Or you'd hear: 'I would Wisconsin [Mr. OBEY], says you never be a victim of a serial killer. I don't campaigns cost too much. walk the streets.'" cannot operate on an open rule. I But do you know what they say Indeed, some women's advocates find dis- heard that yesterday in the civil rights bothers them more? The American turbing irony in the increase of reported bill. people are more concerned about can- rapes on college campuses. Mr. Speaker, I went back and didates ending up obligated to special "Intellectually we try to empower women. checked the history of the civil rights interests. We encourage them to make the best of bill. In 1963, when we debated, I was their capabilities. But is it wrong to do that, Mr. Speaker, what we are doing here part of that debate. It was an open today in discussing the rule is process. to encourage them to reach for the brass rule. Ten hours of debate. Then I ring, to give them a false sense of their own Oftentimes, people say process is not capacities, when the world is such a danger- checked the 1965 voting rights bill, important. I think it is. I think it af- ous place? It may come down to a basic, and I was proud of that. That was an fects substance, especially when the physical kind of danger for which they'll be open rule. Ten hours of debate. process we are talking about allows totally unprepared," said Bonnie Smith, What has happened to this House? the bill in front of us under the rule, a former director of UR's Susan B. Anthony Have we got to have a gag rule here Center for Women's Studies, now with Rut- bill which never went through the now? committee system. The bill was con- gers University. in "It's also important to acknowledge that They are moving toward freedom structed from a task force which origi- Soviet this is just another burden that women Lithuania, Czechoslovakia, the nated from a bipartisan task force the other alone carry. We have to take extra measures Union, and we are going under the former Speaker. to protect ourselves in the world in a way way. But let me tell Members, the bill in that men don't have to." l 1600 front of us is not the product of a bi- Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield partisan operation. Now, I happen to 3 minutes to the gentleman from Mas- Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield think there are a number of areas of 2 minutes to the gentleman from Vir- sachusetts [Mr. CONTE]. campaign finance reform that lend ginia Mr. CONTE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in [Mr. PARRIS]. themselves to bipartisanship. Mr. Speaker, there is opposition to this rule. It denies the Mr. PARRIS. For example, the area of transfers, an old proverb that ignorance doesn't House a debate. It denies the Con- the area of bundling, the area of soft kill you, but it makes you sweat a lot. gress, the administration, the public money, independent expenditures, and Many of my Democratic colleagues any chance for campaign finance the Federal Election Commission profusely. There is a reform. It is unfair. It is a wrong rule, are sweating reform area. All of those items had strange odor in this Chamber today, and we ought to reject it. been discussed in the bipartisan task and you might ask the question why? Mr. Speaker, this is the most impor- force, and we were moving toward a bi- this They are bringing before this House tant reform bill to come before partisan solution. But this bill was Congress, and it is getting jarmned under a closed rule, crafted by a ruth- crafted on a partisan basis. down our throats. It has never been less exercise of power by the majority, Now, do not tell me that one cannot through a committee. It is a task force a thing called campaign reform. It in- do any work around here on a biparti- bill. It has never had a hearing. It has creases the opportunity for political san basis. I would refer you to some- been changed even since it came out of action committees from special inter- we passed, in fact, in this the Committee on Rules last night. It est groups to increase the average con- thing that is an assault on the whole committee tribution they now give, three-fourths Congress, H.R. 2190, in a very contro- system. It should not be up to the of which goes to the Democrats, by a versial area-voter registration. Who floor at all today, with 24 hours' 30-percent increase. The majority calls were the cosponsors of this measure? notice. It should be up when we come that a great sacrifice. Our Speaker, the gentleman from back in September. There everyone It provides that a labor union is per- Washington [Mr. FOLEY], the minority would have a chance to offer an mitted to contribute 10 times as much whip, the gentleman from Georgia amendment; and a closed rule is a dis- money to any given campaign than [Mr. GINGRICH], myself, the gentle- aster. any one of your individual constitu- man from Washington [Mr. SWIFT], These packages cover spending ents. That is because the Democrats leadership from both sides, on a ques- limits, PAC's, franking reform, public get 95 percent of the union money. tion that is very, very contentious. It financing, soft money, advertising, It throws Federal taxpayer money passed this House on a bipartisan vote. local funding, independent spending, into partisan political activities for the Mr. Speaker, it can be done. If not tax credits for contributors, and very first time in the history of this on the major cutting point issues, cer- 22188 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 tainly in those areas which we consid- slush fund. Read the fine print. You may be. And it is easily documented, er secondary. do not ban soft money. because it is all there; the PAC money Let us consider the rule, because let Our position on soft money says any is reported from PAC's lists and where me tell you, the Swift bill from yester- money spent in the system not raised the money goes is reported, and the day is not the Swift bill we are consid- under Federal contribution laws is out- result of the campaigns are reported. ering under the rule. lawed. We ban soft money. One man, for instance, never gave The Swift bill yesterday we can call We could debate the position of soft any very substantial money to other Swift I, if you will. Under Swift I, money, your position on soft money, Members until he ran for a leadership which was just crafted last Wednes- our position on soft money. We think spot, and then he gave over $500,000. day, the maximum amount that you the Members of this House ought to And that is big money; it is not small could spend in a campaign primary be able to choose between those posi- money. That is something that ought and general was $550,000. tions. We want, not an open rule, but a to stop. Guess what? Today under Swift II, if fair rule. It used to be 10 years ago that it was you do not get two-thirds of all the Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that against the criminal laws of our coun- votes cast in the primary you get a what we are going to do is ultimately try, and then it was changed, and it limit of $715,000. In one day we have wind up with two choices. We are ought to go back. If you stood outside moved from a $550,000 limit to a going to vote on party lines. We are of a polling place or where people are $715,000 limit if you do not get two- not going to open up the debate, we voting and handed everybody a $10 thirds of the primary vote. are not going to resolve fundamental bill that went through and said, "Have What else was in Swift I? Criminal differences, and we are going to do the a nice day," you would be in jail the penalties for overspending, given the same old thing in the same old way. next day. But here you can take hun- limit that is in the bill. Guess what It seems to me that if leadership dreds Swift II contains? No criminal penal- wanted good law, we could have gone of thousands of dollars, or mil- ties for overspending. through a different route. We lions of dollars, whatever you want to could take from In Swift I, they banned registered have gone through the committee vested interests, special in- lobbyists from bundling. Guess what system. We have produced good law terests, and that is where the money happens between yesterday and today? from the committee system, bipartisan actually is coming from, you can look Registered lobbyists are not banned law, in tough, controversial areas. it up. It is not a dream, you can look it from bundling under Swift II. If the Democrat leadership wanted up, the actual contributions, the PAC In Swift I, they banned slate cards agreement and support from Members money and where the money went, it financed by corporations, unions, and on an institutional level, they would is all a matter of record. millionaires. Guess what happens be- have given us a fair rule, not an arro- So this is something I am trying to tween yesterday and today? Swift I to gant, unfair rule. If leadership wanted stop, and I did go before the Rules Swift II? Pretty good government? No. to avoid the obvious cheap partisan- Committee about a year ago and I The same old stuff. ship aspects that will develop from asked them under the ethics law pro- That would not have happened if this kind of a rule, they should have posals if I could offer this amendment. the bill had gone through the commit- given us a different rule on a different And they told me well, no, come back tee process, or in the terms of a bipar- day. when we are discussing campaign fi- tisan agreement. It happens when you Mr. Speaker, what this rule demands nancing. So I did, and then they try to move the bill only through your is a "no" vote. Otherwise we are going turned me down again. side. to get bad law, we are going to get a It seems to me that there is some va- Even if we could not have agreed, Member revolt, and we are going to lidity in the fact that this country has and that is where the gentleman from get partisanship stirred up again, as a less democratic government than it Wisconsin [Mr. OBEY] creates a straw has been done in the past. had a while back. I am not bitter man, we are not necessarily talking Mr. Speaker, the vote today is "no" about it, but the truth is, for various about an open rule, we are talking on the wrong rule at the wrong time. reasons, things that are institutional- about a fair rule. We do not have to The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. ized in our country today are not construct a rule in which we go after a HOYER). The gentleman yields back 2 really very healthy, and this is a very key point in your position and you go minutes. unhealthy situation and it ought to be after a key point in our position. We Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 corrected. can have a rule in which we debate the minutes to the gentleman from Flori- I myself am going to vote against key issues. da [Mr. BENNETT]. the rule. I do not expect the rule to be For example, should we have a Mr. BENNETT. Mr. Speaker, first of defeated on the final passage, and I system where individual candidates all I want to thank everyone that has assume that we will get a vote on the running for subcommittee chairman worked hard on this matter, all the bill, and I will vote for it. But I am dis- can take money out of their campaign committees and all the personnel. Cer- appointed that they have not allowed fund and give it to someone else in an tainly I think that both sides have me to bring up my amendment in a attempt to get that person to support some things to add toward improving way that would get away from some them for subcommittee chairman- our institution. grave dangers in the future. Right ships, as has been done in the past? I do want to say, however, that for now special interests in the United You can do that under your bill. over a year I have worked vigorously States, big defense contractors and Under the Republican substitute, we to try to see if I could end something people like that can give money to the ban all transfers. No leadership PAC's, that was and is, I think, very wrong PAC of an individual who runs for no PAC-to-PAC, no candidate-to-candi- and likely to get worse. That is that at Congress, and that person can turn date. We ban all transfers. the present time there is no law that around, whether the defense industry Mr. Speaker, I think we should prohibits a Member from giving his likes it or not, and give money to mem- debate which position we should have own money or giving his PAC money bers of the caucus. This is something for transfers, yours or ours? That does to other people in the caucus or wher- that I have experienced myself. I not require an open rule. That re- ever he wishes in order to influence know it is true, and I think it is some- quires a fair rule. votes for himself for being chairman thing that ought to stop. I think it is What about soft money? Your posi- or subcommittee chairman or what very dangerous to our country to allow tion is, you say, as you announced, have you in this way of leadership at- this to continue. that you ban soft money. Come on, tainment. I am sorry that the Rules Commit- you do not ban soft money. You have In fact, that is a practice in the Con- tee has kept me back from raising this your building fund, you have your gress at the present time, as sad as it question in any opportunity I have August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOLrSE 22189 had on it. I am sure that there is no was shocked when the FEC advised me Admittedly, Carmichael was malicious intent here. We are all that contributions of excess campaign charged, and convicted, under 42 trying to work for a better Govern- funds to other candidates are permissi- U.S.C. 1973i(c), and not under 18 ment. But this ought to be solved, and ble, up to $1,000 per election per candi- U.S.C. 602. However, the legal reason- I had to express how I felt about the date. ing would seem to me to be identical fact that I have been refused twice The advisory opinion by the FEC under either statute. now from offering this amendment came as such a surprise that I did One of our able and respected mem- which is a very mild amendment. some research into this matter myself. bers went so far as to send out a letter My law is less severe than the law My research led me to 18 U.S.C. 602, requesting "a check for $500 to $1,000 was 10 years ago when there was a as mentioned earlier, and to our own so that I can begin to build the active criminal penalty for what I am trying Code of Ethics (Public Law 96-303). support within the Democratic Mem- to get at. According to the Code of Ethics for bers of Congress to win this key lead- I would like to read to you from the Government Service, which is the law ership position." 1976 edition of title 18, United States today, Members of Congress are pro- Acting out of a sense of party unity, Code, Crimes and Criminal Procedure. hibited from accepting ". . . benefits and goodwill, does not negate the in- Chapter 602 of title 18 stated that it under circumstances which might be tention to influence another members was illegal to take money from other construed by reasonable persons as in- voting habits. Florida's Third District Members. I am reading from this sec- fluencing the performance of govern- Court of Appeal recently held that tion when I say: mental duties." Can any of us deny "acting out of a misguided sense of that accepting money from Whoever, being a Senator or Representa- a fellow public service and [while receiving] no tive in ... Congress . . . directly or indirect- Member, when that Member is run- pecuniary benefit himself are irrele- ly solicits, receives, or is in any manner con- ning for a leadership position, ".. . cerned in soliciting or receiving, any . . might be construed by reasonable per- vant," and did not indicate that de- contribution for any political purpose what- sons as influencing performance of fendant did not possess the requisite ever, from any other [Senator or Represent- governmental duties"? I do not think criminal intent. Trushin v. Florida, ative], shall be fined not more than $5,000 384 So. 2d 668 (3d DCA 1980), at 679. or imprisoned not more than three years or we can however deny that. It appears that the law has been changed so that In Trushin, defendant offered free both. legal services if voters would pledge to This was from 18 U.S.C. 602, 1976 Members do not face criminal sanc- tions for accepting money from other vote for two particular candidates, nei- edition. This was repealed in 1980. ther of whom was the defendant. De- The U.S. Supreme Court had an op- Members, but such acts still violate our Code of Ethics. spite not having any direct pecuniary portunity to consider the language of For all of our rhetoric about ethics gain in the outcome, defendant's con- chapter 602 in U.S. v. Wurzbach, 50 S. viction was affirmed. Ct. 167 (1930). Wurzbach was decided in. Congress, and how we live our lives in a fish Nor is it necessary to prove that the on the basis of the Federal Corrupt bowl, we are carrying on prac- tices that should not, and would not, money affected the result of the elec- Practices Act, the predecessor to 18 tion, according to the U.S. District U.S.C. 602. However, the language of be accepted were we not in Congress. One former Member whom we all Court for the Western District of Mis- the old Federal Corrupt Practices Act souri. "[T]he government is not re- and the language of chapter 602 in the greatly admire as a person, donated approximately $20,000 of PAC money quired either to allege or prove that 1976 edition of title 18, are almost the alleged "vote-buying" either relat- identical. In Wurzbach, the Supreme from 1981 to 1985 to other Members. When he successfully ran for a leader- ed to or in any way affected the result Court held that the language concern- of any election . .". U.S. v. Sayre, 522 ing the prohibition of soliciting or re- ship post his contributions increased 27 fold by distributing $552,500 to F.Supp. 973 (W.D.Mo. 1981), at 974. ceiving money was "perfectly intelligi- Where money is involved in elections, ble," and prohibited such practices. other Members. Under the amended A 1980 amendment to the law chapter 602, that was legal. But The election thus becomes a spending con- should it be? test with the candidate most willing and (Public Law 96-187) eliminated the able to make such payments having the language prohibiting the receipt of If one stood outside the voting booth and gave only $10 to every voter in a greatest chance of winning. The fact that contributions from other Members. the person making the payment did not According to the amended law, it is general election, he would have been intend to influence the federal election does unlawful for a candidate for Congress, accused of vote buying. In U.S. v. Car- not change the reality of the threat; the or a Member of Congress, to solicit michael, 685 F.2d 903 (4th Cir. 1982), payment itself, not the purpose for which it contributions from other Members, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals is made, is the harm and the gist of the of- (18 U.S.C. 602, 1988), but it is all right had an opportunity to rule on a case fense-Id at 975-6. to accept the money. In my opinion involving allegations of vote buying. Admittedly, Members of Congress few Members of Congress are aware Carmichael, a former South Carolina may not be so blatant as to specifically that it is illegal to solicit contributions State senator, was convicted under 42 tie the donation directly to a vote. from other Members, and in any U.S.C. 1973i(c), for giving voters as However, I believe the intent is clear- event, I believe the ban on solicitation little as $10 in an election for local it is no small coincidence that a is widely violated. While the law sheriff. Carmichael contended that Member contributes far more gener- allows receipt of money from other the law required proof that any vote ously to other Members when the Members, I have a hard time distin- buying actually affects an election for donor is running for leadership posi- guishing receipt of funds from solicita- Federal office. Id., at 908. The court tions. Compare the contributions tion. If it is unlawful to ask for the held that it was not necessary for the made by Members running for leader- money, how can it be proper to take government to prove that passing the ship positions to the contributions the money? How about the legality of money actually affected a Federal con- made by Members not seeking leader- one giving it when one seeks an in- test. Rather, a violation is established ship positions. From that we can clear- House leadership role? Currently that when the activity: ly see the intent-money, if not direct- is improper, and clearly should be * * * exposes the federal aspects of the ly buying votes, unduly influences made illegal. election to the possibility of corruption, votes. This makes a mockery of our My concern about Member-to- whether or not the actual corruption takes code of ethics, our laws, our reputa- place and whether or not the persons par- tions, and Congress itself. Member contributions prompted me to ticipating in such activity had a specific write to the Federal Elections Com- intent to expose the federal election to such There is a more sinister aspect of mission asking them for an advisory corruption or possibility of corruption.-Id., this though. Allowing such donations opinion on the practice of Members (quoting United States v. Bowman, 636 F.2d are bad if they are out of Members donating money to other Members. I 1003, 1011, 1011 (5th Cir. 1981). funds, as it tends to make winners of 22190 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 rich Members and losers of Members MESSAGE FROM THE ration of the Golden Anniversary of the who are not rich. If the money is PRESIDENT Mount Rushmore National Memorial. coming H.R. 4252. An act to authorize the Secre- from outside sources, including A message in writing from the Presi- PAC's, tary of the Air Force to purchase certain an alarming possibility occurs, dent of the United States was commu- outside money is directly influencing property at Pease Air Force Base, New nicated to the House by Mr. Kal- Hampshire. the House leadership. Do we want spe- baugh, one of H.R. 4525. An act to amend the Ethics in cial interest PAC money influencing his secretaries, who also informed the House that on the fol- Government Act of 1978 to increase the au- internal House races? The answer to lowing dates the President approved thorization of appropriations for the Office that can only be a resounding "no." of Government Ethics. Data on the details of special interest and signed bills and joint resolutions On July 17, 1990: money can be obtained from the Fed- of the House of the following titles: H.R. 2514. An act amending subchapter eral Elections Commission. This data On June 6, 1990: III of chapter 84 of title 5, United States further illustrates how special inter- H.R. 644. An act to amend the Wild and Code. Scenic Rivers Act by designating ests influence internal House races. segments On July 27, 1990: of the East Fork of the Jemez and Pecos H.R. 2844. An act to improve the ability of I think we all realize that Congress Rivers in New Mexico as components of the the Secretary of the Interior to properly has come to some sort of ethics crisis. National Wild and scenic Rivers System. manage certain resources of the National Whether it is media-induced or not, On June 18, 1990: Park System. the general public thinks there is a H.J. Res. 516. Joint resolution to designate On August 2, 1990: problem. In the June 12, 1989 issue of the week beginning June 10, 1990, as "Na- H.J. Res. 591. Joint resolution designating Time magazine, Fred Wertheimer, tional Scleroderma Awareness Week." the third Sunday of August of 1990 as "Na- president of Common Cause, is quoted On June 25, 1990: tional Senior Citizens Day." as saying: "Our Nation faces a crisis in H.R. 4612. An act to amend title 11 of the United States Code regarding swap agree- the way we govern ourselves. Our Na- ments and forward contracts. tion's Capital is addicted to special in- PROVIDING FOR CONSIDER- On June 28, 1990: ATION OF H.R. 5400, CAMPAIGN terest influence money. Members of H.J. Res. 575. Joint resolution to designate Congress are living professionally and June 25, 1990, as "Korean War Remem- COST REDUCTION AND personally off these funds." brance Day." REFORM ACT OF 1990 With all of the honorable people in On July 3, 1990: Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield Congress, we ought to be able to come H.R. 1622. An act to amend title 17, such time as he may consume to the up with meaningful and reasonable United States Code, to change the fee gentleman from Idaho [Mr. CRAIG]. ethics schedule of the Copyright Office, and to rules. This issue of Member-to- make certain technical amendments. Mr. CRAIG. Mr. Speaker, I stand in Member campaign contributions isn't H.R. 3046. An act to reduce the number of strong opposition to the rule. splashed across the front pages of our Commissioners on the Copyright Royalty Mr. Speaker, one of the most common hometown newspapers now, but it un- Tribunal, to change the salary classification complaints about Congress today is that it has doubtedly will be if we continue to let rates for members of the Copyright Tribu- lost touch with the people. That Congress is it grow. Simply outlawing Member nal and the United States Parole Commis- arrogant. That Congress manipulates legisla- PACs would not work because Mem- sion, for the Register and Associate Regis- tion and works not for the benefit of the bers will then give from their personal ters of Copyrights, and for the Deputy and public, but rather for our reelection cam- campaign funds including PAC dona- Assistant Commissioners of Patents and Trademarks, and for other purposes. paigns. tions or their personal funds. H.R. 3545. An act to amend the Chesa- There is no better example of this manipula- We must enact legislation similar to peake and Ohio Canal Development Act to tion than the rule being currently proposed for H.R. 83, a bill that I have introduced. make certain changes relating to the Chesa- our debate on campaign reform. This bill would do the following peake and Ohio Canal National Historic This bill is meant to clean up our electoral things: Park Commission. process and restore integrity in Congress. So First, prohibit any Senator or Repre- H.R. 3834. An act to amend the National what does the leadership do? It uses a rule to sentative, or candidate for such office, Trails System Act to designate the route lock out any meaningful debate and consider- from contributing to other Members, from Selma to Montgomery for study for potential addition to the national trails ation of this all-important issue. and candidates, for Congress. This system. What we will see today on the floor is not would include contributions to or from On July 6, 1990: an open debate but rather the establishment Members' PACs or personal funds, and H.J. Res. 555. Joint resolution to com- of each party's election platforms on cam- cover direct and indirect contributions, memorate the bicentennial of the enact- paign reform. including those that are earmarked; ment of the law which provided civil govern- The three proposals we will consider, H.R. Second, prohibit Members from so- ment for the territory from which the State 5400, the Obey-Synar amendment, and the liciting or accepting contributions with of Tennessee was formed. Republican substitute including H.R. 5050, respect to elections for H.R. 5075. An act to amend the Rail Pas- congressional senger Service Act to authorize appropria- H.R. 5052, and H.R. 5053 vary greatly in their leadership offices. These offices would tions for the National Railroad Passenger proposals. If we are to shape and mold a true include the leadership of both the Corporation, and for other purposes. campaign reform bill, we should have the House and Senate committee and sub- On July 12, 1990: chance to debate the merits of these provi- committee chairmanships and any H.R. 5149. An act to amend the Child Nu- sions independently. We should have the other officer of a political party. trition Act of 1966 to provide that the Secre- chance to strengthen various proposals and I'm sure there are many Members tary of Agriculture may not consider, in al- provide more extensive reforms. Instead, we who would like to see this practice locating amounts to a State agency under are being given three proposals that cannot stopped. We are now forced to spend the special supplemental food program for women, infants, and children for the fiscal be amended, with the message-take it or hundreds of thousands of dollars, and year 1991, any amounts returned by such leave it. now sometimes millions, for our House agency for reallocation during the fiscal Our legislative process is supposed to en- races. To be faced with the additional year 1990 and to allow amounts allocated to gender and promote an open system of specter of spending hundreds of thou- a State for such program for the fiscal year debate and consideration in the belief that sands of dollars for internal races in 1991 to be expended for expenses incurred through such a process our laws are made addition is absurd and, more impor- in the fiscal year 1990. stronger. This rule is contrary to that belief. tantly, this allowed practice has oner- On July 13, 1990: The current rule does not allow for true ous threats for the purity of our de- H.J. Res. 599. Joint resolution to designate July 1, 1990, as "National Ducks and Wet- debate. This rule is the Democrats' election mocracy. lands Day." platform on campaign reform-it is a sham. Let's move now and nip this in the On July 16, 1990: If the Democrat leadership is truly commit- bud. This is a grand opportunity for H.R. 1028. An act to require the Secretary ted to campaign reform, why doesn't it want a change. We should not miss it. of the Treasury to mint coins in commemo- full and open debate on this bill? If the Demo- August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 22191 crat leadership is so confident of its campaign paign spending limit. It is an interest- In the Beck case, the Supreme Court reform measure, what does it have to fear ing experience for those of my col- decided that workers could only be from an open rule? leagues who have not had that oppor- forced to pay dues for collective-bar- We have a chance to restore confidence tunity recently, but I can tell them gaining activities-which in the Beck and integrity to our electoral system. If we are along with the pain and the difficulty case, amounted to only 21 percent of going to take meaningful steps to open up our and the longer hours and the harder the dues. The other 79 percent was campaign system, let's start with opening up work of campaign financing, of having being misspent. the very debate that will decide this issue. Mr. to raise the money, I think all of us in My legislation would require that Speaker, the voters of this Nation deserve an the new era of campaign finance will unions notify workers that they have open rule on campaign reform. I urge my col- be rewarded. We will be rewarded be- the right to know how much of their leagues to oppose this rule. cause we will have a better opportuni- dues are being spent on legitimate col- Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, for pur- ty to work with our people, our con- lective-bargaining activities and how poses of debate only, I yield 1 minute stituents: to really get to the grass- much is being spent for the union to the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. roots. leader's political purposes and that McMILLEN]. Perhaps with the exception of my they have the right not to contribute Mr. McMILLEN of Maryland. Mr. race back in 1967, when I was elected dues for these other activities. Speaker, I rise in favor of this rule. to the Kentucky State Senate, I do Unfortunately, the Democrat leader- There has been a lot of discussion on not think I have had a race before my ship has done everything possible to the other side about how it is unfair, primary this past May that was more prevent campaign reform legislation how it is too restrictive, and you know, of a grassroots effort, our effort was from being considered in a democratic in my former life as an athlete, when remarkably effective, and it was also a manner. games were close and time was waning, two-way street. I sustained myself and The Democrat leadership has re- our coach would say to us, "Take your got energy from the people, and I fused to allow the House to debate best shot." think my supporters got energy from campaign reform under an open rule That is what this rule is all about. It me. which would allow Members to offer is saying to our colleagues on the So while I can understand the con- amendments to H.R. 5400 which they other side of the aisle, take your best cerns we all have about going into a feel would provide for fair elections. shot. new era, to leave the known for the My legislation has 60 Members of The Democrats are presenting two unknown to take a leap in the dark is Congress as cosponsors. Those Mem- alternatives. The Republicans are of- frightening and does have certain bers represent more than 30 million fering an alternative which in essence fearsome aspects. But I think in the Americans. This closed and undemo- is a layup in their own basket. long haul of it, by adopting today one cratic rule does not allow me to offer The Republican substitute will have or the other of the Democratic propos- ample opportunity to be debated on my legislation as an amendment. als I think the floor of this body. If it is the will catapult us into the The standard line from the Demo- new answer to the problems of campaign era correctly and responsibly, and crat leadership to support a closed and finance, then let them sway us with I think it will be the best time possible undemocratic rule is that the demo- their arguments. for campaigning in our country. cratic process had worked well in com- The sad fact is, Mr. Speaker, that it I said earlier today that we have a mittee where all sides were heard; that is not the answer to the problems with chance to be heroic, and that this is everyone had a chance to offer amend- federal campaign finance. Rather than really a very historic day, on August 3, ments in committee and that there is a genuine attempt at reform, the Re- 1990, we have a chance to do two no need to rehash everything on the publican substitute is a partisan pro- things that for those of us who stay on House floor. posal to improve their own chances for in this Chamber will be looked back on Mr. Speaker, I find it outrageous election. It is a sham of a proposal in with pride. One is the passage of a that this legislation, H.R. 5400-which the name of reform, no spending civil rights act, which we did earlier some claim was "immaculately con- limits, no restrictions on individual ex- today and now the passage of a cam- ceived"-is being brought to the House penditures, no decent reform of soft paign reform act. We come to Con- floor without a markup in any com- money. gress, I believe, to be not just wit- mittee. Mr. Speaker, this is a fair rule which nesses to history, which we are, but to In fact, this legislation which claims guides the debate today, and every- be participants and makers of history, to make our Federal elections more body will have a right to be heard, I which we can be by voting up the rule free and fair has never been the sub- urge the rule's adoption. and by voting up campaign reform. ject of a single public hearing in the Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield House. What's worse is that the Demo- minutes to the gentleman from Ken- 2 minutes to the gentleman from crat leadership of the House has tucky [Mr. MAZZOLI]. Texas [Mr. DELAY]. sought to abuse the American demo- Mr. MAZZOLI. Mr. Speaker, I very Mr. DELAY. Mr. Speaker, many of cratic process and prohibited the much thank my friend from Michigan us here in the House would like to see House from holding any public hear- for yielding time to me. some sort of change in the campaign ings on any campaign reform legisla- Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the finance laws in order to work out a tion. rule and in support of campaign fi- level playing field where all candidates That's no hearings on this bill. nance reform. It is my intention to would be able to get a fair start in a That's no hearings on my bill, H.R. vote for the Synar-Obey substitue, but campaign. 2589. failing that, certainly the work of our I introduced H.R. 2589, the Workers That's no hearings on any campaign friend from Washington State, which Political Rights Act, to do just that. reform legislation. has been noble and heroic, is worth Right now, union leaders funnel an es- None! our vote, and I thank him for that timated $300 million annually of union Zip! effort. members' dues into political cam- Zilch! Let me just address myself to a paigns without the consent of the Zero! couple of aspects of this debate to- members. More than two years ago, The Democrat leadership has made night. One is I do think that spending the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the a complete mockery of the democratic limits are very much in order. I just Beck case that this action was wrong process demanded by Americans. completed a primary election in which and that workers had the right to pre- That's an outrage. I forswore the PAC contribution, and vent being forced to contribute their Democrats have written a bill that in a sense adopted voluntarily a cam- dues for causes they oppose. does not protect the political rights of 22192 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 American workers. The Democrat bill first race, I challenged my opponent tober 15 that has so often been forced only continues to allow their candi- then to voluntary spending limits. He into my district. Three different times dates to receive large amounts of unre- refused; I was outspent 3 to 1 in my I have had to face lading of money in ported aid from labor bosses which is first race. In my second race-in fact, the last 2 weeks of an election that did probably why they refuse to hold in my first race my opponent raised not have to be reported until after the public hearings. over $450,000. We did not have the ca- election. This rule and this bill are im- This Democrat bill was created in a pability to do that. portant to clean up campaigns around dark backroom far away from public In my second race, I challenged my the country. scrutiny or debate. I don't know how opponent at that time to voluntary Mr. Speaker, I urge support of the anyone could claim that this bill was spending limits. He refused. We were rule. immaculately conceived. It was far outspent in that race 21/2 to 1. Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield dirtier than that. This bill calls for a $550,000 cap on 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio This is a bad bill and a bad rule. It spending in any election cycle. I think [Mr. MILLER]. does not allow consideration of the one of the best parts of it is that it Mr. MILLER of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, Beck bill. Vote no on the rule. does try to be regionally sensitive by it is ironic that the House just passed offering some flexibility, depending on O 1620 legislation that will strengthen minori- the various primary elections that ty rights all across our country, but Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield could occur, depending on how elec- when it comes to protecting minority 1 minute to the gentleman from Con- tion laws are structured in different necticut [Mr. SHAYS]. rights in this body-when we consider regions of the country. But at the important legislation like campaign fi- Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, when I same time, it asks for voluntary limits, nance reform-how quickly they was elected to Congress in 1987, I ex- it also has enough flexibility to try to forget about such protections. Why pected to like and respect my col- meet the different regional needs we are we considering this much-needed leagues and to be concerned about the face as a Nation. process by which we do our business. I find as a candidate so often, why campaign reform legislation under a The reality is I like my colleagues far am I raising this money? I am raising closed rule? Is the leadership fright- more than I ever imagined. I have tre- it to spend it on television. ened that we might improve the bill mendous respect for the men and In my district in Toledo, OH, it costs by making campaigns more competi- women who serve here. But the proc- me, for 30 seconds on a show like tive, and risking their majority status. ess is really hurting. "Golden Girls," $3,000. It is clear the majority party wrote Mr. Speaker, I am fed up as a rank- Now, that is incredible that Mem- this bill to protect their power and and-file Member to be told this is a bers of Congress should have to go domination over this body. The politi- great rule, and we have to accept what into the broadcasting business to be cal action committee provision of was done in one back room or another into marketing for ABC, NBC, and granting higher limits for certain back room. It isn't a great rule, and it CBS when we want to run for office. types of PAC's while placing lower should be defeated. The rank-and-file I like the proposal in this bill that limits on others, is coming close to vio- Members of Congress should be al- gives you one free advertisment for lating the first amendment. This lowed to deal with each issue on its every two purchased, especially for wouldn't have anything to do with the merits. those of use who have to run in these fact that the majority party receives Mr. Speaker, contribution and various TV markets. more PAC money from the PAC's they spending limits, soft money, PAC's, One of the other good aspects of the would give this preferential treat- leadership PAC's, bundling, franking, legislation is that it encourages small ment? Don't get me wrong, I am for and public financing all deserve to be donors, expecially those from inside reducing the increased role political individually addressed on their merits. our own State, where people who con- action committee's have played in This Congress and the Members here tribute $50 or less can get a tax credit campaigns in recent years, but I do not deserve to deal with each issue on its for those contributions. favor selective treatment for one PAC merits. We deserve an open rule. I think we should do more to encour- over another. I urge my colleagues to The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. age small donor contributions in cam- vote this rule down, so we can have HOYER). The Chair will state that the paigns. open debate on this important issue. gentleman from Michigan [Mr. It also encourages small donor Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 BONIOR] has 14 minutes remaining, PAC's. So that those PAC's that are minutes to the gentleman from North and the gentleman from Tennessee allowed to contribute to campaigns Carolina [Mr. HEFNER]. [Mr. QUILLEN] has 9 minutes remain- can do so. Mr. HEFNER. Mr. Speaker, it was ing. This bill limits the influence of the kind of interesting listening to this Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 large donor PAC's, which is one of the debate. My good friend from Texas, minutes to the gentlewoman from most important actions that this body who is on the subcommittee with me, Ohio [Ms. KAPTURI. can take. the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in One of the other things this bill does DELAY], some remarks that he made, support of this rule and the campaign is that it limits the role of wealthy he had some landmark legislation and finance reform bill. I know that those contributors. he had been working very hard on it who speak against the rule and bill In my own races, my opponents have for a long, long time. today, as well as the Obey-Synar been able within the flash of an [ amendment, would like to try to nit- evening to raise $40,000 in $1,000 con- 1630 pick this bill to death. But I think fi- tributions in order to make their word He had 60 cosponsors, which is nally we have brought to the floor a heard over television. We have never about a third of the people on this bill that is wide-ranging in its reforms, had that-I think I had one $1,000 side. The first time I ran for Congress, that anyone interested in campaign contributor in my entire career, and I came up here like every other chal- reform can support. they were related, and they gave me lenger, trying to find some PAC Frankly, I find the most distasteful largely a part of their life savings. money. Most all of the PAC's that part of my job having to raise money I like the limitation on the role of were in existence at that particular to run for office every 2 years. wealthy contributors. time were the business PAC's, who did One of the most wonderful things Finally, because it does offer the op- not have a tendency to contribute to about this bill is that it asks candi- portunity for voluntary limits, no Democrats. They did not particularly dates in any race to accept voluntary longer will I face in my district the know what my philosophy was, but I limits. From my own experience in my type of end-loading of money after Oc- did not get PAC money. Some of the August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUrSE 22193 candidates running against me and the allow Members to do what they want lar to this Obey-Synar amendment was the other folks this year not only are col- to do. It seems to me it is just a little last one to be considered in this manner. lecting PAC money but they are also bit outrageous. Why do we not go The last time the House of Representatives using their campaign money to sup- ahead and pass this rule and get along considered and passed a bill revising the cam- port themselves and pay their car pay- with campaign financing, and get out paign laws was later in 1979, and that bill was ments. If they run long enough, they of here and go home? passed under suspension by voice vote. It perhaps can even pay for their houses Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield was eventually signed by President Carter in out of the campaign contributions. 1 minute to the gentleman from Min- January 1980. I think where Republicans are amiss nesota [Mr. FRENZEL]. Mr. Speaker, there are provisions in this bill is because they do not wish to negoti- Mr. FRENZEL. Mr. Speaker, we that involve four committees of the House: ate and put a cap on campaign. How- have heard a lot of revisionist history House Administration, Energy and Commerce, ever, I am going to go back to North today on campaign reform. In the Post Office and Civil Service, and Ways and Carolina. People do not say to me, three previous contested bills that we Means. I would suggest that many of those "Where are you getting this money? passed in 1972, 1974, and 1976, we had Members might like to have a crack at some Why does it cost so much to run a extensive hearings by as many as of these provisions as well. campaign?" Why do you spend, like three committees extending over I would urge the House to reject this rule the late Sam Irvin said, why does many months. We had amendments and put aside this whole process until the somebody spend $2,000 for a saddle, within those committees extending committees of jurisdiction have an opportunity for a 40-dollar mule? It does not make over months, and we had a limited to go through the regular process and the mi- any sense why they spend so much closed rule that allowed the House nority rights are protected at that level and on money. many options to vote on the floor. the floor. Reforming our election laws is seri- Now the other thing, I never heard To say that we have to work in the ous business, we should at least give it our so much caterwauling in my life. I dark to pass election reform is the careful and thoughtful attention. came over here the other morning. worst kind of hypocrisy in our democ- Democrats were having a caucus racy. I think the people who vote for Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 which was very boring, and I was this rule can truly be ashamed of minutes to the gentleman from Illinois trying to find some action someplace, themselves. It is absolutely ridiculous [Mr. HAYES]. so I came to this body. They were to give Members one shot and a few Mr. HAYES of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, lined up on this side over here, and minutes of debate on something that I did what the gentleman suggests, I guess what? They were chastizing all Members admit is complex. came out of the sunshine to voice my Members for not coming up with a As a matter of fact, in 1979, the two sentiment in support of this rule. I budget package at the summit. They parties working together passed the had debated over whether or not I do not have a package at the summit. last election bill that was enacted in should be in favor of campaign reform They did not have a budget when we this Congress on the suspension calen- as being suggested, but I made up my passed a budget here. They were lined dar and had no trouble getting it en- mind and I stand before Members up over here, and they are saying that acted. The problem here is that we are probably in the most rarest kind of po- we have got to address campaign fi- afraid to come out in the sunshine. I sition. nancing. Where is the Democrats' plan urge the defeat of the rule. I would not have been here had it on campaign reform? They were lined Mr. Speaker, during my 17 years on the not been for the contributions I got up over here. House Administration Committee, I have wit- through union PAC funds. I do not I made a little speech, not a very nessed some pretty highhanded methods de- want to see a situation develop where good one, but I made a little speech on signed to achieve partisan advantage in the we cut off the opportunity for people, something else. Another gentleman drafting of our campaign financing laws. Al- little people who are willing to give a came in, and we had two Democrats though we have had many acrimonious strug- Member $2 or $3 because it costs me that talked about, where is your gles over procedures, proposals, and sub- something in the neighborhood of summit package, which they do not stance, never, even under the most autocratic $350,000 to $400,000 to be elected to have? Where was your budget when of chairmen, were the minority denied an op- Congress. That is a lot of money. we passed the budget here? They did portunity to offer their amendments and par- Those voluntary contributions from not have one then. ticipate in the drafting of the legislative pro- people, begging people for money, that Now they say this rule is bad. Now it posals. made it possible. seems to me with all the brilliant The drafters of these amendments are cor- I had 13 different opponents who minds that we have on this side here, rect. Election law is complicated. There are ran in a Democrat primary against me. that we could put together, into their many interactive provisions of the law. Care I am here. I have not had to spend campaign package, and have it ready must be taken so as not to disadvantage one that much since. That was 7 years ago. here to offer for this House to consid- side or the other. I would suggest that no one But this does not only get little peo- er. We have been working on this. In- knows what the consequences of the propos- ple's money, it helps them to partici- cidentally, it was not in a closed dark als will be. pate in the political process. I think room where we met all over this. We Let me set the record straight about the Members know that. We have a gov- have had more task forces on this procedures that the House has used to con- ernment of the people, by the people, campaign reform than anything that sider amendments to the Federal Election for the people. We ought to partici- has ever taken place, that we are Campaign Act. In 1972, 1974, and 1976, hear- pate in who their leaders should be. thinking about setting up a full com- ings were held by the Committee on House This gets them interested in election mittee and having a full committee Administration or the Subcommittee on Elec- campaigns when they contribute their chairman just in charge of task force tions. Lengthy markups were held during money, be it ever so little. money. which the minority was permitted to offer as So I want to close by just saying But Members, it is a sham. It is a many amendments as we could think up. The that I am for this campaign reform. I sham to say this rule is bad, that they rules under which the House considered elec- am for this rule. So let Members get need an open rule, to where we can tion bills were of the "modified closed" varie- on with the business of adopting the offer what we want to offer. It seems ty, however, the minority was able to offer rule and discussing the measure as it to me we can put a package together several amendments. should be. even at this later date, we can offer On several occasions, the rule structuring Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield anything that we want in the package. debate on the Federal Election Commission 1 minute to the gentleman from Flori- So it seems to me that that is stretch- authorization permitted the House to consider da [Mr. JAMES]. ing it just a little bit to complain various public financing amendments. In 1979, Mr. JAMES. Mr. Speaker, I am. con- about the rule that is not going to the Obey-Railsback amendment which is simi- cerned, and I am concerned primarily

39-059 0-91-3 (Pt. 16) 22194 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 because I see a scenario where by the they also will make us more accounta- where theirs just shuts it off: Except caps we are putting on this, we are set- ble and, as a result, better legislators. for the loophole that would let every ting ourselves up to allow only a multi- Reasonable people can disagree, and, dollar that is currently being shoveled millionaire to successfully compete when it comes to campaign reform, through State parties to be shoveled with Members. He can do it with the there is considerable room to disagree, through county parties. And utterly scenario of spending caps, even which is why we need an open rule to no disclosure. The Democratic propos- though if he does not find the $75,000 consider the legislation. al has disclosure on soft money. The limit, Members still are limited by The gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. debate is going to be very interesting. PAC contributions. That is significant. OBEY], my dear friend, talks about a Mr. Speaker, the rule is fair. Cam- Now, it takes in many districts three- package here and a package there. But paign finance reform needs to be com- quarters of a million dollars to even he is a good legislator, and I like to prehensive, and it needs to be cohe- make an adequate campaign, and the think I have some area of expertise in sive, and the rule provides each party way it is written, it does not discount it. It does not mean that that is the with the opportunity to provide a the money we spend to collect it. So sacrosanct way of making this body reform package that will do that. when we are talking these caps of 550 work best. Now, Mr. Speaker, I will accept Swift or the maximum, it does not allow Yes, we begin from some base, but 1 and Swift 2. I think that is fine. I Members to consider the net, so we there ought to be some cross-fertiliza- would make a small suggestion on the may only be running with $300,000 or tion from time to time. What is good numbering. I think it should be Swift $400,000 against a very bad scenario here may not be good there. We will 1.0 and Swift 1.1, similar to the way on the other side as far as a million- pick it apart on either side. they number computer software pro- aire running. That is what bothers me Every one of these 10 or 11 points of grams as they improve them. I think most about it, though I am for reform ours, for example, could not be totally that would be fine. agreed on our side. I had to bang and for limitation on PAC contribu- But let us look at numbers in terms heads on our side to get them to agree. tions. That is a real concern the way it of the Republican Some of them would just as soon split proposals. They had is written, to me. the 25 points. Then we had 17 of those Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield off on a couple of them. I bet some of their folks would like a couple of points left when they introduced their the balance of my time to the minori- 10 bills. And out of 10 bills, they have ty leader, the gentleman from Illinois them, and they would discard others. That is the way I think this system now in their substitute offered eight [Mr. MICHEL]. points. Again they lost nine of the Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, the works so much better, and, of course, other points. This is the incredible debate on campaign reform reminds that is why I have to be opposed to shrinking reform proposal. me of the words of the great old song this rule, because it is so structured What does this rule offer the Repub- "It's still the same old story" but is and restrictive to those of us who licans? An opportunity to offer every- "not a fight for love and glory." It is a would like to have a full blown debate it in a compre- fight for fair and equitable campaign on each of these specific parts that we thing they want put reform. have been laboring on for so many hensive package. That is what we have At the beginning of this Congress I months. done. They can offer the House every- said I had hoped it would be known as So, Mr. Speaker, I would urge Mem- thing they want. the reform Congress. We worked with bers at this time to vote against this Mr. Speaker, that is not a harsh the majority to produce exemplary rule. It is not appropriate for this par- rule, not when we are looking for a ethics reform legislation, Members on ticular occasion. Yes, we will have an comprehensive, cohesive proposal, and both sides of the aisle. I think it was a opportunity. I understand. The Speak- yet we find that, after the ambitious bipartisan effort all the way around, er made a commitment to me because 25 points, which shrunk to 17 points, and a bipartisan vote when we fin- we talked earlier about it before the which have now shrunk to 8 points, ished. There was one brief shining end of July. Well, Mr. Speaker, we are that I have a suggestion. moment when it seemed that cam- into August, and the Speaker is a man Mr. Speaker, the suggestion is: Pass paign reform would be dealt with in a of his word, and we work well togeth- this rule. Hurry to the debate. Pass similar fashion. er, and I would always give him that this rule now because, if we wait until That is why we House Republicans opportunity, if we get a commitment, September, the Republican reform sat down earlier and hammered out after we get back again, and we are proposal will have disappeared alto- differences in our caucus, our 25-point going to be here after the August gether. Republican campaign reform proposal, recess, but to do it in a more orderly Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I have the product of those sessions, came fashion where we can really have an no further requests for time, I yield out in September 1989. That is when open rule, at least some measure of back the balance of my time, and I we had everything completed and letting individual Members offer move the previous question on the res- ready. That is why, in answer to our amendments. Then I could feel much olution. distinguished Member, the gentleman more comfortable about the rule. The previous question was ordered. from North Carolina, where is your However, Mr. Speaker, as for now, The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. plan? Where is your plan? And then closed as it is, I would urge Members HOYER). The question is on the resolu- get foisted and pushed aside until the to vote against this rule with the hope tion. closing days of this session when we and expectation that, if it is defeated, The question was taken; and the are so limited, that is our gripe. then we come back at another time Speaker pro tempore announced that with more time at our disposal and do the ayes appeared to have it. 0 1640 this job up right. Mr. FRENZEL. Mr. Speaker, I object The hope for bipartisan cooperation, Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the vote on the ground that a I guess, flickered, and it dimmed, and the balance of my time to the distin- quorum is not present and make the it was rather extinguished by the ma- guished gentleman from Washington point of order that a quorum is not jority's unwillingness to reform, so we [Mr. SWIFTr, who has labored so hard present. have come to this, a battle for the very and so well on this piece of legislation. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evi- soul of this institution. Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Speaker, I am look- dently a quorum is not present. Mr. Speaker, we believe our package ing forward to the debate that we will The Sergeant at Arms will notify will bring congressional elections back be getting into shortly. We will have absent Members. to the people. These proposals will an opportunity, for example, to deal The vote was taken by electronic keep elections local. They will keep with the accusation that our soft device and there were-yeas 232, nays them competitive and honest, and money proposal does not do the job, 185, not voting 15 as follows: 22195 August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE Davis Kyl Roth [Roll No.DeLay 3141 Lagomarsino Rowland (CT) Mr. WALKER moves that the DeWine Leach (IA) Saiki House do now adjourn. Ackerman Hall (OH) Owens (UT) YEAS-232Dickinson Lent Saxton Anderson Hamilton Pallone Donnelly Lewis (CA) Schaefer The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Andrews Harris Panetta Dornan (CA) Lewis (FL) Schiff question is on the motion offered by Annunzio Hatcher Parker Douglas Lightfoot Schneider Anthony Hawkins Patterson Dreier Livingston Schulze the gentleman from Pennsylvania Applegate Hayes (IL) Payne (NJ) Duncan Lowery (CA) Sensenbrenner [Mr. WALKER]. Aspin Hayes (LA) Payne (VA) Early Lukens, Donald Shaw Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I Atkins Hefner Pease Edwards (OK) Machtley Shays move to table the motion. AuCoin Hertel Pelosi Emerson Madigan Shumway Barnard Hoagland Penny English Marlenee Shuster The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Bates Hochbrueckner Perkins Fawell Martin (IL) Skeen Chair will state to the gentleman that Beilenson Hoyer Pickett Fields Martin (NY) Slaughter (VA) the motion is not subject to a motion Berman Hubbard Pickle Fish McCandless Smith (NE) to table. Bilbray Huckaby Poshard Frenzel McCollum Smith (NJ) Boggs Hughes Price Gallegly McCrery Smith (TX) The question is on the motion to ad- Bonior Hutto Rahall Gallo McDade Smith (VT) journ. Borski Jenkins Rangel Gekas McEwen Smith, Denny The question was taken; and the Bosco Johnson (SD) Ray Gillmor McGrath (OR) Boucher Johnston Richardson Gilman McMillan (NC) Smith, Robert Speaker pro tempore announced that Boxer Jones (GA) Rose Gingrich Meyers (NH) the noes appeared to have it. Brennan Jones (NC) Rostenkowski Goodling Michel Smith, Robert Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, on that Brooks Jontz Rowland (GA) Goss Miller (OH) (OR) I demand the yeas and nays. Browder Kanjorski Roybal Gradison Miller (WA) Snowe Brown (CA) Kaptur Russo Grandy Molinari Solomon The yeas and nays were ordered. Bruce Kastenmeier Sabo Grant Moorhead Spence The vote was taken by electronic Bryant Kennedy Sangmeister Green Morella Stangeland device, and there were-yeas 129, nays Bustamante Kennelly Sarpallus Gunderson Morrison (WA) Stearns Byron Kildee Savage Hammerschmidt Myers Stump 275, not voting 28, as follows: Cardin Kleczka Sawyer Hancock Nielson Sundquist [Roll No. 315] Hansen Oxley Tanner Chapman Kolter Scheuer YEAS--129 Clarke Kostmayer Schroeder Hastert Packard Tauke Alexander Clement LaFalce Schumer Hefley Parris Thomas (CA) Archer Gunderson Ravenel Coleman (TX) Lancaster Serrano Henry Pashayan Thomas (WY) Armey Hancock Rhodes Collins Lantos Sharp Herger Paxon Torricelli Baker Hansen Ridge Condit Laughlin Sikorski Hiler Petri Traficant Ballenger Hastert Ritter Conyers Lehman (CA) Sisisky Holloway Porter Upton Bartlett Hefley Roberts Cooper Lehman (FL) Skaggs Hopkins Quillen Vander Jagt Barton Henry Rogers Costello Levin (MI) Skelton Horton Ravenel Vucanovich Bateman Herger Rohrabacher Coyne Levine (CA) Slattery Houghton Regula Walker Bliley Hiler Ros.Lehtinen Darden Lewis (GA) Slaughter (NY) Hunter Rhodes Walsh Broomfield Holloway Rowland (CT) de la Garza Lipinski Smith (FL) Hyde Ridge Weber Bunning Hopkins Schaefer DeFazio Lloyd Smith (IA) Inhofe Rinaldo Weldon Burton Hunter Schiff Dellums Long Solarz Ireland Ritter Whittaker Callahan Hyde Schulze Derrick Lowey (NY) Spratt Jacobs Roberts Wolf Chandler Inhofe Sensenbrenner Dicks Manton Staggers James Roe Wylie Clinger Ireland Shaw Dingell Markey Stallings Johnson (CT) Rogers Young (AK) Coble James Shumway Dixon Martinez Stark Kasich Rohrabacher Young (FL) Coleman (MO) Johnson (CT) Shuster Dorgan (ND) Matsui Stenholm Kolbe Ros-Lehtinen Combest Kasich Skeen Downey Mavroules Stokes Conte Kolbe Slaughter (VA) Durbin Mazzoli Studds NOT VOTING-15 Coughlin Kyl Smith (VT) Courter Dwyer McCloskey Swift Bevill Leath (TX) Roukema Lagomarsino Smith, Denny Dymally McCurdy Synar Cox Lent (OR) Bilirakis Luken, Thomas Schuette Craig Dyson McDermott Tallon Crockett Nelson Torres Lewis (CA) Smith, Robert Eckart McHugh Tauzin Crane Lewis (FL) (NH) Ford (MI) Pursell Washington Dannemeyer Edwards (CA) McMillen (MD) Taylor Hall (TX) Robinson Watkins Lightfoot Smith, Robert Engel McNulty Thomas (GA) DeLay Livingston (OR) Dickinson Lowery (CA) Solomon Erdreich Mfume Towns 0 1706 Espy Miller (CA) Traxler Dornan (CA) Lukens, Donald Spence Evans Mineta Udall The Clerk announced the following Douglas Marlenee Steams Fascell Moakley Unsoeld Dreier Martin (NY) Stump Fazio Mollohan Valentine pairs: Duncan McCandless Sundquist Feighan Montgomery Vento On this vote: Early McCollum Tauke Edwards (OK) McCrery Thomas (CA) Flake Moody Visclosky Mr Nelson of Florida for, with Mr. Pursell Fllppo Morrison (CT) Volkmer Fawell McEwen Thomas (WY) Foglietta Mrazek Walgren against. Fish McMillan (NC) Upton Ford (TN) Murphy Waxman Mr. Ford. of Michigan for, with Mr. Rou- Frenzel Miller (OH) Vander Jagt Frank Murtha Weiss kema against. Gallegly Miller (WA) Vucanovich Frost Nagle Wheat Gekas Molinari Walker Gaydos Natcher Whitten Mr. BAKER and Mr. BARTLETT Gingrich Moorhead Walsh Gejdenson Neal (MA) Williams their votes from "yea" to Goodling Myers Weber changed Goss Gephardt Neal (NC) Wilson "nay." Oxley Weldon Geren Nowak Wise Gradison Parris Whittaker Gibbons Oakar Wolpe Mr. YATES changed his vote from Grandy Paxon Wolf Glickman Oberstar Wyden "nay" to "yea." Grant Perkins Wylie Young (AK) Gonzalez Obey Yates So the resolution was agreed to. Quillen Gordon Olin Yatron NAYS-275 Gray Ortiz The result of the vote was an- Ackerman Guarini Owens (NY) nounced as above recorded. Anderson Boehlert Campbell (CA) Andrews A motion to reconsider was laid on Boggs Campbell (CO) NAYS-185 Annunzio Bonior Cardin the table. Anthony Borski Carper Alexander Boehlert Clay Applegate Bosco Carr Archer Broomfield Clinger Aspin Boucher Chapman Armey Brown (CO) Coble Atkins Boxer Clarke Baker Buechner Coleman (MO) MOTION TO ADJOURN AuCoin Brennan Clay Ballenger Bunning Combest Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I offer Barnard Brooks Clement Bartlett Burton Conte Bates Browder Coleman (TX) Barton Callahan Coughlin a privileged motion. Beilenson Brown (CA) Collins Bateman Campbell (CA) Courter The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bennett Brown (CO) Condit Bennett Campbell (CO) Cox TALLON). The Clerk will report the Bentley Bruce Conyers Bentley Carper Craig Bereuter Bryant Cooper Bereuter Carr Crane privileged motion. Berman Buechner Costello Bliley Chandler Dannemeyer The Clerk read as follows: Bilbray Bustamante Coyne Byron Darden 22196 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 Davis Kolter Ray So the motion to adjourn was reject- anced reform was thrown out of kilter, DeFazio Kostmayer Regula Derrick LaFalce Richardson ed. leaving us with open-ended spending. DeWine Lancaster Rinaldo The result of the vote was an- Without a spending limit, the cost of Dicks Lantos Roe nounced as above recorded. election campaigning has gone wild; Dingell Laughlin Rose Dixon Leach (IA) Rostenkowski the pressure to raise and spend enor- Donnelly Lehman (CA) Roth mous sums accelerates. The average Dorgan (ND) Lehman (FL) Rowland (GA) CAMPAIGN COST REDUCTION incumbent spent about twice in 1988 Downey Levin (MI) Roybal AND REFORM ACT OF 1990 what he or she spent Durbin Levine (CA) Russo in 1980. It's Dwyer Lewis (GA) Sabo The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. absurd and we all know it. Dymally Lipinski Saiki OBERSTAR). Pursuant to House Resolu- This great rush of money into the Dyson Lloyd Sangmeister election process has brought on a rash Eckart Long Sarpalius tion 453 and rule XXIII, the Chair de- Edwards (CA) Lowey (NY) Savage clares the House in the Committee of of problems, some real, some potential. Emerson Machtley Sawyer the Whole House on the State of the The movement toward reform has Engel Madigan Saxton Union for the consideration of the bill, been growing over the past several English Manton Scheuer Erdreich Markey Schneider H.R. 5400. years and has obviously peaked in this Espy Martinez Schroeder Congress. Evans Matsui Schumer 0 1727 The action by the Senate in passing Fascell Mavroules Serrano its version of campaign reform merely Fazio Mazzoli Sharp IN THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Feighan McCloskey Shays Accordingly, the House resolved underscores the necessity for the Flake McCurdy Sikorski itself into the Committee of the House to act, and to act now. Flippo McDade Sisisky In January 1989, I, along with Chair- Foglietta McDermott Skaggs Whole House on the State of the Ford (TN) McHugh Skelton Union for the consideration of the bill man ANNUNZIO and others, introduced Frost McMillen (MD) Slattery (H.R. 5400) to amend the Federal Elec- H.R. 13 and Tony Coelho, MIKE Gallo McNulty Slaughter (NY) SYNAR, and others introduced H.R. 14, Gaydos Meyers Smith (FL) tion Campaign Act of 1971 and certain Gejdenson Mfume Smith (IA) related laws to clarify such provisions both comprehensive campaign reform Gephardt Michel Smith (NJ) with respect to Federal elections, to packages. So the Democrats immedi- Geren Miller (CA) Smith (TX) reduce costs in House of Representa- ately went on record as wanting to Gibbons Mineta Snowe move ahead on this issue in the 101st Gillmor Moakley Spratt tives elections, and for other purposes, Gilman Moilohan Staggers with Mr. HOYER in the chair. Congress. Glickman Montgomery Stallings The Clerk read the title of the bill. In February of last year, Speaker Gonzalez Moody Stark Jim Wright and minority leader BOB Gordon Morella Stenholm The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the Green Morrison (CT) Stokes rule, the bill is considered as having MICHEL appointed a bipartisan task Guarini Morrison (WA) Studds been read the first time. force, eight Democrats and eight Re- Hamilton Mrazek Swift publicans, to try to work out a compre- Hammerschmidt Murphy Synar Under the rule, the gentleman from Harris Murtha Tallon Washington [Mr. SWIFT] will be recog- hensive, bipartisan reform package. I Hatcher Nagle Tanner nized for 1 hour, and the gentleman was pleased to cochair this task force Hawkins Natcher Tauzin from California [Mr. THOMAS] will be with my good friend and very able col- Hayes (IL) Neal (MA) Taylor league, GUY VANDER JAGT. The task Hayes (LA) Neal (NC) Thomas (GA) recognized for 1 hour. Hefner Nowak Torres The Chair recognizes the gentleman force held a series of meetings; the at- Hertel Oakar Torricelli from Washington [Mr. SWIFT]. mosphere was positive and construc- Hoagland Oberstar Towns tive. Hochbrueckner Obey Traficant Horton Olin Traxler l 1730 As the task force meetings pro- Houghton Ortiz Udall Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I yield gressed, it became obvious that while Hoyer Owens (NY) Unsoeld myself such time as I may consume. there was basic conceptual agreement Hubbard Owens (UT) Vento on a number of items within an overall Huckaby Packard Visclosky Mr. Chairman, the issue of campaign Hughes Pallone Volkmer finance reform has been argued and package, Republicans and Democrats Hutto Panetta Walgren discussed by the media for months, had very different views on the defini- Jacobs Pashayan Washington tion of campaign finance reform, Jenkins Patterson Waxman has recently been debated and acted and Johnson (SD) Payne (NJ) Weiss upon in the Senate and is now before that a bipartisan comprehensive bill Johnston Payne (VA) Wheat the House. was not going to be attainable under Jones (GA) Pease Whitten those circumstances. I had many meet- Jones (NC) Pelosi Williams This is a highly personal issue to all Jontz Penny Wilson of us. We are all experts on this sub- ings with Mr. VANDER JAGT and our Kanjorski Pickett Wise ject. We ran and were elected under a staffs were in constant touch, but the Kaptur Pickle Wolpe certain set of laws and it is difficult to philosophical gap proved too great. Kastenmeier Porter Wyden Kennedy Poshard Yates conceive changing those rules. Rather than let the issue drop, both Kennelly Price Yatron But times change, events occur parties continued to work, independ- Kildee Rahall Young (FL) which promote change, and I think it ently, on the issue, and the result of Kleczka Rangel is evident to many of us, indeed per- that effort is before us today. NOT VOTING-28 haps to the overwhelming majority of H.R. 5400 is major reform; it's com- Bevill Hall (TX) Robinson us, that the laws and procedures under prehensive; it's workable; it's good Bilirakis Leath (TX) Roukema which congressional elections are fi- public policy. Crockett Luken, Thomas Schuette nanced need review and refinement. First, and most important, it puts a de la Garza Martin (IL) Smith (NE) Dellums McGrath Solarz The House has gone this route cap on campaign spending. Because of Fields Nelson Stangeland before. We passed the Federal Elec- the Supreme Court decision, this cap Ford (MI) Nielson Valentine tion Campaign Act in 1971 and have must be voluntary, so there are in- Frank Parker Watkins amended it several times over the ducements in reduced broadcasting Gray Petri Hall (OH) Pursell years. That was a far-reaching act, a and postage costs to make opting into major reform. If the provisions of that the program attractive. O 1726 act were in effect now, we would have We establish a basic spending limit Mr. KLECZKA changed his vote many fewer concerns about changing of $550,000 for an election cycle, with spending limit of from "yea" to "nay." the legislation. Unfortunately, as we a primary election all know, the Supreme Court struck $300,000. To compensate for the po- Mr. PAXON changed his vote from the key section of the act-the spend- tential financial disadvantage which "nay" to "yea." ing limit section. Thus, the careful bal- might occur in a close, hotly contested August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 22197 primary race, we introduced a 30-per- Independent expenditures have been ed through undervaluation of in-kind con- cent general election spending bonus a problem for the other body and are a tributions. for those primary winners who receive growing concern in House contests. Secs. 102(a)(2) and 102(a)(3) provide that less than two-thirds of the vote. The Our bill tightens the regulations on in- any gift, subscription, loan, advance, or de- $550,000 general limit, however, re- dependent expenditures by prohibit- posit of money or anything of value is a con- mains in place. The bill has a special ing the costs of such expenditures tribution is made by any person for the pur- provision for runoff elections and from being underwritten by the treas- pose of encouraging any specific individual who is not a candidate to become a candi- places a $75,000 limit on the personal uries of corporate, union, or trade as- date. This provision subjects committees contribution of participating candi- sociation PAC's. The bill also requires formed to encourage an individual to run dates. additional disclaimers to make certain for office to the reporting and contribution Much attention has been focused on the public knows that these messages strictures under the Act. political action committees and a mas- are totally unrelated to a candidate. Sec. 102(b) clarifies current law by delet- sive effort has been made to discredit Some messages need to be more ing references to the term "direct mail" in all PAC's. closely related to a candidate, and certain party-building exclusions to the defi- Some have conveniently forgotten those have to do with negative adver- nition of "contribution" and inserting that political action committees were tisements. H.R 5400 requires that all "mail" in lieu thereof. established as reforms-as part of the authorized campaign advertisements Sec. 102(c) excludes from the definition of effort to provide the fullest possible clearly state that the candidate takes contribution the value of any advertising disclosure. When a candidate receives full responsibility for the message. rate reduction made available to a qualify- a PAC contribution it's on the record To encourage those who wish to con- ing House of Representatives candidate by a and everyone knows just where that tribute to a congressional campaign newspaper, magazine, broadcasting station, if such reduction is made contribution is coming from. That is but feel overwhelmed by the flood of or cable system, not always true with individual contri- available to any qualifying House of Repre- money that currently washes through sentatives candidate during the 90-day butions. Federal law only requires the our political system, our bill allows a period before the election involved. Adver- minimum amount of identification on 100-percent tax credit for in-State con- tising rate reductions provided pursuant to individual contributions. tributions of $50 or less to candidates this provision would be exempt from the Many political action committees abiding by the spending limits. Act's prohibition of corporate political con- provide an ideal vehicle for constitu- There are other important reforms tributions. ents of modest means to contribute in this legislation which will be dis- something and play a role in the polit- cussed as we go along in the debate. In "Amendments to Definitionof ical process. Some PAC's have thou- general, the bill contains all the items Expenditures" sands of contributors who can only of conceptual agreement reached by Sec. 103(a)(1) amends the definition of the give a small amount of money, others the bipartisan task force. This is a term "anything of value" to require the have very few members who contrib- giant step forward. H.R. 5400 is good value of campaign expenditures to be deter- ute the maximum, so all PAC's are not for the country, is good for the House, mined by the higher of: (1) cost to the equal. and is good for each of us individually. person making the expenditure; (2) fair market value on the date of acquisition by H.R. 5400 recognizes this disparity. I urge all of my colleagues to vote for First, it sets a 50 percent, or $275,000, the person making the expenditure; (3) fair H.R. 5400. market value on the date of the expendi- contributions aggregate limit on PAC Mr. Chairman, I insert with my ture. This provision prevents the undervalu- which a candidate may accept. Second, statement a summary and section-by- ing of in-kind expenditures. it establishes small donor committees, section analysis of H.R. 5400. Sees. 103(a)(2) and 103(a)(3) provide that which are political committees which THE CAMPAIGN COST REDUCTION AND REFORM any purchase, payment, distribution, loan, raise their funds exclusively from indi- ACT OF 1990 advance, deposit, or gift of money or any- vidual contributors of $240 or less per Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute thing of value is an expenditure if made by year. These small donor committees to H.R. 5400, Made in Order as Original any person for the purpose of encouraging would be able to contribute $5,000 per Text any specific individual who is not a candi- election. All other PAC's not limiting SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS date to become a candidate. This provision their fundraising to individual contri- Section 1: Short Title.-This Act may be reinforces Sec. 102(a). butions of $240 or less per year would cited as the Campaign Cost Reduction and Sec. 103(b) amends the Act by deleting be allowed to contribute only $1,000 Reform Act of 1990. references to the term "direct mail" in cer- tain party-building exclusions to the defini- per election. H.R. 5400 also puts an TITLE I-AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT OF 1971 tion to "expenditure" and inserting "mail" end to so-called leadership PAC's. The section clarifies current House of in lieu thereof. The outrageous raising and spending "Definition of a Qualifying law. of soft money in the 1988 Presidential Representative Candidate" election, clearly in violation of the Sec. 101 defines the term "qualifying "Registrationas Qualifying House of intent of the law, has focused atten- House of Representatives candidate" to RepresentativesCandidate" tion to that area. H.R. 5400 closes the mean a candidate for the office of Repre- Sec. 104(a) provides, in the case of a prin- or Resident Com- soft money loophole in current law by sentative in, or Delegate cipal campaign committee of a candidate for missioner to, the Congress, whose principal in, or Delegate prohibiting Presidential candidates in its state- the office of Representative campaign committee includes Commissioner to, the Congress, who accept public funds from raising ment of organization a declaration of inten- or Resident or receiving any soft money. The bill for registration as a qualifying House of tion under section 303(b)(7) and, by reason of goes further, and bans the use of polit- of such declaration, to abide by the expendi- Representatives candidate by declaration for the purpose ture limitations specified in section 315(h) intention to receive broadcast time under ical party soft money of of influencing Federal elections. Final- or section 315(i) section 315(c) of the Communications Act 1934 or to receive reduced postal rates under ly, the bill requires full reporting of all "Amendments to Definition of Contribution" section 3629 of title 39, United States Code. soft money receipts and disburse- Sec. 104(b) allows a candidate for the amends the definition of the ments. The problems related to soft Sec. 102(a)(1) House of Representatives to amend the money are dealt with firmly and effec- term "anything of value" to require the to in- to be deter- statement of organization in order tively in H.R. 5400. value of campaign contributions if the amendment is mined by the higher of: (1) cost to the clude such declaration, The practice of bundling campaign person making the contribution; (2) fair filed under section 302(g) not later than the contributions has gotten totally out of market value on the date of acquisition by day the candidate becomes a candidate for hand, and, again, HR. 5400 deals effec- the person making the contribution; (3) fair purposes of State law. Declarations of inten- tively with this problem by prohibit- market value on the date of the contribu- tion to receive broadcast and postal rate ing bundling by political action com- tion. This provision prevents the Act's con- benefits, whether in the original filing or by mittees and parties. tribution limitations from being circumvent- amendment, may not be revoked. 22198 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 "Restrictionson Control of Certain Types of (1) other than a qualifying House of Repre- primary). In addition, the section estab- Political Committees by Candidates for sentatives candidate receives contributions lishes a cap on political committee contribu- FederalOffice" or makes expenditures aggregating more tions of 50% of the limitation specified in Sec. 105 prohibits candidates for Federal than $200,000, such candidate shall so subsection (i)(1)(C) for runoff elections. office from establishing, maintaining, or notify the Commission within 72 hours and These limitations on contributions from controlling a political committee other than the limitation under that paragraph shall political committees apply both to qualify- an authorized campaign committee or a not apply to any candidate in the election. ing and nonqualifying House of Representa- committee of a political party. In addition, Sec. 108(i)(3) provides for indexing of the tives candidates. the section provides that for one year after expenditure limitations established by para- the effective date of this Act, any such po- graph (1). Such adjustments are to be "All Contributions in Elections for Federal litical committee may continue to make con- rounded to the nearest $1,000 and shall be Office to Be Subject to the Federal Elec- tributions. At the end of that period such made with respect to each 4-year period be- tion Campaign Act of 1971" political committee shall disburse all funds ginning after calendar year 1992. The price Sec. 110 amends the Act to prohibit candi- by one or more of the following means: index average shall be computed for each 4- dates from accepting any contribution with Making contributions to a entity qualified, year period ending before a presidential respect to an election for Federal office if under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Rev- election, with the applicable base period being the 4-year period ending with calen- the gift, subscription loan, deposit, thing of enue Code of 1986, or making a contribution value, or payment constituting the contribu- to the treasury of the United States; or, con- dar year 1992. Sec. 108(i)(4) provides that if, in a primary tion is given or made with respect to an elec- tributing to the national, State or local com- tion for State office or otherwise is not sub- mittees of a political party, or, making con- election with respect to a general election, a tributions not to exceed $1,000 to any candi- qualifying House of Representatives candi- ject to the Act. date for elective office. date receives the greatest number of votes "Intermediaryor Conduit Amendments" and becomes the nominee of the political "Amendment to Definition of Independent Sec. 111 provides for the counting of cam- Expenditure" party involved and receives less than 66.7 percent of the total number of votes cast in paign contributions against the Federal con- Sec. 106 amends the F.E.C.A. of 1971 to the primary election, the limitation applica- tribution limitations of both original donors clarify that an expenditure is not an inde- ble to the qualifying House of Representa- and political committees acting as interme- pendent expenditure if (A) there is any ar- tives candidate under paragraph (1)(A) shall diaries for such funds, thereby preventing rangement, coordination, or direction with be increased by 30 percent, except that the the Act's strictures from being circumvent- respect to the expenditure between the can- total of expenditures of the candidate with ed. didate and the person making the expendi- respect to the general election may not Sec. 111(B) would limit the bundling of all ture; or (B) with respect to the election, the exceed $550,000. contributions in the form of a check or person making the expenditure is author- Sec. 108(i)(5) provides that in computing other negotiable instrument made payable ized to solicit contributions or make expend- expenditures for purposes of paragraph (1), to a conduit to the amount of the contribu- itures on behalf of the candidate or an au- no amount of legal or accounting fees shall thorized committee of the candidate, is an tion limitation of the individual or commit- be taken into account. tee serving as intermediary. It also specifies officer of an authorized committee of the Sec. 108(i)(6) provides that in computing candidate, or receives any compensation or that bundled contributions funnelled expenditures for purposes of paragraph (1), through a political committee or its officers, reimbursement from the candidate or an au- expenditures for broadcasting, newspapers, thorized committee of the candidate. This magazines, billboards, mail, and similar employees or agents, or other agents of a section prohibits coordination between per- types of general public advertising shall be connected organization acting in its behalf, sons or committees making independent ex- allocated to the election time period during shall be counted against the contribution penditures and any Federal candidate. which the advertising appears, and other limit of the conduit without regard to whom "Amendments Relating to Limitation on Ex- expenditures shall be allocated to the elec- the contribution is made payable. penditures in a Single State by Candidates tion period in which the expenditure is Sec. 111(C) provides exemptions for bona for PresidentialNomination Who Accepts made. fide efforts conducted solely for the purpose Amounts from the Presidential Primary Sec. 108(j) requires any qualifying House of sponsorship of a fundraising reception, Matching Payment Account" of Representatives candidate who makes ex- dinner, or event by two or more candidates, Sec. 107 eliminates state-by-state expendi- penditures that exceed a limitation under two or more national, State, or local com- ture limitations for presidential candidates subsection (h) or subsection (i) by 5 percent mittees of a political party acting on their who accept amounts from the presidential or less to pay to the FEC, for deposit in the own behalf, and fundraising efforts for the primary matching payment account. This Treasury as miscellaneous receipts, an benefit of a candidate. provision in no way changes the overall, na- amount equal to the amount of the excess "EncouragementAmounts to be Treated as tional expenditure limitation for presiden- expenditures. For overspending by 5 percent Contributions" tial candidates who accept public funding. and less than 10 percent, the provision re- "Limitations on Expenditures by Qualify- quires qualifying candidates to pay the FEC Sec. 112 amends the Act to require a con- ing House of Representatives Candidates" an amount equal to three times the amount tribution described in section 301(8)(A)(iii) to be treated, with respect to the individual Section 108 provides for limitations on ex- of the excess expenditures. For overspend- ing by 10 percent or more, qualifying candi- involved, as a contribution to a candidate, penditures by qualifying House of Repre- whether or not such individual becomes a sentatives candidates. dates must pay the FEC an amount equal to Sec. 108(h) prohibits a qualifying House three times the amount of the excess ex- candidate. This provides for the treating of of Representatives candidate from making penditures plus a civil penalty in an amount amounts donated to prospective candidates expenditures derived from personal funds of determined by the Commission. for Federal office as contributions. such candidate in excess of $75,000 with re- "Limitation on Acceptance of Political "Contributions to Candidates from State spect to an election for the Office of Repre- Committee Contributions by House of and Local Committees of Political Parties sentative in, or Delegate or Resident Com- Representative Candidates" to be Aggregated" missioner to, the Congress. Sec. 109 amends the Federal Election Sec. 113 further amends section 315(a) of Sec. 108(i)(1) prohibits, except as provided Campaign Act of 1971, as amended by sec- the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, in paragraph (2), (3), or (4), a qualifying tions 107(b) and 108 of this Act, to prohibit as amended by sections 111 and 112, to pro- House of Representatives candidate from a candidate for the office of Representative hibit a candidate for Federal office from ac- spending more than $550,000 with respect to in, or Delegate or Resident Commissioner a general or special election (and any pri- to, the Congress, and the authorized politi- cepting, with respect to an election, any mary election relating to such general or cal committees of such candidate, from ac- contribution from a State or local commit- special election); $300,000 with respect to a cepting any contribution from a political tee of a political party (including any subor- primary election for such office, except committee with respect to a general or spe- dinate committee of such committee), if that, if under State law, a candidate who re- cial election (and any primary election relat- such contribution, when added to the total ceives a majority of votes in the primary ing to such) for such office which exceeds of contributions previously accepted from election is elected to the office involved and 50 percent of the expenditure limitation all such committees of that political party, there is no general election, in which case specified in subsection (i)(1)(A) when added exceeds a limitation on contributions to a the primary election spending ceiling would to the total of contributions previously candidate under this section. This section be $400,000; or $100,000 with respect to a made by political committees to such candi- prevents State or local party committees runoff election for such office. date and the authorized political commit- from acting as conduits for the circumven- Sec. 108(i)(2) provides that if any candi- tees of such candidate with respect to the tion of contribution limitations and report- date in an election referred to in paragraph general or special election (and any relating ing requirements under the Act. August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 22199 "Application of Limitations and Reporting "Prohibitionof False Representation to paper, magazine, billboard, mass mail, and Requirements to Certain Amounts Not De- Solicit Contributions" newsletter communications, and similar fined As Contributions or Expenditures Sec. 118 prohibits any person from solicit- kinds of communications or public advertis- Under the Federal Election Campaign Act ing contributions by falsely representing ing that is exclusively on behalf of State or of 1971" himself as a candidate or as an agent of a local candidates; administrative expenses of Sec. 114 amends the Act to provide that candidate, a political committee, or a politi- a State or local committee of a political any amount received or used by a State or cal party. party, including expenses for overhead, local committee of a political party for an "Contribution Limitations for Small Donor staff (other than individuals devoting a sub- excluded payment shall be subject to limita- Political Committees; Elimination of Spe- stantial portion of their activities to elec- tion and reporting under the Act as if such cial Contribution Limitations for Multi- tions for Federal office), meetings, and con- amount was a contribution or expenditure, candidate PoliticalCommittees" ducting party elections or caucuses; re- as applicable. No part of such amount may search pertaning solely to State and local Sec. 119 eliminates special contributions candidates and issues; and maintenance of be allocated to a non-Federal account or limitations for "multicandidate" political otherwise voter files. The section clarifies that state maintained in, or paid from, an committees (commonly referred to as payments not designed to influence Federal account that is not subject to this Act. "PACs") and, in lieu thereof, provides for elections are not subject to the Act's limita- This section ends the practice by which the establishment of "small donor" political tions and reporting requirements. contribution and expenditure limitations for committees, meaning broad-based political presidential candidates can be circumvented organizations which restrict their fundrais- "AdditionalReporting Requirements" through the use of so-called "soft money", ing to individual contributions of $240 or Sec. 123 amends the Act to set additional thus ensuring that activities which promote less per year, reporting requirements. The section re- a presidential candidate are paid for with Sec. 119(a) provides that a small donor po- quires each state committee of a political funds in compliance with the Act. It does litical committee may make contributions to party to file with the Commission, in addi- not prohibit the distribution of sample bal- any candidate for Federal office and the au- tion to any other report required by law, lots or printed slate cards listing three or thorized political committees of such candi- any report of non-Federal receipts and dis- more candidates. date with respect to an election which, in bursements filed by the committee under the aggregate, do not exceed $5,000. State law, and such supplementary material "ProvisionsRelating to Separate Segregated Sec. 119(b) defines the term "small donor as the Commission may require to assure Funds" political committee" to mean a political compliance with the Act. It also requires Sec. 115 amends section 316(b)(2) of the committee that has been registered under each national committee of a political party Act to permit corporations, labor organiza- section 303 for at least 6 months, has re- to file, as part of each report to the Com- tions, membership organizations, coopera- ceived contributions from more than 50 per- mission, a statement of all receipts and dis- tives and corporations without capital stock sons, has made contributions to 5 or more bursements by the committee in the report- to defray the costs of administration and so- candidates for Federal office, accepts contri- ing period, including receipts and disburse- licitation of contributions to separate segre- butions only from individuals, and does not ments for non-Federal purposes. In addi- gated funds, if amounts disbursed from such accept contributions totaling more than tion, the section requires any individual who funds are used solely for communication or $240 from any single individuals in a calen- makes contributions that are subject to lim- campaign costs under subparagraph (A) or dar year. itation under section 315(a)(3) to report to (B), contributions with respect to elections Sec. 119(c), a conforming amendment, re- the Commission the name of the person for Federal or State office, or non-election stricts the ability of a political committee to making the contributions and the amount related purposes. donate, with respect to an election, more and recipient of each such contribution not The provision in no way prohibits the es- than $1,000 unless the committee qualifies later than 7 days after making contributions tablishment of separate segregated funds as a "small donor" political committee, in aggregating $20,000 or more, but less than for other political purposes but put such which case the contribution limitations es- $25,000, in a calendar year. Individuals must funds on the same financial footing as other tablished above in Sec. 119(a) would apply. also report the above mentioned informa- political committees if these funds engage "ClarificationRelating to Certain tion not later than 7 days after making con- in broader political activities. Contributions" tributions aggregating $25,000 in a calendar Sec. 120 amends the Act to make clear year with respect to contributions not previ- "Disclosurein Solicitations by Certain ously reported. UnauthorizedCommittees" that a gift or other item referred to in 301(8)(A)(i) is considered for the purpose of "Transfers Between Elections" Sec. 116 requires communications by polit- influencing an election for Federal office if Sec. 124 provides that notwithstanding ical committees not authorized by any can- it is given in response to a solicitation that any other provision of this Act or any other didate (other than political party commit- states or implies that it is to be used for law, a candidate may transfer any unex- tees) to include a clear statement that nei- that purpose, whether or not the gift or pended campaign funds for use with respect ther the committee nor the communication other item is characterized, in a document to any later election. is authorized by a candidate or under the or otherwise, as being for another purpose. control of a candidate. This section is de- Under this section, candidates and their rep- TITLE II-AMENDMENTS TO THE COMMUNICA- signed to prevent misleading solicitation resentatives may not circumvent the Act's TIONS ACT OF 1934 AND TITLE 39, UNITED practices by unauthorized organizations. limitations by soliciting contributions for STATES CODE "Specific Disclosure Requirements for one purpose and depositing such funds in an "Amendment to Section 312(a) of the Com- Certain Communications" account established for another use. munications Act of 1934, Relating to Dis- criminationAgainst Candidates" Sec. 117 amends 2 U.S.C. 441d to require "Coordinated Expenditures to Be Made any authorized political communication Only From Amounts Subject to the Federal Sec. 201 empowers the FCC to revoke any broadcast over a television station to include Election Campaign Act of 1971" station license or construction permit for Sec. 121 amends the F.E.C.A. to require willful or repeated discrimination against a a readily identifiable photographic or simi- of lar image of the candidate, shown for at coordinated expenditures under section candidate in the amount, class, or period 315(d) to consist only of amounts that as re- time made available to such candidate on least 4 seconds and of sufficient size to cover behalf of his candidacy. at least one-third of the television screen, ceived by the committee making the ex- accompanied by statement that the candi- penditure, are subject to limitation and re- "Amendment to Section 315 of the Commu- date takes full responsibility for the adver- porting under the Act, and are paid from an nications Act of 1934, Relating to Candi- tisement's content. The section also requires account that is subject to the Act's require- date Access" any unauthorized political communication ments. The section thereby assures that Sec. 202 requires licensees, in providing which is televised to display a continuous only funds raised in compliance with the access to use of a broadcasting station with statement, of sufficient size to be clearly Act are used to influence Federal elections. respect to a campaign, to give priority to le- visible to the viewer, identifying the person "Additional Exclusions from the Definitions gally qualified candidates for public office paying for the advertisement throughout of Contributionsand Expenditures" over other political users. It thereby ensures the communication's duration. Political Sec. 122 amends the F.E.C.A to exclude that broadcasters faced with a limited in- communications through newspapers, direct the following activities from the definitions ventory supply will make air-time available mail, radio and other media would be re- of "contributions" and "expenditures": any first to candidates and then to other politi- quired to include similar identifying infor- amount for a candidate for other than Fed- cal users. mation and, in the case of authorized com- eral office; any amount in connection with a The purpose of this subsection is to make munications, a statement indicating candi- State or local political convention; any cam- it clear that as between a purchase of time date acceptance of full responsibility. paign activity, including broadcasting, news- by a candidate or his committee on behalf 22200 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 of his candidacy and by oher political users, systems. No broadcast licensee or cable regulations of independent expenditures, the licensee or cable system is to give priori- system shall be found to have violated any and for other purposes. ty to a purchase by a candidate or his com- provision of the Federal Election Campaign mittee EXPENDITURE LIMITATIONS FORHOUSE on behalf of his candidacy. If other Act of 1971 or the Communications Act of CAMPAIGNS political users have already purchased 1934, as amended, because of the reasonable preemptible time, and a political candidate good faith decisions it makes and actions it Voluntary Spending Limits (Sec. 108): Be- or his committee desires to purchae the takes to implement the purposes of said sub- cause mandatory limitations on campaign same time at comparable rates, the other sections. expenditures were held unconstitutional in the controversial 1976 Supreme Court case political user's purchase shall be preempted "Amendments to Title 39, United States of Buckley v. Valeo, candidates must agree by the licensee or cable system in favor of Code, Relating to Postal Rates for Certain the candidate or candidate committee. It is Election Materials" to limit their spending voluntarily. the intent of this legislation that if the Under the proposal, candidates who other political user has purchased fixed Sec. 205 adds to 39 U.S.C. 369, providing choose to participate in the system would time desired by the candidate, the other po- postal rates to qualifying House of Repre- voluntarily limit their overall spending to litical user's purchase shall be preempted by sentatives candidates for first-class mail $550,000 for the election cycle. No more the licensee or cable system in favor of the matter of one-half of the rates currently in than $300,000 of that amount could be spent candidate or his committee. In any circum- effect, and for third-class bulk mail matter, in the primary, except in states where the stance in which a candidate or his commit- the same rates as the rates of postage for a primary election may be determinative, in tee and other political users have requested qualified political committee. These reduced which case there would be a primary cap of the purchase of time as yet unsold, the li- rates shall be made available only with re- $400,000. In addition, participating candi- censee or cable system shall sell that time to spect to matter mailed during the 90-day dates winning primary elections with less the candidate or his committee. period ending on the day before the date of than 66.7 percent of the total vote would be the election involved. The section also au- allowed a 30% spending bonus in the gener- "Amendment to Section 315 of the Commu- thorizes the reimbursement of the U.S. al election, provided that their total general nications Act of 1934, Relating to Use of Postal Service, through the Revenue For- election expenditures do not exceed BroadcastingStations by Candidates" gone appropriation, for any resulting reve- $550,000. (The maximum possible spending Sec. 203(a) amends the Communications nue loss. bonus would thus be $165,000). There would Act of 1934 to exclude debate between can- "Amendments to the Internal Revenue Code didates from the use of a broadcasting sta- be a separate limit of $100,000 for runoff of 1986 Relating to the Credit for Contri- elections. Each of these spending limits tion within the meaning of the subsection. butions to Qualifying House of Represent- would be adjusted for inflation every four Sec. 203(b) repeals the lowest unit rate re- atives Candidates" quirement and, in lieu thereof, provides that years. The bill provides an exemption from charges made for the use of any broadcast- Sec. 206 provides for a 100 percent credit, the spending limits for legal or accounting ing station by a legally qualified candidate up to a maximum credit for a taxable year fees. Finally, participating candidates would in connection with his campaign for nomi- of $50 ($100 in the case of a joint return), be prohibited from making expenditures de- nation or election shall not exceed the for in-state contributions to qualifying rived from person funds in excess of $75,000 charges for comparable use of such station House of Representatives candidates. The with respect to an election. Candidates must by other users. It also provides that in de- tax credit under this section shall apply to declare whether or not they wish to partici- termining charges to legally qualified candi- taxable years beginning after December 31, pate by the time of their state's filing dead- dates, a licensee must disregard any charge 1990, and would be allowed with respect to line; once a decision is made to opt in, it for special or nontypical commercial use by any qualified political contributions, only if cannot be revoked. other users. This section prohibits licensees such contribution is verified in such manner Benefits for Eligible Candidates: Candi- from establishing rates for candidates that as the Secretary shall prescribe by regula- dates abiding by spending limits would be are not normally extended to and used by tions. entitled to the following comunication bene- commercial advertisers. "Amendment to Section 1003 of the Internal fits: Sec. 203(c) requires licensees to Revenue Code of 1986" A. Reduced Broadcasting Costs (Sec. 203): make candidates would be entitled Sec. 207 amends the Internal Revenue Participating available additional time, without extra to one free TV or radio spot of comparable cost, to a qualifying House of Representa- Code of 1986 to prohibit presidential candi- value for every two paid for. This provision tives candidate who purchases at least 2 po- dates or their agents, as a condition of eligi- litical advertisements. The additional amounts to a one-third discount on broad- time bility to receive public funding of their cam- cast costs for candidates limiting their cam- to paigns, from soliciting or receiving, directly provided must be equal in market value paign spending. one-half of the total time purchased. or indirectly, any funds that are not subject B. Reduced Postage Costs (Sec. 205): Par- Sec. 203(d) states that licensees, in afford- to limitation and reporting under the Feder- ticipating candidates would be entitled to ing equal opportunities to candidates under al Election Campaign Act or are allocated to mail at either (1) one-half the first-class a non-Federal account or otherwise main- this subjection, are not required to make postage rate; or (2) the non-profit, bulk time available to a candidate without cost tained in, or paid from, an account that is third-class rate. Either option could be se- when additional time is made available to that Act. The section rein- free not subject lected for any given mailing. The postal rate of charge to a House candidate who is quali- forces provisions designed to prevent presi- reduction is available only during the 90 fying. dential candidates and their representatives days prior to an election. It the intent of this legislation that opera- from soliciting or receiving any funds not C. 100% Tax Credit for Small, In-State regulated by the Act. tors of cable systems shall make advertising Contributions (Sec. 206): Participating can- time available to political candidates or TITLE III-EFFECTIVE DATE their authorized committees on all cable didates would be allowed, in taxable years system channels sold, and on any public "Effective Date" beginning after December 31, 1990, to solicit access channel on which time would be Sec. 301 states that, except as otherwise contributions eligible for a credit. A 100% available to a member of the general public. provided, the amendments made by this Act tax credit would be provided for in-state shall apply with respect to elections for Fed- contributions to participating House candi- "Amendment to Section 315 of the Commu- eral office beginning with the general elec- dates of up to $50 (single return)/ $100 nications Act of 1934 Relating to Disclo- (joint return) per year. sure Requirements for Certain Political tion of November 3, 1992 (and any primary election relating to such). Removal of spending limits for a candi- Communications" date with non-participaing opponent (Sec. SUMMARY OF THE DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP Sec. 204 amends the Communications Act 108): The proposal removes the limits on CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM PACKAGE:THE personal funds and overall spending entirely of 1934 to prohibit licensees from allowing CAMPAIGN COST REDUCTION AND REFORM for a participating candidate when an oppo- the use of a broadcasting station for a com- ACT OF 1990 munication that is not in compliance with nent is not participating and raises or the disclosure requirements specified in sub- PURPOSE OF THE BILL spends more than $200,000. (The opponent sections (d), (e), (f), or (g) of section 318 of The purpose of H.R. 5400 is to amend the must notify the FEC within 72 hours upon the Federal Election Campaign Act. Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 and such event). Under the program, the partici- In resolving any disputes regarding deci- certain related laws to provide for a volun- pating candidate would still be afforded sions made or actions taken by broadcast li- tary system of spending limits for House media and postage benefits, thereby assur- censees or cable systems to implement sub- elections, to reduce campaign costs, to limit ing that those candidates who wish to limit sections (d), (e), (g), or (h) of Sec. 318 of the aggregate contributions from political com- their spending can do so without being put Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, the mittees, to restrict the use of "soft money", at a disadvanage relative to wealthy candi- FCC shall defer to the reasonable good to encourage increased participation by dates who are not participating in the faith judgments of said licensees and cable small contributors, to provide for greater system. August 3, 1990 CC)NGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOLrSE 22201 Penalties for Overspending (Sec. 108): or local committees of a political party, or made available with respect to their cam- Participating candidates who spend more making contributions not to exceed $1,000 paigns. than the limit, but less than 5% more, to any candidate for elective office. Allocation of Broadcast Time (Sec. 202): would be required to pay a penalty to the "SOFT MONEY" Broadcasters would be required to give pri- F.E.C., for deposit in the Treasury, equal to Soft Money Provisions ority to legally qualified candidates over the excess amount. For overspending by (Sees. 110, 114, 120, 1.21, 122, 123): The proposal takes other political users in allocating air-time. more than 5%, candidates would have to a multi- pronged approach to ensure pay three times the excess expenditure. For that only funds BUNDLING OF CONTRIBUTIONS raised and spent in compliance overspending by 10% more, the FEC could with the Prohibition of Bundling (Sec. 111): Contri- Act's limitations and restrictions impose additional penalties, over and above are used to butions would be counted against the limits influence elections for Federal office, there- triple payment of the excess expenditure. of both the original donor and any political by shutting the so-called "soft money" The system of spending limits that would loop- committee, or agent of a political commit- hole. First, it bans the be established by this bill serves several im- use of party funds tee, serving as intermediary. This provision raised outside the strictures of Federal law portant public interests. Such a system closes the "bundling" loophole that has for the purpose of influencing a Federal would facilitate communication by candi- enable certain individual and committees in election; any party communication or activi- dates with the electorate by lowering the effect to finance a favored candidate's cam- ty that refers to a Federal cost of broadcast time and postage, thus en- candidate must paign above and beyond what their contri- be paid entirely out of hand dollars even if hancing public discussion. Second, it would bution limits allow. state candidates are mentioned. Second, "co- reduce the risk of corruption and the ap- ordinated expenditures" must be paid out ADDITIONAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS pearance of corruption by diminishing the of funds raised in compliance with the Act. role of large private contributors. Finally, it Reporting by Party Committees and Large Third, presidential candidates accepting would relieve candidates of the burdens of Individual Donors (Sec. 123): State party public funds are prohibited, directly or indi- fundraising, thereby affording them more committees would be required to file with rectly, from soliciting or receiving any soft opportunity to address the issues and com- the FEC any report filed by the committee money. Fourth, the municate with the voters. proposal prohibits other under State law as well as such supplemen- Federal candidates from soliciting funds on tary material as the Commission may re- LIMITATION AND REFORM OF POLITICAL behalf of their election campaigns and de- COMMITTEES quire to assure compliance with the Act. positing any such amounts in an account Also, each national party committee must Establishment of Small Donor Commit- not regulated by the Act. Fifth, the propos- file a statement of all receipts and disburse- tees (Sec. 119): The proposal eliminates spe- al prohibits the conversion of state cam- ments, including those for non-Federal pur- cial contribution limits in the law for "mul- paign funds to Federal use. Finally, it re- poses. In addition, the measure requires in- ticandidate" political committees (common- quires the full disclosure by state and na- dividual making contributions aggregating ly referred to as "PACs") and, in lieu there- tional party committees of all soft money $20,000 or more, but less than $25,000 in a of, provides for the creation of "Small receipts and disbursements. calendar year to report their names and the Donor" Committees. Small Donor Commit- INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURES amount and recipient of each such contribu- tees are defined as political committees that Independent Expenditures by Connected tion within 7 days. Individuals making con- have been registered for at least 6 months, Political Committees (Sec. 115): The ability tributions aggregating $25,000 must report have made contributions to 5 or more Fed- to the Commission the above mentioned in- eral candidates and which restrict their of corporate, labor union and trade associa- tion PACs to underwrite the administrative formation with respect to contributions not fundraising to individual contributions of previously reported. $240 or less per year. and solicitation costs of independent ex- Contribution Limits for Small Donor penditures with treasury funds would be OTHER MAJOR PROVISIONS eliminated. Committees (Sec. 119): Small Donor Com- The entire cost of these expend- Elimination of Presidential State-by-State itures would mittees would be allowed to contribute have to be paid out of the po- Expenditure Limits (Sec. 107): The proposal litical committee's own funds. This provi- $5,000 per election to authorized candidate eliminates state-by-state spending limits for sion in no way prohibits the establishment committees. (Political committees not quali- presidential candidates accepting public of separate segregated fying as small donor committees would be funds for other polit- funding. National expenditure limits are in allowed to contribute only $1,000 per elec- ical purposes. no way changed. Definition of "Independent Expenditure" tion). Encouragement Amounts To Be Treated Aggregate Limitation on PAC Contribu- (Sec. 106): The definition of "independent as Contributions (Sec. 112): The measure tions (Sec. 109): House of Representatives expenditure" would be tightened to prevent provides for the treating of amounts donat- candidates would be prohibited from accept- arrangement or coordination between the ed to a prospective candidate as contribu- ing more than 50 percent ($275,000) of the person or committee making the expendi- tions whether or not said individual be- spending limit in contributions from politi- ture and any candidate. comes a candidate. Disclaimers on Independent Communica- cal action committees with respect to an State Part Contribution Loophole (Sec. tions (Sec. 117): The proposal requires inde- election cycle. This applies to both partici- 113): The total amount of contributions a pating and nonparticipating candidates. pendent expenditure television ads to in- candidate for Federal office may accept in clude a continuous message, clearly visible Funds carried over from previous cam- an election from a state or local committee to the viewer, that identifies the name of paigns, irrespective of their original con- (including any subordinate committee) of a tributory source, are not counted against the person or committee responsible for the political party would be limited to $5,000. advertisement and indicates that the broad- this aggregate limitation. This provision prohibits state and local cast was not authorized by any candidate. Congress is concerned with the significant party committees from acting as conduits and increase in the amount of money contribut- Newspaper, radio, billboard, direct mail for the circumvention of contribution limi- also be ed by political action committees to candi- other public communications woud tations. to include prominent disclaimers. dates, and in the ratio of these contribu- required Disclosure in Solicitations by Unauthor- tions to the total contributions received by PROVISIONS RELATING TO CANDIDATE USE OF ized Committees (Sec. 116): The measure re- such candidates. The imposition of a ceiling BROADCAST TIME quires communications by political commit- on aggregate contributions from such com- Negative Campaign Advertising (Sec. 117): tees not authorized by any candidate (other mittees would preserve the integrity of the In order to encourage less negative cam- than political party committees) to include election process, preventing corruption and paigns, the proposal requires authorized tel- a statement that neither the committee nor the appearance of corruption. evision ads to include (whether the candi- the communication is authorized by a candi- Leadership PACs (Sec. 105): Federal can- date personally appears in the ad or not) a date or under the control of a candidate. didates would be prohibited from establish- photographic image of the candidate along This will prevent misleading solicitation ing, maintaining or controlling a political with a statement indicating that the candi- practices by unauthorized organizations. committee other than an authorized com- date "takes full responsibility" for the ad- Prohibition of Fraudulent Solicitations mittee or a committee of a political party. vertisement's content. Candidate communi- (Sec. 118): The measure prohibits the fraud- For one year after the effective date of this cations through other media, such as radio, ulent solicitation of campaign contributions; Act, any such political committee may con- newspapers and direct mail, must include no person may raise funds by falsely repre- tinue to make contributions. At the end of similar statements of responsibility. senting himself as a candidate or as an that period such political committee would Broadcast Discrimination Against Candi- agent of a candidate, political party or other be required to disburse all funds by one or dates (Sec. 201): The Federal Communica- political committee. more of the following means: making contri- tion Commission would be empowered to Effective Date (Sec. 301): Except as other- butions to a 501(c)(3) organization; making revoke any station license or permit for will- wise provided, the legislation takes effect a contribution to the treasury of the United ful or repeated discrimination against candi- with respect to elections for Federal office States; contributing to the national, State dates in the amount, class, or period of time beginning with the 1992 election cycle. 22202 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 Mr. Chairman, I reserve the remain- Chamber should not be for sale-not to the with me to Swift 1-and the gentle- der of my time. special interests, not to anyone, not at any man from Washington prefers that time. the modification be Swift 1.1. I was de- O 1740 We all have different ideas on how we need bating Swift and not-so-Swift, but I Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr. to reform it. Those ideas deserve legitimate, will accept his Swift 1 and Swift 1.1. Chairman, I yield such time as he may substantive debate-not partisanship. If Members recall under Swift 1, consume to the gentleman from New I urge my colleagues in the leadership, on some group of Democrats decided that Jersey [Mr. RINALDO]. both sides of the aisle, to renew their efforts there ought to be criminal penalties Mr. RINALDO. Mr. Chairman, there is no to enact meaningful reform. for overspending in their liberal more important issue now before Congress We deserve it. Our constituents deserve it. spending structure. As Members recall, than campaign reform. For that reason, I And the institution deserves it. after those Democrat Members who regret that the efforts undertaken a year and a Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr. wanted a little freer operation spoke half ago have given way to partisan politics in- Chairman, I yield myself such time as for Swift 1.1, that portion of Swift 1 stead of a meaningful, bipartisan bill. I may consume. was struck. Make no mistake: We need reform. We I would have liked to have had a If Members will recall, originally need a good, comprehensive, fair bill. And we general debate on each of the number some Democrats wanted to ban regis- need it now. of positions that the gentleman from tered lobbyists from bundling and de- Probably every Member of this Chamber Washington has articulated as part of livering money. But at the eleventh has been the subject of an editorial about the Democrat campaign plan. We on hour, those who wanted a little looser fundraising-about the role of money in poli- our side of the aisle went through a structure said, "Strike that." tics and in our own campaigns-and we are very arduous process trying to deter- Originally, some folks wanted to ban all familiar with the innuendo and insinuation mine what we thought would be an ap- that it is the special interests with the biggest slate cards financed by corporations, propriate campaign reform position, unions, and millionaires. But guess bank rolls who really call the shots. not just a single item, but a compre- what? There are some folks who oper- That is unfair. It is untrue. And we all know hensive package. it. As I indicated on the debate on the ate with straight cards, and they did But what do we do about it? rule, I think we could have come to an not want that hampering the good old How do we convince your constituents and agreement on a number of those areas, way of doing business. So what hap- mine that Congress isn't for sale? How do we as we have done in the past. Unfortu- pened? That was struck from Swift 1. prove to them that the system really does nately, we had no opportunity to con- And that is what produced Swift 1.1. work and that it is not driven by money? sider this legislation under the com- But more important than that, some The last thing we should do is get bogged mittee structure-a structure in which Members sat dovn and said, "Look, down in partisan politics and start pointing fin- we have taken testimony in the past- what you are doing after all is limiting gers across the aisle, blaming each other for and we have never sat down in what us, and we don't want to be limited blocking reform. we call a markup and made the tough quite as much as you indicate we Unfortunately, that is what we are engaged decisions. Instead, the Democrats got should be limited." So where Swift 1 in doing, instead of taking the opportunity and together on their side and decided had $550,000, Swift 1.1, if they get less passing a substantive bill. what they wanted, Republicans got to- than 66.7 percent of the vote, limits We all know reform will not be easy. I think gether on their side and decided what them to $715,000. the efforts of our colleagues since the begin- we wanted. Now, what normally hap- Now, the gentleman from Illinois ning of last year have proven that. pens in the usual legislative process is [Mr. HAYES] said he was concerned What we need is political leadership-from after Members do that, we then come about whether or not he should really the President and from the Speaker and from together and discuss the relative support this bill because he won his the majority and minority leaders in the House merits and pick and choose between election with a lot of union PAC and in the other body. That is the kind of lead- the two positions. We are not going to money. It is perfectly legal to take ership that will produce a realistic, fair, effec- do that here today because the Demo- union PAC money. But one of the tive bill. crats did not write a rule that would things that has been discussed is how But let us not kid anybody: We all know that provide Members an opportunity to do much PAC money is in the system. I we are not going to write a meaningful bill that. indicated to Members that one of the here on the House floor. True reform will be Oftentimes, the Democrats tell most comprehensive recent studies in- the product of bipartisan negotiations, not par- Members that Republicans are irrele- dicated that although the American tisan bickering. And it is going to take conces- vant. Oftentimes, we decide ourselves public is concerned about how much sions from both sides of the aisle. we are irrelevant to the process. money we spend, they are more con- We all know what happens without it. Frankly, that is not true. cerned about the question of influ- We give people a perfect opportunity to I happen to serve on the Committee ence. Who controls the amount of continue denigrating the institution and the on Ways and Means as another one of PAC money? And the gentleman from system and their elected representatives. my assignments, and more often than Washington is advertising the Demo- We should not allow that to happen. not, Democrats on that committee crat plan as the Campaign Cost Re- We are never going to remove all money have come to me and said, "Thank duction Act of 1990. from politics. goodness you were in the room when Well, under current law in the 1988 When I first ran for Congress in 1972, my we decided on the policy because you general election cycle, $99.1 million campaign cost about $100,000. saved us from ourselves," and that, in was collected by Democrat and Repub- But just 10 years later, I was faced with a fact, better legislation comes out of lican general election candidates from tremendous challenge. the process of accommodation and PAC's. What would happen if the I had an opponent who was independently compromise than that legislation that Campaign Cost Reduction Act of 1990 wealthy. He was instrumental in gerrymander- Democrats or even Republicans can goes into effect? In terms of contribu- ing my State. And he went on to spend $2.3 write by themselves. tions from PAC's $223.6 million would million against me in an effort to win a seat in So let Members now revisit, once be available. That is the Campaign this Chamber. It is the largest amount of again, the legislation that we have in Cost Reduction Act of 1990 in regard money ever spent by a congressional candi- front of Members, that the Democrats to PAC receipts. date in the history of our country. are so proud of, that they believe is The gentleman from Illinois should I didn't spend nearly that much-in fact, I comprehensive campaign finance not worry, there is plenty of room for was outspent by 3 to 1. reform, although it has been altered his folk. But there is something wrong in a system just as recently as 24 hours ago. If In addition to that, we have talked that allows that to happen. Seats in this Members recall, and return once again about spending limits, that what this August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 22203 proposal is going to do is put a cap on O 1750 mary can get you elected, and it's outrageous total spending. OK, sounds Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from counted as a general. They you can good. Is it as advertised? Let Members Washington [Mr. SWIFT] wanted to spend $400,000." take a look at the Campaign Cost Re- talk about soft money. He says the However, Mr. Chairman, when my duction Act of 1990 and take a look at Democrats disclose. He is absolutely colleagues put all of this mishmash to- the current law, 1988. Now, I left out correct. The Republican provision gether, what it says is that in a gener- third party candidates, but they really does not disclose. I say to my col- al election in the very same race it is skew the amount. There is a lot of leagues, "You don't disclose what you possible that one person could have them, but very little money involved. ban. The only reason you disclose it is $550,000 to spend, and someone else We are dealing with Republicans and because you allow it." would only have $250,000. That is the Democrats, the major candidates. We Now, my colleagues, let us take a bottom end; arbitrariness carried to an took a look at the Republican and look at what the Democrats allow, be- extreme. Democrat incumbents under the 1988 cause they really do not eliminate soft However, Mr. Chairman, the Demo- election law, and found how much was money. They allow administrative ex- crats do not stop there. Take a look at spent: $156 million. Under Swift 1, the penses of a State or local committee of the media section. If one is going to first Campaign Cost Reduction Act, a political party, including expenses get the free time, they are going to say $226.5 million would be allowed to be for overhead and staff. They allow to that person, "You've got to run a 4- spent. But, hey, wait a minute. Re- maintenance of voter files. They allow second spot on one-third of the member in the last 24 hours we went any amount in connection with a State screen." from Swift 1 to Swift 1.1? Under Swift or local political convention. They 1.1, if we get less than two-thirds of Mr. Chairman, I ask, "Why wasn't it allow any amount in a so-called build- 3 seconds? Why wasn't it 2 seconds? the primary vote, we will be able to ing fund that allows unlimited corpo- spend more. Why wasn't it 10 seconds?" These rate, union, and political dollars to pay people decided on 4 seconds. That is So let Members look at the refined for party offices and any fixed equip- Campaign Cost Act of 1990. Under the the way it is going to be. No hearing, ment. That is, anything that can be at- no discussion from people, no talk Swift 1.1, they can now spend $294.6 tached to the floor: computers an all million, an increase of 89 percent over about what may or may not be appro- of that. In addition, remember they priate. Let us pick a number, and that 1988 expenditures. They want to sell just added slate cards as part of Swift the name, Campaign Cost Reduction is what we deal with. 1.1. Now let us talk about public financ- Act of 1990, but that is not what it Mr. Chairman, let us talk about does. The other thing that disturbs me ing in the Swift bill because it has got transfers. The gentleman from Florida it. Now everybody is focusing on a lot is that in the committee system is very concerned about Member to we do good work. Everyone of the Synar-Obey, and they are talking Member transfers in terms of influ- about the direct Treasury contribution Members spends time in committee; ence peddling. We have seen more and we look at the work product; we go in terms of matching funds, and that more of it. It has become a habit. I do is public financing. It reminds me of into sessions; we attack it; we call in not think it is very good. The gentle- people to give testimony on it; and that Gary Larson cartoon of that mos- man from Florida [Mr. BENNETT] does quito that is swelling up enormously guess what? Many times we see por- not think it is very good. I have to tell because he struck an artery, and the tions of the bill in a different light the gentleman from Florida [Mr. BEN- phrase is, "Pull out, pull out." Yet after people have talked to Members NETT] that his party's plan allows about what that particular measure Members to contribute to other Mem- Synar-Obey hits the artery of the might really do. I cannot believe the bers. Yes, it bans leadership PAC's but Public Treasury, direct Federal fund- Democrats meant to do what they do it allows Members to control State and ing for elections. in their bill. For example, the bill says local party committees, and, in fact, However, Mr. Chairman, I say to my there is only one kind of a committee. take from their own committee and colleagues, "Don't think Swift 1.1 It is a small donor committee, and a give to other committees. I do not doesn't deal with it." Take a look at small donor committee is defined as think that really gets to the heart of the postage section. Every time you anyone who runs a PAC that accepts a the problem. buy a stamp, the Federal Government contribution no greater than $240. Mr. Chairman, the plan of the gen- is going to subsidize the other half of That PAC is able to contribute $5,000. tleman from Illinois [Mr. MICHEL] it, if you agree to Swift 1.1. It's called But if any anybody gives $240 or more, says, "No transfers, not between revenue foregone. That means the they have violated the small donor Member to Member, not between lead- Treasury shall pay. definition. Therefore, they can only ership, not between PAC's. You don't In a few minutes we will be looking give $1,000. move money sideways." at the Michel substitute. It offers Guess what is included in the defini- Mr. Chairman, let us talk about limits. They are not arbitrary fixed tion "political committee," as the way spending limits. My colleagues have limits. They are not bribedl limits it is written? The Democratic Party, if seen from Swift 1 to Swift 1.1 that the using Treasury subsidies. But they are it accepts oneontributionio over $240, target moved from $550,000 to meaningful limits. The limits in the can give only $1,000. Now, that is true $715,000. But, is it not fun sitting Michel amendment are local. The of the Republican Party as well, but I around arbitrarily determining how Michel amendment says a majority of cannot believe anyone would write a much money someone can spend in a funds must come from the people who piece of legislation that would treat campaign regardless of the fact that are in the area. It says, "You can't the national political parties in the the district which one represents is an take a dime from a PAC. You can't same way that they were going to urban district, a major metropolitan take a dime from Washington until treat political action committees. I city, or it is a rural district, or it is an the people back home give you that would have to think that is a mistake, entire State, or it is a suburban rural dime." but remember we still have the Synar- mix, or it covers 20,000 square miles, Mr. Chairman, that is real change. Obey amendment to come. That would or it covers 60,000 square miles? Some- That is fundamental change. That is limit the political parties, if they ac- body had the arrogance to sit down enabling change. This is not playing cepted a contribution more than $240, and say, "This is how much you are games with limits, or allowing people to $500 as a contribution from the Na- going to spend. It's $550,000, unless, of to continue to do what we have been tional Democratic Party to a candi- course, you don't get two-thirds of the doing. date, or the Republican National vote in the primary. Then it's My colleagues want fundamental Party to a candidate. $715,000. You can spend $300,000 in change. Please, my colleagues, we have Now, we will talk about Swift 1. the primary, unless, of course, the pri- not had a chance to talk about it, but, 22204 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 please, let us take a look at the idea of Mr. Chairman, the Republican sub- termine how much is going to be allowing local control of campaign fi- stitute is not a comprehensive, point- spent. nance. by-point reputation of the Democrat I know that is novel and revolution- The gentleman from Washington proposal. We would have liked to have ary. [Mr. SWIFT] said that the difference had the ability to have each of the Mr. ANTHONY. Mr. Chairman, I between Swift 1 and Swift 1.1 was im- major sections set aside in a separate thank the gentleman from California provement. Let me tell my colleagues position, had the Democrat position [Mr. THOMAS] for answering those that he must think Frankenstein is an offered and they debate between the questions. improvement over Adam. Maybe he two. That has not been available to us thinks Roseanne Barr sings the na- under the rule, and so what we have O 1800 tional anthem better than Beverly offered, as a substitute, is going to the Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr. Sills because, if Swift 1.1 is an im- heart of the contentious areas. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the provement, then please deliver me The gentleman is a member of the gentlewoman from Nevada [Mrs. from improvements. task force, and he knows that we VUCANOVICH], a member of the sub- Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, for pur- agreed on a number of areas. The committee that would have heard this poses of debate only, I yield 4 minutes titles of those areas are contained in legislation had it been brought to the to the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. the Democrat proposal. For example, subcommittee and the full committee. ANTHONY]. the bundling area. I think we could Mrs. VUCANOVICH. Mr. Chairman, Mr. have ANTHONY. Mr. Speaker, I come to an agreement, but, I thank the gentleman for yielding thank the gentleman from Washing- rather than us waiting until the last this time to me. ton [Mr. SWIFT] for yielding. minute, remember we had only until Mr. Chairman, I rise First, Mr. Chairman, I would like to Midnight to come up with our propos- today in strong engage the gentleman from Washing- al. The other folks were changing opposition to the bill H.R. 5400, the ton [Mr. SWIFT] in a colloquy pertain- their positions until the last minute. Campaign Cost Reduction and Reform ing to section 105 of his proposal pro- Had we had a month or so to sit down Act of 1990. Let me make it perfectly hibiting the so-called leadership after they set their structure, we set clear that I support campaign reform PAC's. It contains a transitional our structure, we would have been legislation. However, we have not had period to permit these committees to willing to confront point by point. a chance to refine this measure in a spend down the money in their ac- What we have are the heart of the true bipartisan spirit. counts. That 1-year transitional period difference between us. It is a question First, this bill takes insufficient is triggered by the effective date of of spending limits, a question of steps toward limiting PAC contribu- the act. Can you, as the author of the PAC's. We do not have a comprehen- tions. Members of Congress are al- bill, tell us what that effective date is? sive, point by point reputation. We ready perceived by the general public Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, will the could work out bundling and those as marionettes dancing under strings gentleman yield? other are as if we sit down and work manipulated by the fingers of special Mr. ANTHONY. I yield to the gen- together. interest groups. In order to correct tleman from Washington. Mr. ANTHONY. Mr. Chairman, re- this perception, we need real PAC Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, for the claiming my time, I take the gentle- reform, not just language that con- purposes of section 105, the effective man's answers to be that, no, those tains the letters, "P", "A", and "C". date will be November 3, 1992, which is three things that he criticized us for Establishing two types of PAC does the only date certain provided for in striking are not in the Republican sub- nothing more than discriminate the bill. Thus, these committees will stitute. against smaller organizations and in have 1 year from that date-or until Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr. favor of large, broadbased, interests. November 3, 1993, to spend down their Chairman, will the gentleman contin- Today, we passed the civil rights bill. funds. During that 1-year period these ue to yield? Now, we turn around and say its OK committees will not be permitted to re- Mr. ANTHONY. I yield to the gen- to choke one organization's resources ceive any contributions but will only tleman from California. but not another's. These groups are be allowed to make contributions and Mr. THOMAS of California. But we not inanimate objects, Mr. Chairman, expenditures. Further, I expect that have one of those in ours. It is just they are composed of the same people this will be clarified by the work of like our question. We were similar we voted to protect just a few hours the conference committee. there. When they changed theirs, we ago. Either we cut all PAC contribu- Mr. ANTHONY. Mr. Chairman, the became different. They allow it. We do tions or we cut none. gentleman from California [Mr. not. Additionally, I understand that an THOMAS], my good friend, was making Mr. ANTHONY. The second ques- amendment will be offered by the ma- some points about changes in the tion: Looking through your substitute, jority party to match individual con- Swift proposal, the Democratic leader- and the gentleman has a chart show- tributions through direct public fi- ship campaign finance reform pack- ing how much money could be collect- nancing. That means the taxpayer age. If the gentleman would, I have ed and spent on our side because we again, I remind my colleagues of just got a few questons I would like to have a cap of $550,000. I find no cap in today's earlier events. We have just ask because he showed a chart that their bill. I assume that there is no cap voted to raise the short-term debt ceil- had 3 years that were stricken on our in their bill. ing and now, not more than a few side of the aisle after we had internal Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr. hours later, we are considering creat- debate, time to think about it, and we Chairman, will the gentleman yield? ing yet another Government program thought that it was best to strike it Mr. ANTHONY. I yield to the gen- funded through the U.S. Treasury. out. The gentleman's statement on the tleman from California. The citizens of this great country are floor made me think that he thought Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr. asking for campaign reform, not addi- those provisions should have stayed in Chairman, the cap is, I think, the best tional spending programs. the Democratic bill, and I was just cu- cap of all. How much local people who It is time that we got serious about rious whether or not they are in the can actually vote determine should be campaign reform. It is time we stop Republican substitute. spent in a campaign. No, we do not sending mixed messages to the Ameri- Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr. have an arbitrary amount. No, we do can people. I urge my colleagues to Chairman, I apologize to the gentle- not dictate what can be done or oppose this legislation in its current man for not yielding at the end of my cannot be done regardless of the size form. statement. I had intended to do, and I of the district. We say, "Let the people Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, for pur- forgot. who actually vote in the campaign de- poses of debate only, I yield 2 minutes August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOU SE 22205 to the gentlewoman from Maryland tees-$275,000 per election cycle or In Chinese history there is a theory [Mrs. BYRON]. with a pretense of greater discipline of revolution based upon a mandate of Mrs. BYRON. Mr. Chairman, let me $225,000 under the Obey-Synar ap- heaven. A government may legitimate- say first of all that I have watched for proach. The party that used to proud- ly be overthrown only when the man- the last 20 years on a personal basis ly proclaim it was the party of reform date is removed as signaled by natural the escalation of campaign costs. You in American politics has come forth phenomena like droughts, floods, and know, in 1905 was the first time this with the embarrassingly self-centered hurricanes. Congress addressed campaign financ- notion that labor PAC's which it re- The unanswered question of the ing. I had a relative in this body at ceives by a 40 to 1 rate more than the 1990's is whether the American people that time. Republican Party should be less are in the process of concluding that Once again in 1925, we addressed shackled than business PAC's which conflicts of interest that cost real campaign financing, and then in 1971, more evenly divide their largess. people real money are of earthquake reform Yet it is self-evident that Democratic a major campaign financial proportions; whether the mandate of was voted on by this House. self-serving ensconces the status quo legitimacy ought to be removed from We as Members of this House under- and provides an invitation for the con- stand more than anyone else what tinuance of legal, although dubiously the current political system. campaign costs can be. This legisla- ethical, conflicts of interest. It is my conviction that the Ameri- tion, which began as a bipartisan What America needs is a Congress can people want and deserve change. effort in February 1989, today comes indebted to the individual citizens who They want and deserve revolution. In- before us with an enormous amount of click the voting levers, not to the stead they are being served up the work on both sides of the aisle. money groups which tilt the levers of status quo. No one cannot say it has not been power. For those who believe politics should looked at, because it has. Here, let me stress, never in the his- be the art of representation, not the When we try to put together legisla- tory of the Congress has there been a art of electoral manipulation, the ap- tion to address a rural district, an greater cause celebre for campaign proach before us should be defeated urban district, a metropolitan district, reform than the S&L debacle. Con- and a conference established with the the issues are not always the same; but gress, particularly the committee Senate that combines the best of the I think the legislation before us today system, has let America down. Republican approach to limiting addresses many of those issues. In the 1980's alleged defenders of PAC's with the best of the Obey-Synar What is a voluntary limit, all Mem- the little guy in American politics approach to limiting spending. bers and challengers must agree. transformed an industry created under True reform must be radical and bi- It has PAC reform. What is a PAC? Franklin Roosevelt to serve the small partisan, not marginal and one-sided. It is nothing but an outgrowth of saver and average homeowner into a small individual donors to contribute privileged preserve where a moneyed O 1810 to the political system. elite could play investment roulette Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I yield So today before us, this evening, late with taxpayer-insured deposits. myself 30 seconds. in the session, it is once again time to Now, today, as the 1990's commence, If I could have the attention of my readdress this issue. I think the Swift these same alleged defenders of the friend, the gentleman from California, proposal meets the needs of campaign little guy are suggesting that the I would like to ask whether he would reform. system that produced the biggest scan- be so kind as to let us use his graphics. It is time, as we did in 1971, to move dal in American history be tinkered Would that be permissible for us to forward. with rather than reformed, and tilted have them set up in the well? Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr. to favor the same incumbents who let Mr. THOMAS of California. If the Chairman, for purposes of debate America down so expensively in the gentleman will yield, yes, if I can find only, I yield 5 minutes to the gentle- last decade. them. man from Iowa [Mr. LEACH] one These same defenders of the little Mr. SWIFT. We do not need them Member who has always been associat- guy are today suggesting that big now, and we would have time with a ed with positive, progressive, campaign money should continue to be the couple of other speakers, but I just finance reform. mother's milk of American politics, wanted to see if I could get permission Mr. LEACH of IOWA. Mr. Chair- that money folks count more than the to use the gentleman's graphics. man, I thank the gentleman for yield- silent middle class which places a pri- Mr. THOMAS of California. Certain- ority on making mortgage payments ing this time to me. ly. We will try to find them and work over contrib- Since first running for Congress 16 and paying school tuition it out for the gentleman. uting to candidates. years ago in the shadow of Watergate, Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, for pur- This body must come to understand I have consistently urged bipartisan min- support for campaign reform. that at the root of the S&L problem is poses of debate only, I yield 31/2 I am convinced that the role of spe- weak law and that at the root of weak utes to the gentleman from North cial interest PAC's must be limited in law was not a collusive attempt of ill- Carolina [Mr. PRICE.] order that individual citizens may be willed legislators to defraud the Mr. PRICE. Mr. Chairman, I think it empowered to the maximum extent public, but rather of well-intentioned is important in undertaking this possible under our representative members operating under the rubric debate to step back a bit from all the democratic system. of politics as usual. confusing detail that is in these com- Today, after more than a decade of It is the system that has perverted peting proposals and ask ourselves congressional avoidance, after a scan- judgment, not the individual who has what we really are trying to accom- dal of unprecedented magnitude-the perverted the system. Hence the need plish, what we ought to really be striv- $20 a month bill this Congress has for reform of a campaign system that ing for in campaign finance reform. placed on the average American allowed the S&L industry to give $1.8 It seems to me there are four princi- family for the next 30 years to pay for million to candidates in the last elec- ples, four goals, that we ought to keep the S&L bailout-the majority party tion cycle while losing over 100,000 before us. The first is to limit spiraling continues to put its head in the trough times that amount in federally insured campaign spending. The Swift propos- of political piggery. deposits. Taxpayers who are being al does that. It establishes a spending It has brought forth a bill that is a asked to pay the congressional piper limit of $550,000 for House campaigns, sham and a shame. demand that this kind of return on po- and it reduces mail and broadcast It is a sham because it proposes a no- litical investments be stopped, once costs for those who accept this limit. limit limit on political action commit- and for all. The proposal thus provides realistic 22206 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 cost containment, but it still permits had it come through the committee divides the PAC's into two groups. full and effective campaigns. system. Whole multitudes of so-called small We have made a reasonable adjust- Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. Chairman, I giver PAC's are now enfranchised as ment upward in permitted spending thank the gentleman for yielding me opposed to PAC's whose membership for the campaign cycle when a candi- this time. may give in fewer numbers but larger date has a contested primary. That is Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to amounts. One you can give $5,000 and as it should be. the legislation offered by the gentle- another $1,000. Second, true campaign reform man from Washington [Mr. SWIFT], Mr. Chairman, I suspect it will take should provide for a healthy diversity who is my chairman and a friend and the PAC organizations just about 1 of funds. Our proposal, the Swift pro- colleague, and in rather wondrous but week to simply add more folks to their posal, does not eliminate any class of very skeptical awe in opposition to the organizations, and that will be that. donors, but it does provide for a better amendment offered by the gentleman We have 12, 12 PAC's that this af- balance among small contributors, from Oklahoma [Mr. SYNAR] and the fects, and we went through how many large contributors, parties, and politi- gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. OBEY] PAC's do we have-I ask the gentle- cal action committees. This is especial- and in support of the Republican ly true of the Synar-Obey amendment reform package. man from California [Mr. THOMAS]-I which limits PAC's, especially large- Mr. Chairman, we should simply think it is in the thousands, about donor PAC's, further, lessens the role have gone home. I do not think there 4,000, and about 2,900 that actually of large individual contributors, and is any useful purpose that can be give, and we found 12 that this will makes up the difference with a modest served here at this point but, never- affect. Well, so much for reform. amount of public funding financed theless, I am going to carry on for What is the limit for this segregated through the tax-checkoff system. It is about 5'/2 minutes, and as a member of reform? $275,000. This is a far greater no solution simply to limit the amount the Subcommittee on Elections, I had amount than most people receive from raised or spent, unless we resign our- at one time the fervent hope that the PAC's now, and of course, you can roll selves in the age of television to simply gentleman from Washington [Mr. the PAC contributions over to the not reaching thousands of our voters. SWIFT], the gentleman from Califor- next election year, and it does not No, we must have full and effective nia [Mr. THOMAS], and the rest of my count on next year's limit. You campaigns but we must ensure that colleagues on the subcommittee would washed that. It is now clean. This is they are financed from a healthy di- hold hearings and work under very, just in the bank, and if it is PAT ROB- versity of sources. very difficult circumstances, I know ERTS, the PAT ROBERTS for Congress Our third goal ought to be to en- that, to try and hammer out a biparti- Fund, although I do not get that courage small contributors, to encour- san campaign reform package. much in PAC's. This is worse than age broad participation. The Swift I think there are some areas of business as usual. proposal does this in numerous ways, agreement as has been indicated by You wanted to end the practice of such as tax credits for individuals giv- the gentleman from California [Mr. endless receptions, endless calls, end- ing up to $50 to House candidates in- THOMAS]. One is to obviously reduce less special interests, tugs of war? The State, and a preferred position for the influence of PAC's; we have the only thing we are going to do here now PAC's that limit contributions from transfer problem and the bundling is guarantee more memberships to individuals to $240 a year. problem, or challenge, if you want to Common Cause, more justified grist Synar-Obey further encourages this call it that, and certainly streamlining for their reform mill and that of by tying the public match to small the FEC; we could do that, and, yes, others who are in the reform business, contributions. In other words, we en- even spending limits, and, yes, even and enough righteous indignation to courage financial participation by or- soft money. last Fred Wertheimer at least a life- dinary voters to ensure it will be I say to the gentleman from Wash- time. mainly money from these sources that ington [Mr. SWIFT] that I apologize Throughout this exercise, you have finances our campaigns. for referring to him while he is talking wanted to limit spending and you have Finally, true campaign reform to the chairman. I was going to ask if a limit of $550,000, unless, of course, should encourage accountability and he really thought that this was the you do not get two-thirds of the vote, prevent abuses. Again, the Swift pro- proper way to do this in terms of a and then you raise the cap, but very posal does this in several ways. It task force as opposed to the subcom- little is said about the tremendous ad- tightens up the soft-money loophole mittee and the committee. I worked vantage that we, as incumbents, have for legiti- Washington while providing exceptions with the gentleman from in this body. mate State party activity on behalf of [Mr. SWIFT] on something called Let us now take one we have all the ticket. It discourages unaccount- motor voter registration. I got on the grown to love and to cherish and to able "independent expenditures" and motor voter bus. I think it ended up in requires a prominent disclaimer in ad- the ditch, and I got off the motor protect and use, and that is the frank- vertisements financed from these voter bus, but we at least made an ing privilege. It has been estimated sources. It prohibits bundling. It dis- effort, and I had really hoped that we that the franking privilege and all courages negative campaign advertis- could do this through the subcommit- that goes with it, the postal patrons ing by requiring a disclaimer from the tee and the full committee process and the questionnaires and the news- sponsoring candidate. rather than the task force. letters, the columns and the public We limit spending. We provide a Having said that, we have, instead, meeting notices is worth at least healthy diversity of funds and encour- bundled up what I call an incumbent's $500,000 to any incumbent. I know age small contributors, and we encour- protection package and called it just a little bit about this, because as a age accountability and prevent abuses. reform. The No. 1 issue of concern, it member of the House Administration That is true campaign reform. It is a seems, for everybody interested in Committee, I have to approve a virtual comprehensive bill, a responsible bill. campaign reform is to do something army of part-time employees for the It deserves the strong support of ev- with these evil PAC's. PAC's are a Doorkeeper of the House just to move eryone in this House. four-letter word. I do not really buy this stuff out during even-numbered Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr. that, but at least the Republican plan years. Chairman, for purposes of debate is simple and effective. It reduces the only, I yield 7 minutes to the gentle- PAC contribution from $5,000 down to 0 1820 man from Kansas [Mr. ROBERTS], a $1,000. And we have a 60-day delay and an- member of the subcommittee that The plan offered by the majority other 60-day delay, which means all of would have considered this legislation under the small-is-beautiful banner, that vital, important material that August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 22207 goes out to our constituents, it is only from Ohio, somebody I respect a great example of public financing of politi- 120 days late. But never mind. deal, and I would love to know what is cal campaigns in the history of the Our bill at least makes a stab at on his mind under the banner of United States. I beg to differ. The first franking reform and quarterly reports reform. example was the New England town that involve public disclosure on a Mr. ECKART. Mr. Chairman, with meeting, because the only means of Member-by-Member basis. But you say that great introduction, I would then communication then was the town to the challenger under your plan that have to not make all of the kind state- hall, and the taxpayer paid for it. you accept a spending limit that ments I would have made about my Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 simply guarantees my reelection with colleague and get straight to the point minutes to the gentleman from Illinois all of the advantages I have, paid for of my question. [Mr. ANNUNZIO], chairman of the by the taxpayer. If you do not, then I The point the gentleman made, I Committee on House Administration. get more of the taxpayer subsidy, and think, is well taken. I think franking Mr. ANNUNZIO. Mr. Chairman, you really do not have to pass the reform is something that some of us today, we have the opportunity to pass Synar version or the Obey version to would also like to see occur. a meaningful and responsible cam- get that. You have a mailing discount Perhaps then I could inquire of the paign reform law, a process begun as soon as you sign up, and that is a gentleman who referenced franking years ago and renewed in January 50-percent discount for what we call reform as should have been a part of 1989. On January 3, 1989, AL SWIFT, the Young Attorney Get Acquainted campaign finance reform, why when it chairman of the Subcommittee on Act in the various districts all around was part of the Republican caucus ini- Elections, and I introduced a series of the country. tial package it was not included in the election reform bills including H.R. 11, I was not going to get into this. substitute that the Republicans craft- to control soft money, H.R. 12, to pro- There is no righteous fury more indig- ed for presentation to the floor to- hibit the practice of bundling, and night? nant than the reformer, but if we look H.R. 13, the Campaign Cost Reduction regard Mr. ROBERTS. I think it is a part under the banner of reform in Act designed to control the money to the Synar/Obey amendment, let me of it. chase that seems to drive our system point out that we have public financ- Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr. off financing congressional campaigns. ing, taxpayer financing for everyone, Speaker, will the gentleman yield? These bills provided the basis for our for everyone if anyone in the race does Mr. ROBERTS. I yield to the gentle- current proposal, H.R. 5400. not adhere to the spending ceiling. man from California. Mr. Chairman, I cannot let this im- All you have to do is have one Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr. person in that race not sign and you Chairman, in answer to the gentle- portant moment pass without recog- do sign and you are guaranteed a 50- man, once again, we thought there nizing the determination, persistence, percent mailing discount. Now if you was going to be franking reform under and negotiating skills of the gentle- file for office and you do sign, you are the Legislative Subcommittee of the man from Washington, Chairman AL asking every single issue group, every Appropriations Committee. It was SWIFT of the Subcommittee on Elec- single issue group to get into the proc- scheduled this week, Just as the tions. There has been no Member so ess. It is the death of the two-party Senate dealt with franking and cam- patient, so willing to listen to all sides system. paign finance in two separate struc- and to accept constructive suggestions. There is a qualification, 500 people tures, we were under the impression It is AL SWIFT'S careful and profes- at $50 a piece, or 1,000 people at $100 a that we were going to have franking sional work that brings an acceptable piece. Anybody with a mailing list can dealt with under the Legislative Ap- campaign finance reform bill to the get in on this. Hello right-to-life candi- propriations Subcommittee position floor today. As chair of the task force dates, hello pro-choice candidates, on campaign reform, but once again on campaign finance reform, and as hello gun control, hello Lyndon LaR- the schedule was changed. chair of the Election Subcommittee, ouche. We have people with that Mr. ROBERTS. I am for it; you are AL has worked long and hard to craft outfit that stand over here and dem- for it. Let's get it done. a comprehensive package that tackles onstrate between the Longworth Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, for pur- the problems that must be solved if we Building and the Cannon Building and poses of a colloquy, I yield 1 minute to want to restore the public's confidence they are going to be in the race, and the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. in our system of campaign financing. that is going to be a marvelous exer- JACOBS]. While others have made important cise in democracy. Mr. JACOBS. Mr. Chairman, title II, contributions to H.R. 5400, it was AL Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from section 439(a) currently prohibits per- SWIFT who provided the leadership California [Mr. THOMAs] asked me to sonal use of excess campaign funds by necessary to reconcile the many differ- discuss issues. I have touched three. a candidate for Congress. For legisla- ent viewpoints into a responsible and The truth of it is, however, that this is tive history purposes, does the gentle- contructive bill. I am proud of AL the silly season. This is filler. We are man from Washington agree that SWIFT'S work as chairman of the Elec- waiting to go home. We should go excess funds means either those funds tions Subcommittee of the Committee home. We should not be doing this. which are left over after a campaign, on House Administration, and of his The President is going to veto the bill or during a campaign those funds con- work as chairman of the Speaker's and we are not going to pass the bill. verted to personal use if a candidate task force. True reform comes next year. This is uses those funds during a campaign Building on the provision of H.R. 11, a reform pickup that is stuck in the for personal expenses, but that that which we introduced at the beginning mud. You are stepping on the gas and candidate has determined by that act of the 101st Congress, today's bill asking me to push the pickup. No deal. that they are excess funds and not closes the soft money loophole. Our Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 necessary for campaign purposes? bill prohibits Presidential candidates additional minute to the gentleman Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, will the who accept public funds from solicit- from Kansas [Mr. ROBERTS] if he gentleman yield? ing or receiving any soft money. It also would like to have it so that he may Mr. JACOBS. I yield to the gentle- bans the use of soft money to influ- yield to the gentleman from Ohio. man from Washington. ence Federal elections at any level and Mr. ROBERTS. I thank the gentle- Mr. SWIFT. That is my understand- perhaps most important, it requires man for yielding the time. ing of current law. the full disclosure of soft money Mr. ECKART. Mr. Chairman, will Mr. JACOBS. Fine. I would only add spending. the gentleman yield? one thing. Another troubling aspect of our Mr. ROBERTS. I yield to my good Earlier in the debate I heard some- campaign financing system is dealt friend and neighbor, the gentleman body say that this would be the first with in the provision based on H.R. 12, 22208 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 which we also introduced 2 years ago, about public financing. But Common if you have mass numbers, in a labor prohibiting the practice of bundling. Cause tells me that is not right, that I organization, for example, we are By bundling groups of checks and am wrong, and I am willing to go along going to let you keep giving $5,000 be- other contributions; PAC's, other po- with this once again. cause, after all, you are giving to our litical committees, or individuals can I think the gentleman from Wash- people." now channel large sums of campaign ington [Mr. SWIFT] has done an excel- Now you take a look at leadership funds to a Federal office candidate lent job of putting this bill together. I PAC's. We say, "Hey, no leadership and still avoid current contribution think Mr. SYNAR and Mr. OBEY will im- PAC, no transfer of money from one limits. prove upon these provisions. I thank PAC to the other," and we do you Under H.R. 5400, contributions the leadership for not making us go guys a favor. I mean, do you not get would be counted against the limits home tonight not having done cam- sick, all of your colleagues and all your both of the original donor and of any paign finance reform. candidates running against us coming intermediary through which the funds I am glad that we will be able to up here and saying, "Can't you give us were funneled. This provision effec- work with the other body to bring $1,000?" I mean, we would cut that tively prohibits the practice that en- about a good piece of legislation. out, and everybody would be better off abled some committees and wealthy Mr. Chairman, I hope this bill for it if we would do it. individuals to finance a favored candi- passes. The same with bundling. date's campaign above and beyond Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr. The concept of anybody allowing what their contribution limits allow. Chairman, for purposes of debate bundling directly or indirectly in this In closing, I urge my colleagues to only, I yield 41'/ minutes to the gentle- day and age smacks at the issue of man from Wisconsin [Mr. GUNDER- vote for this comprehensive campaign campaign reform. Of course, then that SON]. finance bill. By passing this bill, we gets to the issue of political parties. Mr. GUNDERSON. Mr. Chairman tell the American people that we are But if you are going to reduce special and Members, I guess I had the privi- concerned about the possibility for interests, you got to raise the role of lege of being on the bipartisan cam- corruption under current practices, parties, to return politics to the and that we are determined to give paign reform task force. It was at least an honor when I was selected. I do not people. them responsible, accountable, fair So we are trying to do that, help the and open campaign finance legislation. know that we really did a lot. We cer- tainly are not coming here with any Republican Party, help the Democrat- O 1830 kind of bipartisan package, but it was ic Party. Not you, you are saying that Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, may I a good experience and I learned a lot somehow or other, because the Repub- inquire as to the remaining time on about campaign reform in the process. lican Party has more people that each side? I went into the task, and I guess this donate, we tend to have a party and The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is the frustration I have tonight, be- you tend to have more of a labor orga- from Washington [Mr. SWIFT] has 34 cause it seems to me if there is one nization activism. We are going to say minutes remaining, and the gentleman goal in campaign reform, it ought to "no" to parties. We are going to say from California [Mr. THOMAS] has 301/2 be to return the elections to the Amer- that the most the parties at the State minutes remaining. ican people. and local levels can do is a maximum Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 You know, we talk a lot about elec- of $5,000. minutes to the gentlewoman from tion returns in this country. In the Then we get into this whole issue of Connecticut [Mrs. KENNELLY]. last midterm elections, it was 35 per- protecting the incumbents. If you Mrs. KENNELLY. Mr. Chairman, as cent turnout, the lowest, the lowest of want to protect an incumbent, it is ob- a former secretary of state of Con- any democracy in the world. We ought vious what you do is you put a spend- necticut, I have advocated campaign to be embarrassed about that national ing cap on because if the challenger finance reform before, and I am de- crisis, and we ought to do something cannot spend money to get name ID, lighted to be here tonight doing the about it. they cannot get elected. same thing. So I think we ought to try to figure A funny thing happened: We have a We all know reform of the campaign out a way in campaign reform not to bill in front of us, the so-called Demo- system is not easy. These are difficult help Democrats or to help Republi- cratic reform bill, that says the most and sensitive issues for public officials cans or help others, but to return the you can spend is $550,000. You know and for the democracy we cherish. elections to the people so that they what? I know exactly where that came What we are primarily doing here get involved. from, that number, because there is a today is changing how we run for elec- Now, how do you think you do that? study by the nonpartisan, nonprofit tion in 1992, and our opponents and It would seem to me there are a couple Center for Responsible Politics of the how they run. What we are really of things we ought to do. You have got 1988 elections. You know what they doing is trying to eliminate the grow- to reduce the role of PAC's. You got to did? They figured out that any chal- ing perception in this country that reduce the role of special-interest lenger who spent over $500,000 got money is such an important consider- groups. You have to level the playing 45.9 percent of the vote. So that they ation in our elections that it influ- field between incumbent and challeng- said, "by 1992 we had better get this ences our daily activities and the deci- er. cap at $550,000 so we can guarantee sions that we make. You have got to find a way to deal that challengers cannot win. We know this is not true. But the with negative campaigns. That is a "And to make doubly sure that chal- perception is there, and we have got to problem with the bill that is in front lengers cannot win, we are going to combat it. It is a perception that has of us tonight and why I support the deal with this whole issue of independ- consequences in the real world, conse- Republican substitute. ent expenditures." We are going to say quences such as reducing the faith of Take a look very quickly in terms of that "if any of those challengers get our citizens in the democratic process PAC's: Yes, both bills purport to the money and they have the gall to and the essential fairness of this Gov- reduce the role of the PAC's, ours does go on TV or radio and attack us for ernment and, most importantly, in it across the board for everyone. our voting records, why, then, it is their belief in us as politicians. Theirs conveniently says, "If you are a automatically time out because any in- There are aspects of this bill we professional PAC and there is a small dependent expenditure by any organi- might not agree with, but that is not number of you but you happen to give zation, a professional PAC or anybody the point. We are here to reform. more money, we are going to lower the that gets the money, we ought to have I must say with all candor that my amount that a professional PAC can free air time to respond to every constituents are less than enthusiastic give to only $1,000 per candidate. But attack made in a challenger's cam- August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 22209 paign against us by an independent ex- Now, the same applies to chart No. 2 If the gentleman would take a look penditure." where our friend, the gentleman from at the chart he referred to, incum- So campaign reform, it is a good title California [Mr. THOMAS] tried to chart bents spent $156 million with no limit and probably some place down the out spending by candidates. Again, we whatsoever. That is how they spent road we will do it, but as for now we do have the same problem. The left-hand with no limit. That is history. not want to return the elections to the column is a total amount of spending Under your proposal, Swift 1.1, there American people. Keep them for the by candidates in the last election is almost $300 million available to special interests, keep them for the in- cycle. The two right-hand columns set spend. That is the cost reduction act? cumbents and at least the 435 that are out the total amount of spending that No, that is a comfort level for incum- here, we will be better off even if the candidates could make under various bents. country is not. proposals should the maximum spend- Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 ing be undertaken. Now, that is not minutes to the gentleman from Michi- minutes to the gentleman from Ne- going to happen. Not all candidates gan [Mr. LEVIN]. braska [Mr. HOAGLAND]. for the House, two candidates or more Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Mr. Chair- Mr. HOAGLAND. Let me tell you in each of 435 districts, are going to man, I just want to in my 2 minutes what a pleasure it is, Mr. Chairman spend $550,000 each cycle. That will say a few words about what I think is and colleagues, to have an opportunity not happen. the key issue as someone who came to come here this evening and speak in In any event, if we compare oranges up, so to speak, from the ranks as a with favor of the leadership package, the Al oranges, once again, the left- precinct delegate, a county chair, a hand column, mislabeled as Swift package, in favor of the Synar/ "current State chairman, a legislator, and now law," would have to go through Obey package, and on the subject of the in the Congress. roof. Again, it would have to reach all campaign finance reform generally. I want to say a word about money the way up to the stratosphere There are two very important be- and politics. cause under current law there is no Perception is a problem, reform elements in this legislation. No. limit on the total amount of spending. but the problem, also, is that there is 1, total PAC contributions that Mem- That is why these reform proposals some reality underlying the percep- bers can receive and spend are limited are so crucial. tion. Big money talks too big. Period. in one election cycle in most cases to Now, in my time that is left let me The Republican package is purely $275,000. tell Members about my experience in cosmetic on this. It says big money is No. 2, the total amount that a Omaha, and why it is so important to OK as long as half of the big money Member can spend in one election have spending limits. Last cycle, my comes from where they come from. cycle is limited in most cases to opponent and I spent more than all Now, how is that a solution? Well, I $550,000. other races except three in the coun- have heard it said on this side, some- Now, those limits are very impor- try. My opponent spent over thing about the "T" word. Well, let tant. I will explain in a moment how $1,150,000 for a congressional race in Members talk about the "I" word. In- costs are simply escalating out of sight Omaha, NE. I spent over $850,000. tegrity. That is what is really at stake and, for the sake of this institution, Now, if we take a look at the escala- on this issue. The Swift package may for the sake of our time, we have to tion of costs from 1980 to 1990 and ex- not be perfect. It is a step in the right bring these expenditures under con- trapolate those increases into the direction. It has some public money in trol. future, at that rate of spending, I look it. I hope, proudly, we say so. But first I would like to address at having to raise in 1996 to hold my Synar-Obey has some more, because these charts that the gentleman from seat, $1.3 million, and in 1998, $1.65 we need a shift from campaigns that California [Mr. THOMAS] showed us million. Spending will go up and up are financed, whose cases we judge, to earlier. and up and up. a system where it comes from the Let me first display the PAC chart One final point: Think of how much public whose interests we are supposed and show why this chart really com- time it takes Members away from leg- to serve. I am here probably to say I pares apples with oranges. In the left- islative business, away from doing support this package as a step in the hand column we have what is called their job, to have to raise $1.3 million right direction. current law. That is the total amount or $1.65 million in a 2-year cycle to get Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr. of PAC money that was received and reelected. We need to limit these ex- Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the presumably spent by candidates in the penditures, to limit special interest in- gentleman from Missouri [Mr. 1988 general election. In the right- fluence, and give Members the time to BUECHNER], a member of the biparti- hand column we have the total do our legislative work properly. san task force. amount of PAC money that could be Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr. Mr. BUECHNER. Mr. Chairman, I spent if all candidates were to receive Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute to was intrigued by the remarks of the the maximum, if the Swift proposal respond to the gentleman, in his so- gentleman from Omaha. A $2 million were adopted. called analysis of the chart. campaign in Omaha? Where did that Now, that is clearly comparing I would remind the gentleman that money come from? Did that come apples with oranges, because if we are under Swift 1.1 there is, in fact, no from Nebraska's elderly ladies and talking about the maximum amount limit on the other column as well, be- gentlemen; from the people that have of money that could be spent under cause this is a voluntary system. Some- small businesses, from the laborers of current law, as this infers, it says "cur- one can opt out of it. So there is no Omaha? Did it come from the neigh- rent law," that is an infinite amount limit on either one. boring communities? Probably not. because current law allows that. What I was pointing out with the That money came from New York, chart, if the gentlemen would under- Washington, DC, Beverly Hills. It did O 1840 stand the purpose of the chart, is that not come from Omaha. So if this chart were really compar- the current law column is what was That is the problem. The problem is ing oranges with oranges and not spent in the last election, with no ceil- that we are letting people from Bever- apples with oranges, the left-hand ing available. That is how much was ly Hills and Meridian, CT, and Los An- column would reach to the roof of this raised. The Members are purporting geles dictate who is going to be the Chamber. Indeed, it would reach to this to be the cost reduction act. If Senators and Members of Congress the stratosphere. Indeed, it would that is the case, with no ceiling and from North Dakota and South Dakota have no limit because under current that was all that was raised, why is the and Missouri and Louisiana and Geor- law, Members can raise and spend as amount that could be raised under gia. That is what is getting people much PAC money as they want. your spending limit so much higher? mad. The Keating 5 is not a result of 22210 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--HOUSE August 3, 1990 somebody from hometown just kind of speaker passed it. He was going to run the kind of quiet that threatens this moving around. It is because the per- for Lieutenant Governor, and it fit democracy. vasiveness of outside money has nicely in his campaign plans, and he This is also one of those occasions gotten out of control, and to stand sent it to the senate. The senate when the best can easily become the before this House and say, "Well, we passed it. On the way back, it had enemy of good. Sure, there are some adopt one of these Democratic propos- some changes. On the way back the parts of this bill I don't like-mainly als, that will put an end to it," is ludi- courier got lost, 180 feet away from because they do not go far enough. crous. the house he disappeared only to reap- But what is there is a vast improve- Instead of talking about money from pear after the session ended. It did not ment over what we have got. We will the home area, and I would say to the pass. get nowhere waiting for the perfect gentleman, big money, we have disclo- bill. sure. If the people want to say, "I 0 1850 AL SWIFT has my thanks for the ex- don't want those people giving $750, or Mr. Chairman, a couple of us, a traordinary effort he's made to fash- $1,000," and by the way we were pre- Democrat from the city of St. Louis, ion a bill that will work and will bring pared to reduce the amount of big Steve Vossmeyer, and myself, put to- real and substantial reform. Likewise, money down to $500, let Members gether an initiative campaign. Because my thanks to DAVE OBEY and MIKE have a disclosure on it, but let Mem- we believed that Missourians deserved SYNAR for their fine work in putting bers keep it at home instead of the fat better. We had the State Republican together a package that improves fur- cats from around the country doing it. Party, the State Democratic Party, ther a bill that's a great improvement Let us as Members stop what people the leading election official, the secre- to begin with. understand is an abuse of the process. tary of state opposed to us, the AFL- This bill strikes at the heart of what The abuse of the process that ensures that incumbents are reelected. CIO and the chamber of commerce, is wrong with politics in this country This is a numbers game, and what did likewise and they spent a half a today: too much money. Too much these numbers are all about is politics. million dollars to defeat it. We spent money being given to campaigns, and We are talking about real numbers. $32,000. too much money being spent by cam- The numbers are, "You Deomcrats got The people wanted campaign paigns. The bill finally puts a limit on us Republicans 2 to 1, and if you keep reform, and they enacted it, by 72 per- the amount that can be spent on a things exactly the way they are, that cent, despite the odds. So, I say to the House campaign. It provides workable is good for you. Oh, of course they can gentleman from Washington [Mr. and appropriate inducements for can- change the exterior, they can put a SWIFT], and Mr. Chairman, Mr. Speak- didates to agree to abide by that new paint job on it, they can put new er, "You can mislead the people * * * spending limit. It reduces significantly chrome stripping on it, can even put a but they're going to find you out." the role of political action committees. CD in it, but it is the same old incum- And when they do they are going to be It cleans the system of the covert, de bent car and it will keep chugging mad. facto PAC's that are the cause and down that highway, and the special in- Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, did the effect of so-called bundling. It elimi- terests will be behind the driver's seat, gentleman say "lie?" nates leadership PAC's-something so if you don't really care about Mr. BUECHNER. Mr. Chairman, that hurts the Democrats much more reform keep the caps on right where will the gentleman yield? than our Republican colleagues. It en- they know they work, where they do Mr. SWIFT. I yield to the gentleman courages a revival of small, individual not allow a challenger to come in and from Missouri. donations-from the ordinary people really have a reasonable chance. Our Mr. BUECHNER. Mr. Chairman, I of this country to whom we are really Members should tell America the way retract the word "lie." I would just say beholden. And it provides a start at the PAC community really works in a "mislead." cracking down on negative advertising way that all persons understand. I was Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I thank and the abuses of independent ex- a challenger. I lost in 1984. I beat that the gentleman from Missouri. I penditures. person in 1986. He was not under in- worked with him and have a great deal I am proud to support this bill. I am dictment. If Members take a look at of admiration for him, and I appreci- proud to ask my colleagues to support where people have lost, most of them ate the point. it. And I will be prouder still to have it had a scandal. They have not been Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to become law and to abide by it. outspent, they have killed themselves. the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr. But when I went in 1984 to talk to the SKAGGS]. Chairman, for purposes of debate business PAC's, the supported pro-Re- Mr. SKAGGS. Mr. Chairman, this only, I yield 5 minutes to the gentle- publican PAC's, they would say to me, bill is the second of the major steps we man from Indiana [Mr. HILER], a "You know, you can't win, but if you must take to begin to restore the trust member of the Elections Subcommit- can go out and show to me you can and confidence of the American tee who would have had a chance to raise a lot of money, maybe we will people in their Government. We took examine this legislation had this legis- give you money, because it takes the first step last fall in purging our- lation gone through the committee money to win these elections." selves finally of the dependence on process. So when we put the caps on that are extra income-euphemistically known Mr. HILER. Mr. Chairman, I pur- supposedly cost reduction, what we as honoraria-from outside special in- posefully tried to get on the Elections will say to these guys, these special in- terests. And, with this long overdue Subcommittee after my 1988 election terest cynics, is that they know for reform of campaign financing, we will because I felt so strongly and deeply sure we cannot win. remove another malignancy on the that the issue of campaign reform was Now, the irony of this is quite public trust. an issue whose time had come, and I simple: That we are posturing our- I hear a lot of talk among many col- obviously am very disappointed that selves, as though we are trying to leagues that this just isn't that impor- the Elections Subcommittee never had reform elections. But I believe, and I tant-they are not hearing from the an opportunity to deal with any of the know in my heart, that the American people at home about it. That may be proposals being considered today. people are looking at Members saying, true. But, if so, I believe it is sympto- However, Mr. Chairman, the reason "Who are you kidding?" I remember matic of the growing disenchantment why I wanted to get on the Elections when I was in the State legislature, and mistrust out there; more evidence Subcommittee and the reason why I back in 1975, to show I had a good of a quite cynicism that has given up thought that election reform was an heart for some of these issues, we had on even trying to communicate with issue whose time had come was be- an issue come up in our State, the us, or thinking that it matters. That is cause it seemed to me in the area of August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOt JSE 22211 campaign finance that we had gotten the contributor back in the home dis- Frankly, I support very strongly the badly out of balance. trict to the prominent role that they Obey-Synar proposal to reduce the in- In 1984, only 9 percent of the win- ought to have. dividual contributor back to $500. ning candidates received over 50 per- Let us talk about the spending limit The Swift bill, however, establishes cent of their campaign funds from po- that is in the bill, the Swift bill, the the $50 tax credit for small contribu- litical action committees. By 1988, $550,000. As I said, the average for tors, but I think equally or more im- that figure had raised to nearly 50 per- Democrats and Republicans in 1988, portant, distinguishes among political cent of the winning candidates re- incumbents, was $378,000. So, clearly action committees, because that is how ceived over 50 percent of their funds for the great number of incumbents, most Americans contribute to political from political action committees. the spending limit means nothing. campaigns, and it says for those PAC's Now I have nothing against PAC's Who does it mean something for? It that go out and raise less than $240 per se. I see nothing inherently wrong means something for those challeng- from each contributor, they can con- with groups of individuals pooling ers and those incumbents tinue to participate at a $5,000 level. their money and deciding to give to who are in competitive races. In my judgment, that is good. candidates who support their point of Frankly, when you look at who is view. I do not think there is anything My opponent in 1988 spent $575,000. I spent something more than that. contributing big individual bucks to wrong with that. political campaigns, you get a very dis- However, Mr. Chairman, That $575,000; I do not know whether I think torted picture of this country. that when a system begins to be domi- the right amount for my challenger In 1988, a little over 9,400 attorneys nated by the 4,263 political action would have been $650,000, or $700,000 contributed $500 or more to House committees that are in existence, then or $400,000, but I do know a challeng- campaigns. There are more the system has gotten out of balance. er has to get a threshold of spending if policemen, I think the Republican alternative they are going to be credible, and in but only four of them did that. tonight does the best job of restoring the 30, or 40, or 50 races that are com- There were 4,500 physicians versus that balance. By limiting the amount petitive in any given election, and my 79 nurses. that any single PAC can give to any race is one of those in every election, There were 2,700 real estate people single candidate to no more than that challenger, if they are not able to versus 29 carpenters. $1,000, we in effect oppose spending hit that threshold, they will not be Frankly, in much of what goes on in limits because we will dramatically able to be competitive. campaign finance reform, people want- reduce the amount of money that is Mr. Chairman, in South Bend, IN, ing to limit here and there, the indi- flowing from the political action com- $550,000 may be credible, but in rect effect would simply be to turn mittees to the individuals. Omaha, NE, it may not be credible. It American politics over to the wealthi- Now why is it important to restore a may not be enough to reach that est 1 percent in our society. To have balance to bring that figure down? Be- threshold to run that competitive the campaigns funded at the country cause, when political action commit- race. club, whether they be far away or tees become the dominant source of Let us limit spending by limiting the local, that is not my idea of political funds, then the dominant source of amount of money that can come from campaign reform. We need to encour- politics takes place inside the beltway. outside special interests and restore age the small contributor. The Swift bill does through its tax credit, No longer are candidates and incum- the supremacy of the in-district con- bents required to go back to their tributor. through its encouragement to PAC's of giving money in small amounts. It home districts to receive their funding. Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 stops the rapid escalation of campaign All they have to do is to make one call minutes to the gentleman from Minne- costs in this country. In my judgment, to one source in town to get $5,000, sota [Mr. SABO], who has been an ex- it is a major step forward and could be and to do that back home they might traordinarily active member of the also improved by the adoption of the have to contact 50 or 75 or 100 people task force and, beyond that, has been to get that same $5,000. So, we need to Obey-Synar amendment. an absolute stalwart in the develop- Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr. restore that balance, and the Republi- ment of this legislation. can alternative ensures that at least 50 Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I Mr. SABO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from percent of the funds come from the in- strong support of the Swift bill and, dividual districts and that the special Washington [Mr. MILLER], a member later, in support of the Obey-Synar of the bipartisan task force, and one interest committee did not give any amendment. It does several important more than $1,000. who, had this legislation been con- things that deal with what I think are Now let us look at the Swift proposal structed by the bipartisan task force, in terms of political action commit- fundamental issues. It stops the in- would have had an ability to influence tees. On the surface it would look as credible escalation of political cam- the bill. though political action committees are paigns. They doubled in cost from Mr. MILLER of Washington. Mr. restricted to no more than 50 percent 1980 to 1988. If we do not adopt spend- Chairman, I come before this body as of an individual's campaign. But let us ing limits, they will double again over a membr of the bipartisan task force look at what the figures actually were. the next 8 years. on campaign finance reform. It is too Last year incumbents; let us take Major reform is good for all, good bad the rule does not allow us this Democrat incumbents, and then I will for incumbents, good for challengers, evening to debate all the major issues use Republicans incumbents; Demo- a fair system. It also fundamentally of campaign finance reform. We need crat incumbents spent on an average begins to reverse what has happened campaign finance reform. The trend $358,000, far below the $550,000 cap. in the funding of campaigns. has been alarming-a rising percent- Plenty of room for growth for incum- Over the last 8 years, funds from age of campaign funds has come from bents, $358,000. small contributors of $200 or less has political action committees, PAC's, Mr. Chairman, if they had raised all been virtually level. PAC's have and a declining percentage has come $257,000 of that from political action grown, but we rarely talk about the from individuals. Over the last 15 committees based out of Washington, other thing that is growing. Between years the proportion of funds coming DC, they would have been able to raise $200 and $500, those contributions to candidates for this body from PAC's probably in the neighborhood of 75 to have grown by 100 percent. has risen from 17 percent to 40 per- of their total funds from cent. 80 percent f 1900 the political action committees. That The alternatives before us are clear. is not right. That is not good balance. Contributions of $500 grew by 146 The Republican alternative, first, re- That has not restored the voter and percent. quires candidates to raise over half 22212 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 their campaign funds from individuals and without the connmittee reports understandable, and reasoned manner in their home areas. That is returning which result from that sweat and toil, through the committee system. power to the grass roots from DC. laws will be vague, confusing, and po- Our country has been blessed for the Second, it reduces the limit on all tentially misdirected. last 200 years with a representational PAC contributions from $5,000 per Mr. Chairman, H.R. 5400 has not re- democracy, and we have an important election to $1,000 per election. ceived the benefit of these long hours duty to all Americans to continue Third, it prevents PAC bundling of of careful deliberation by Members those procedures and take the time to contributions to avoid PAC reporting representing various viewpoints and write good law. and contribution limits. constituencies. Fourth, it stops Members of Con- I know that the membership of the O 1910 gress from passing on contribution:; task force has spent long hours in the Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, for the from their own campaign funds to development of this bill. I appreciate purposes of debate only, I yield 2 min- other candidates. and respect their efforts. But there is utes to the gentleman from Texas That is real reform. The Democratic no free lunch, the Members cannot leadership [Mr. PICKLE]. alternative does none of write good legislation without spend- Mr. PICKLE. these things. Not only that, it in- Mr. Chairman, I rise ing sufficient time debating and clari- in support of the leadership proposal. creases the proportional power of fying its provisions. labor union PAC's. Our present system of financing Under this legislation, I fear that Federal election compaigns is out of Unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, it will candidates take a Presidential veto and much who are trying to obey the control, and we must seize this oppor- more public pressure before this Con- law will not know how, that the execu- tunity to take action and bring the fi- gress does the job on campaign fi- tive branch will not know how to im- nancing and management of our elec- nance reform. plement it, and that the judicial tions back into balance. Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 branch will not know how to pass Campaign expenditures have become minutes to the gentleman from Illinois judgment on it. exhorbitant, and we should take steps [Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI]. Let me emphasize that those Federal to reign them in. The public needs to Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Chair- Election Commission employees who be reassured that we are representing man, I rise in support of the goals of will interpret this bill will have no their interests, and not the views of campaign finance reform contained in guidance regarding Congress' intent special interests. It is time to restore a this legislation, but I must declare in with respect to the vague language of sense of proportion to compaigns for the strongest terms my grave concerns the legislation, and particularly no ex- Federal office. about the procedures used to bring the perience in the real world of rough One of the most important features bill to the floor. and tumble political campaigns. of this proposal is a cap on the total I have debated with myself for days Although well meaning, without the amount of PAC contributions a candi- about whether to support or oppose clear direction of committee reports, date can accept in an election cycle. this legislation. after much soul these employees will independently This cap, combined with incentives for searching, I have decided to reluctant- determine how this legislation will candidates to focus on the contribu- ly support it. govern our lives. And make no mistake tions of small contributors within the My main concern is that the bill by- about it, it is our very lives about district, will help restore the power of passed normal House procedures. which we are debating. the individual voter. Under these In my opinion, measures properly We have built this law so quickly spending limits, a candidate would es- within the jurisdiction of the standing and so rickety, and we are in such a sentially have to rely on individual committees of the House must be con- hurry to pass it, that we shouldn't be contributions for 50 percent of his sidered by those committees. This is surprised if it soon falls down around funds. necessary for the formulation of us. The individual is the heart of any sound and consistent legislation, and This legislation is far too important good election, and this measure will the efficient operation of the House of for us to abandon our time-honored help to restore the voice of the individ- Representatives. legislative system. That system would ual in the electoral process and make H.R. 5400, as introduced 4 days ago, have avoided these problems-prob- all candidates more accountable to the was referred to four committees of lems I believe are inherent in the task voters. original jurisdiction: The House Ad- force procedure that is developing in The leadership's, reform proposal is ministration Committee, The Energy this House-a procedure that I believe not perfect. I am sure that each and Commerce Committee, the Post harms this institution and weakens Member of the House can find some Office and Civil Service Committee, our legislative product. aspect of it which he or she would and the Ways and Means Committee. As far as I know, no effort was made have addressed differently. But this Not one of those committees has to move this bill through the commit- proposal is a reasonable compromise in considered the bill, much less ap- tees. Some say that the committee dealing with some very complex prob- proved it. process would have slowed the bill lems. I hope that this House will adopt This is not a matter of jurisdictional down too much. I don't know, no one this measure today, and that conferees turf. Our committee system was estab- asked me to take the tax provisions of on campaign reform will bring back to lished over 200 years ago for a very im- this bill through my committee. us a perfected compromise which the portant purpose. It was designed to If asked, the committee on Ways President will sign into law. allow Members with particular exper- and Means would have made every If we fail to act now to correct the tise in specific areas of public policy to effort to work quickly and efficiently acknowledged flaws in our campaign assist in the development and crafting to write good law. And I invite any system, we will reinforce the common of good, sound law. This institutional Member of the House leadership who perception that the voice of the indi- process allows members of the com- does not believe that the Ways and vidual voter no longer reaches these mittees to debate the issues and arrive Means Committee works with the Halls. We will bolster the cynical view at rational policy. leadership to write good law in an effi- that the Members of this House are This policy creates clear legislative cient manner, to challenge this state- more concerned with staying in office history as expressed in committee re- ment. than with hearing the views of their ports which explain and clarify legisla- Mr. Chairman, I sincerely hope that constituents. We should not permit tion. in the future, this body will stop rely- such perceptions. We must do all we Without this hard work and long ing on single-purpose task forces and can to assure that our elections are as hours spent by Members in committee, start again to write law in a reflective, free and open as possible-and that August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOU'SE 22213 our campaigns reflect the influence of tion, or whatever, and, unshackled with the way it has been worked out. our constituents. from the current campaign laws, from In Maryland it would be more useful if I urge my colleagues to support the the campaign money that we now we had public funding in primary cam- leadership proposal before us today. depend on, we Democrats will be able paigns, but we are drafting national Mr. SWIFT. Mr Chairman, I yield 2 to do more to help those average legislation, and the gentleman from minutes to the gentleman from people around this country who need Washington [Mr. SWIFT] has done an Kansas [Mr. GLICKMAN], who has help on health care, on financial legis- excellent job in bringing together a worked extremely hard on the devel- lation, and a whole series of things bill that is good for this Nation, that opment of this legislation. that historically we have been in the will help all regions of our country. Mr. GLICKMAN. Mr. Chairman, 25 forefront of. Our party needs to go It does bring out meaningful reform years ago Lyndon Johnson said that back to its roots, and to do that, we in campaign finance. First, it caps ex- "public confidence in the elective proc- need to get away from our dependence penses, the costs of elections. As has ess is the foundation of public confi- on the very same money that goes to already been pointed out, campaign dence in government," and in the last the Republicans. There is no way for costs from 1980 to 1988 have gone up 25 years, confidence in the elective the Democratic Party to stand for the process in this country has fallen pre- values of Roosevelt, Truman, and 100 percent. If we do not put caps in, cipitously so that now less than half Kennedy and get the bulk of its we are going to see this same trend the voters in this country turn out in money from supporters of Reagan and continue. It is too expensive. We are each election. Bush. spending too much time in raising The perception that elected officials This bill can be good for the coun- money. are on the take, usually from private try. It can also rejuvenate the Demo- The influence of PAC's, as far as the money interests contributing big cratic Party and our traditional con- percentage of money that we receive money to campaigns, is destroying our stituency. from PAC's, has increased from 28 ability to do our job, and it is driving a Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 percent in 1980, to almost 40 percent dangerous wedge between the Ameri- minute to the gentleman from Ken- in 1988. This bill does something about can people and their government that tucky [Mr. MAZZOLI], it. It changes that trend. It allows us has profound implications for the Mr. MAZZOLI. Mr. Chairman, I alternative ways in special interest dol- future strength of this great country thank the gentleman from Washing- lars in order to finance our campaigns of ours. If people do not have confi- ton [Mr. SWIFT], and let me salute through reduced media costs, and re- dence that their elected officials are him on a job well done. duced postage, and by public funding, honest, sincere, and independent, then Aldous Huxley wrote a book called by supporting the Synar-Obey amend- they will not have confidence in the "Brave New World." And after tonight ment. laws that we pass. That leads to real there really will be a new world, and I It expands the importance of small- trouble and potential instability par- think we will all have to be a bit er contributors to the election process. ticularly in bad economic times. That braver as candidates to handle it. It reduces the overall costs which is a great reason to move ahead on Having, as I said earlier this after- means greater participation by our this legislation. The legislation will noon, gone through a recent primary constituents. Grassroots campaigning allow candidates of Congress to reform in May in which I did not take PAC will be rewarded in this bill, less ex- campaign laws. money, in effect, accepting a voluntary pensive ways of campaigning. That Mr. Chairman, I want to say one limit on spending and also reduced in- helps greater participation. other thing that has to do not only for dividual contribution limits, I have We all agree that the current system this country of ours but for my politi- had a bit of current experience with needs change. The Swift-Synar-Obey cal party, the Democratic Party. For campaign reform. proposal clearly improves our system years we were the party of middle- It is scary. It is different. It is bur- and helps restore public confidence in income people, of working people, of densome. But it is really very, very ex- the election system. average souls; Democrats have tradi- citing. It is wonderfully refreshing to I congratulate all who were involved. tionally worked on legislation that af- go back to the people for campaign Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr. fects middle-income people, working support. Chairman, I yield 7 minutes to the people, average people, legislation af- Money today has evicted people gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. FREN- fecting taxes, health, environment, from the political process. This bill ZEL], a gentleman who, as a former and education. What has happened in and the Synar-Obey alternative will ranking member on House Administra- the last 20-25 years is our party has place the people, put the people back tion over the years, has involved him- gotten infected with the same fund- in the center of the process, so I rise, self in many different ways in cam- raising process as have the Republi- as I did this afternoon in support of paign finance reform, more recently cans, and we are now raising much of the rule, I rise in support of campaign moving to become the ranking the same money that the Republican reform. member of the Committee on the Party had been recipient of over the This is a very historic day. We will remaining active- years, so now when people ask me pass civil rights legislation and cam- Budget, nevertheless what is there different between a Re- paign reform. ly involved in campaign finance publican and a Democrat, it is some- Mr SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 reform as a member of the bipartisan times hard to tell them, because we minutes to the gentleman from Mary- task force on campaign finance get our money from the same folks, land [Mr. CARDIN]. reform, and had be been able to par- the same people. When you get your Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Chairman, I ticipate in a true bipartisan task force money from the same people, you thank the gentleman for yielding me on campaign reform, this legislation cannot pursue different agendas. In this time. would have been, as the chairman of truth, at least on several economic Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Committee on Ways and Means issues, the Democratic Party has not the Swift proposal and the Synar- said, sound and consistent and, in fact, presented a clearly defined agenda Obey amendment. we would have seen legislation devel- separate and apart from much of the Mr. Chairman, if I were writing this oped that was sound and consistent. 10 bill for the State of Maryland, I think Republican agenda over the past 0 1920 years. I could impose upon this House to We as Democrats should have an make some changes in it. I would like Mr. FRENZEL. Mr. Chairman, I agenda for the middle class of this to see some changes as all of us would. thank the distinguished vice chairman country, for the working people of this Personally I think the caps are too of the Committee on House Adminis- country on health care, on tax legisla- high for primaries. I am not happy tration. 22214 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 Mr. Chairman, this has been a long some of the authority to the political Add those all up, and what you have day. It has been a particularly long parties that they knew in days gone is a picture of the Congress. The day for those of us who believe that by. Since 1974 we have seen a reduc- American people are looking at our this bill should have been handled in tion in the responsibility and the capa- deficits, and we are telling them we the regular order. bilities of the political party for a vari- have enough money left over to spend Most of us on this side of the aisle ety of reasons, some of which relate to another wad on ourselves. Congress believe that we are missing a chance election law, and relate to the use of apparently did not get the word about for real election reform, because the taxpayer money in Presidential fi- the red ink and the deficit. Democrat majority has seen fit to nancing. Our constituents will say, "Hey, drive this bill down our throats, and to What has happened is the parties Congress is spending the peace divi- impose on us a restrictive rule. This have become kept parties of the Gov- dend. Look what they are doing good process prevents us the flexibility that ernment. The parties cannot even hold for the country. What are they doing? we must have to be able to show to the their quadrennial conventions without They are spending it on themselves, body and to the world what needs to shaking their tincup in advance at the those clever little rascals. Here they be done in election reform. Government and collecting their $18 are, usurping the peace dividend. Are The idea of having no committee million apiece to finance their quad- they giving it to the poor, the lame, meetings and having no hearings, and rennial conventions. the halt? No, they are going to spend having only one amendment allowed So in that kind of a context, we it on themselves." to the minority, is a gag rule of the come to the floor with election reform, Unfortunately, we missed having leg- worst kind. It makes it impossible for with the parties going their disparate islative appropriations before us this us to discuss election reform in the ways, and with the absolute assurance week. We could have seen Congress in- terms that we want to discuss it. We under this kind of process that no creasing its spending on itself in the have to discuss concepts or batches of election reform law can be enacted. legislative appropriations. Its pending ideas rather than concentrate on each The other body has gone through its bill has increased the cost of running of the important provisions. election reform process. It has made a Congress' operation by about 10 per- involved in this kind of I have been kind of a mess of the process over cent. Apparently there is no limit to debate for many years. When I first there, adding all kinds of amendments our greed. came to Congress, I was assigned to kind of a whimsical approach, Well, I will tell Members, when the the Committee on House Administra- with a law was not going constituents look at this one, Mr. tion. I served on it for 18 years. Those because it knew the Chairman, they are not going to snick- were my salad days under the leader- to be enacted. They are going to say, ship of Chairman Hays. I was involved As to the matter at hand, first of all, er or chuckle. expect the Congress to in each one of the election reform I want to talk about the cost of the "We didn't We bills, 1972, which, although it bears Swift and the Obey programs, because spend the peace dividend on itself. that title, was actually passed in 1973, to me that is the overriding consider- expected the Congress to spend it on the act of 1974, the act of 1976, and fi- ation in this situation. something useful, or take it down to nally 1979. In the Swift bill, there are three dif- net." Each one of those bills was passed ferent kinds of cost. The first is the So I would say, Mr. Chairman, there after extensive hearings, after long free broadcast time, which is laid is only one way that this body can go, months of committee debate and against the broadcasters, which is and that is to vote for the Michel sub- amendment, and under rules that pre- eventually laid against the consumers stitute, to vote against the Swift bill, sented a large number of choices to that use the products that are adver- and to vote against the Obey amend- this committee as a whole. We are not tised on airways. I do not think it is a ment. able to do that today. That is the good idea to ask the consumers of the Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 shame of this rule and the shame of United States to pay the costs of our minutes to the gentleman from Ala- the House. elections. bama [Mr. BROWDER]. Mr. Chairman, you have already The second cost is the cost of mail. Mr. BROWDER. Mr. Chairman, I heard the discussion of the process Incidentally, Mr. Chairman, I do not rise in support of H.R. 5400. Mr. that broke down, as the two parties know how to estimate the cost of Chairman, we hear a lot of talk about tried to get together. The reason we these things, but I guess probably $15 a popular saying, "Do the right have had no bill since 1979 is because to $20 million for broadcast spots, and thing." But what is right? the parties are at a stalemate. probably $20 to $25 million for mail There are two right things that we The Democrats believe that we must under the Swift bill. The mail costs should look at. First is reducing the limit expenditures; Republicans be- would be paid by the users of the mail, role of big money in our elections. I lieve that for a minority party, that because we simply force the Postal am not talking about just PAC's. They means that we will never be able to Service to cut its rates. That means are easily recognizable. I am talking have a challenger beat an incumbent. that the first-class users and other about the hidden money that makes We abhor limits. They are flat out un- mail users simply are going to have to its way into our system. acceptable. They preserve incumbents. make up the difference. We have got to have first, spending The Democrats believe they have to Third, under the Swift bill the tax limits. That is the most important use the taxpayers' money to clean up credit is reinstated. That is $50 million thing. The second thing, we have got elections; the Repubicans believe that a year, $600 million over the 5-year to encourage participation by average the taxpayers have very little left to period. American citizens. them that is private, and one of those So you have a huge cost laid partial- Now, I have a personal reason for things is the election system. They be- ly on the consumers, partially on the supporting H.R. 5400. I simply am not lieve that once we turn elections over mail users, and partially on the tax- willing to let campaign money drive to the bureaucracy, we have about payers of the United States, for a total my life. It may be risky, but this is given up the least of the privileges left of perhaps something over $90 million. more important to me than maintain- to the taxpayers. Some, like the Su- Then you go to the Obey version, ing a lock on this congressional seat. preme Court would even call them and the Obey version lays the fourth The gentleman from Washington rights. cost on, the quadruple whammy. CBO [Mr. SWIFT] had the impossibility of Mr. Chairman, Republicans believe says the public financing scheme costs trying to please everybody, on the very strongly that we need to have a a maximum of $87 million an election rule, on the process, on every issue, on party building kind of law that will re- year, perhaps going down to as low as partisan grounds, in every locality, in store some of the responsibilities and $25 million. every political situation or possibility. August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 22215 That is impossible. We are simply stricts PAC contributions to no more than 50 their chances for election. They cannot get a asking people on both sides to make percent of a candidate's total budget. That will majority of voters to support them at the polls, the commitment in the public interest reduce the role and influence of special inter- so they want to change the rules in their to turn elections back over to the ests and, appropriately, increase a candidate's favor. No spending limits, no restrictions on in- people of our country. reliance on support from individuals in their dividual expenditures, no decent reform of soft H.R. 5400 is not perfect, and any- district. money. body can find a reason or an excuse to Negative ads by one candidate attacking I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the say no. But it is far better than what another are becoming commonplace in recent Swift proposal, and the Synar-Obey amend- we have now. It is clearly superior to elections. No campaign reform can stop nega- ment. The American public is clammoring for what lies ahead for our country if we tive campaigning. But this campaign reform compaign finance reform, we cannot miss this continue to let big money buy elec- bill requires the mudslingers to show their own opportunity today. tions, and it is clearly superior to what faces in the negative ads and publicly accept Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 lies ahead for us, in terms of voter ridi- responsibility for the content of the ads. minutes to the gentleman from Penn- cule and voter retribution, if we say no In today's campaigns, individual contributors sylvania [Mr. KOSTMAYER]. to this challenge, if we say no to this play to small a role, in part, because the 1986 Mr. KOSTMAYER. I thank the gen- opportunity. tax reform repealed the political contribution tleman for yielding. tax credit. This campaign O 1930 reform bill restores Mr. Chairman, many years ago when that credit for contributions of $50 or less. En- Jim Farley Mr SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 was Postmaster General couraging more voters to support candidates under Franklin minute to the gentleman from Ohio Roosevelt, he got mad with small donations will serve to democratize at some liberal, good government type [Mr. PEASE]. our political system. Mr. PEASE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in politician out in the State of Washing- In America we don't want a system support- ton and made a disparaging remark support of the bill drafted so carefully ed by the wealthy and the big-buck PAC's. We by Mr. SWIFT, also in support of the need to return the government to the people. about the progressive nature of the Synar-Obey amendment. The campaign reforms in this bill will help politics of the State of Washington. He said there are I take particular pride in one provi- achieve that objective. I urge support for the 47 States and the sion which would provide a 100-per- bill. Soviet of Washington. cent tax credit for in-State contribu- Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I yield Well, that was a disparaging remark tions of $50 or less. I believe I am accu- such time as he may consume to the made in an intemperate moment, but rate in saying that this provision first gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Washington has been a progressive came to the U.S. Congress in 1977 in a MC,MILLEN]. State, rich in the politics of clean gov- bill that I introduced in my first year Mr. McMILLEN of Maryland. Mr. ernment, good government. So it is no in Congress, an idea that I brought Chairman, I rise in support of the surprise that the two men who bring with me from the Ohio Legislature, Swift bill. this legislation to us tonight come where I first developed it. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the from the great State of Washington, I was a voice in the wilderness for 8 Campaign Cost Reduction and Reform Act of AL SWIFT and TOM FOLEY. years. Then all of a sudden this provi- 1990, and also note my support for the Synar- AL SWIFT deserves credit for writing sion began to become included in Obey amendment. it, TOM FOLEY deserves credit for mainstream campaign finance reform Mr. Chairman, for years the cost of Federal making the House vote on it. legislation. election campaigns have spiraled up and up. Campaign finance is an area in All of us, Mr. Chairman, will be The high price of television advertising, com- which we are all experts, all 435 of us. better off if we seek to fund our com- puters, and polling is forcing candidates to All of us got here under this system, paigns with smaller donations from spend increasing amounts of time or raising all of us are apprehensive, understand- our own constituents. The 100-percent money, rather focusing on the issues. ably, about seeing it changed. tax credit will give us every incentive Representative SWIFT'S proposal is an ex- Some in our own caucus urge us to to do so and will give our constituents cellent step forward to reforming a system wait. I ask wait for what? For more every incentive to help finance our that is in serious need of change. Most impor- money, for more millions of dollars to campaigns. tant, it places a cap on campaign financing. be spent, for more people in this coun- Again, I urge support for the bill and The Bill also reduces the influence of so- try to be alienated from the system, for the Obey-Synar amendment. called fat cat PAC's that do not get most of for more young Americans to turn Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I yield their funds from the small contributor. The bill away from politics, for lower voter such time as he may consume to the treats these PAC's differently, reducing the turnout? gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. amount they can give to each campaign. And, This legislation has two important PENNY]. it effectively ends the soft money scam that components the American people Mr. PENNY. Mr. Chairman, I thank has been a big loophole to our campaign dis- ought to understand: It limits the the gentleman for yielding. closure system. amount of money you can spend in a I rise in support of campaign finance I also want to express my support for the campaign for Congress, and it limits reform. Synar-Obey amendment which will be offered the amount of money you can take Today's campaign finance system is a dis- to the Swift bill. This additional proposal adds from PAC's. grace. Campaign reform is long overdue. even more teeth to the Swift bill by reducing That is what this legislation is all Unlimited spending in campaigns has cre- the aggregate PAC limit to 40 percent of the about. We are for it, they are against ated the impression that seats in Congress go spending limit; cuts in half individual contribu- it; it is as simple as that. to the highest bidder; that incumbents-due to tions; and increases the reporting require- This sets limits. In 1988 I spent $1.1 their fundraising advantage-can never be ments to the Federal Election Commission. million to be elected to Congress. If beat; that money is more important than The measure is also a major improvement to this becomes law, I will not be able to people. our system by limiting to 10 percent of a can- do it again. I do not want to be able to This campaign reform bill will, finally, put an didates spending limit, the amount that can be do it again, I should not be able to do overall lid on spending; will help even the taken for the fat cat PAC's I must admit that I it again, none of us should be able to odds for challengers; and will move politics have severe reservations about the public fi- spend that kind of money. away from expensive, impersonal media cam- nancing aspect of this measure-but, on the If this legislation passes, it can help paigns and back to the people. whole, it will improve the overall election to begin to remake the face of politics Excessive contributions from special inter- system. in our country. It would be embarrass- est political action committees [PAC's] have Mr. Chairman, the Republican substitute is ing to us to go home tonight for a given these groups too much influence in the not a genuine attempt at campaign finance monthlong recess and reject campaign political process. This campaign reform bill re- reform, but a partisan proposal to improve finance legislation. I think the time 22216 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 will come when we will thank, both of Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 have dealt with the inconsistencies in the gentlemen from Washington, for minute to the gentlewoman from Cali- the bill have been to say quietly in the compelling us to do this. fornia [Ms. PELOSI]. halls, "Don't worry, we will clean it up Why has it taken so long? Ms. PELOSI. I thank the gentleman in conference." What used to occur Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr. for yielding. around here is we would hammer out Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the I thank the gentleman for this op- the will of the House, the other body gentleman from California [Mr. MooR- portunity to speak on this important would hammer out its will, and we HEAD]. legislation. would come together in conference to The CHAIRMAN pro tempo (Mr. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of contest the two positions. Now, appar- MAZZOLI). The Chair would advise the H.R. 5400. This legislation, I think, ently, we do not go through commit- gentleman from California [Mr. can be called a political clean air act tee. We bring legislation to the floor THOMAS] has 7 minutes remaining and which draws a breath of clean air through what ostensibly was a biparti- through this Chamber and through he has now yielded 2 minutes to the san task force which became a parti- the political process in our country. gentleman from California [Mr. MooR- san task force without a pejorative use Thank you to Mr. SWIFT for the op- of the term "partisan," but it was one- HEAD]. The gentleman from Washing- portunity to support campaign reform, ton [Mr. SWIFT] has 4 minutes remain- sided, one-hand clap that produced which is supported by the public. this legislation today. Then we go to ing. From what I hear from the public, the Mr. MOORHEAD. I thank the gen- conference to clean up the mistakes public wants to reduce the cost of cam- that we made because we do not have tleman for yielding. paigns, the public wants to reduce the Mr. Chairman, I think we all agree the honest clash of ideas in the proc- role of political action committees in ess of formulating the legislation in that some kind of campaign reform is campaigns. The legislation of the gen- necessary. However, I believe that the the first place. tleman from Washington does that. I still believe that had we gone Republican version is far better than His legislation is an invitation to the the Democratic version and certainly through the normal process we would public to join the fight. Important de- have found an enormous portion of favors nonincumbents to a much cisions are made every day in this greater extent than the version that the campaign finance bill that we have body which affect Americans, deci- in front of Members, would have been we are considering, which I consider sions as close to them as the water bipartisan proposals, I think on bun- primarily incumbent protection legis- they drink and the air they breathe. dling, PAC transfers, independent ex- lation Invite the public in, vote for H.R. 5400 penditures, and some of the soft The Republican version reduces and the Synar-Obey amendment. money we have not talked about. I PAC contributions from $5,000 to This legislation will go a long way would have preferred the debate on $1,000. The version that we have toward reducing the alienation the the core of the difference between the before us reduces PAC contributions public feels because of the role of for some PAC's but leaves other PAC's money in campaigns, and broadens the two parties. I think it will come out, as we look at still able to contribute the $5,000. base of participation in the political There is a prohibition in the Repub- process. alternatives available to Members, we lican version against leadership com- Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr. could have reached agreement without I think the gen- mittees, restrictions on contributions Chairman, I yield myself such time as too much difficulty. tleman from Pennsylvania put his between principal campaign commit- I may consume. finger on it saying he spent $1.2 mil- tees. This is not handled very well in The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman lion in his campaign to get back here. the bill which is before us and leaves from California [Mr. THOMAS] is recog- He said, in essence, "stop me or I will giant loopholes. nized for 5 minutes. Mr. THOMAS of California. Mr. ask again." The House of Representatives' elec- The problem is, who he is asking. tion limitation on contributions from Chairman, I appreciated the words of the gentleman from Illinois, the chair- The argument has been made that we persons other than individual resi- are spending too much. The solution is dents is in the Republican version. man of the Committee on Ways and Means. His comments were right on to lower the amount of spending. I will Such a limitation is not in the Demo- remind Members once again: the cratic version. point in terms of the way in which this body usually works to produce American public is concerned about In fact, one of the items which is ad- where that money is coming from vertised the greatest in the Democrat- sound and consistent-I would under- score consistent-legislation. more than they are the amount that ic bill is that is cuts down on total ex- we are getting. Frankly, when we ex- penditures. But there is no reduction The gentleman from Illinois, chair- man of the Committee on Ways and amine this Democrat measure, what below the $275,000 level. Taken along we find in it is a little less of the same with the money that is received for Means, indicated that this bill would have gone through his committee, old game. Is there a limit on where we franking privileges that the incum- get the money from? No. They will bents can send out in notices to their would have gone through House Ad- ministration, would have gone continue to get it from the Washing- constituents, a Member who is in Con- through the Committee on Energy ton PAC's. Do we now have a limit of gress now can spend nearly $700,000, and Commerce, and would have gone $275,000? Yes, but where do we get it while his opponent, the nonincum- through the Committee on Post Office from? The same old sources. bent, is restricted to only a small por- and Civil Service. It seems to me that what I would tion of that amount. I think this par- have liked to have heard from the gen- ticular bill is slanted too much in favor O 1940 tleman from Pennsylvania was, "I of one political party. If we were going It seems to me that had the bill, would like to spend as much as the to have true reform, we ought to have even with all of its present structure, people who are going to participate in reform that is worked out by both gone to that committee process, it the election will allow me to spend." sides and that truly gives the individ- would have at least been more consist- That is going to be a fundamental dif- ual who is not an incumbent an oppor- ent. I do not think it would have nec- ference on the floor here tonight, not tunity, a chance in a race when it en- essarily been sounder, but at least it whether we have a bundling, or ables him to be able to mount a cam- would have been more consistent. whether we have a transfer. package, paign that is equal to his incumbent I think there are portions in this bill but a fundamental concept of how opponent. that are going to need to be adjusted. I much money we will get. And more im- Mr. Chairman, I ask for a "no" vote think it is also a comment on this in- portantly, where is it going to come on this bill. stitution that the way in which we from? August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 22217 What we have in the Democratic cost than media. That dusty old stump the amount of personal money they can use package is more of the same, only less. is now the box in the living room. for their election campaigns. Hence, public What we would really like to see is a But, there are two costs associated funding helps limit the role of the super rich revolutionary concept put in its place, with these changes in politics. First, individual candidate. and that is, we get to spend as much as there is the obvious cost of campaign- My colleagues, the success of Wisconsin's the people back home who get to vote ing. Second, there is a cost to our soci- contribution limits, spending limits, and public on the contest will allow Members to ety when campaigning becomes just financing grants proves that what we are talk- spend. Local control of campaign another TV show. ing about doing today is hardly radical. A re- reform. I would have liked to have Mr. Chairman, that is why I support sponsible mix of public and private funding seen a clean, honest discussion of that H.R. 5400 brought to us tonight by the can work at the Federal level and work well, concept in committee with testimony gentleman from Washington. It ad- just as it does at the State level in Wisconsin. from academicians, practitioners, from dresses both of these costs. It reduces The Swift and Synar-Obey amendment adds people who are simply participating in media costs in return for voluntary on the basic bill and meaningful reform. Pas- campaigns. If we look at proposals, spending limits. I have long supported sage of campaign finance reform legislation yes, they want less spending. But they spending limits-everyone agrees that will restore the ever-waning influence of indi- want is an ability to feel that they are campaigns cost too much. viduals. Influence of working Americans. The back in the process, that we do not go More importantly, H.R. 5400 returns role of big donor PAC's and wealthy individ- to Washington, Dallas, L.A., or New the focus to small donors. It requires uals in the electoral process would be limited. York for their money. We come back that candidates reach out and involve My colleagues, we have got to end the home. the voters in the process. Campaigns money chase. Each Member in this Chamber This bill does nothing to allay the will not be able to be run from a TV studio. knows the constant pressure Members face same old process, except we argue it's as they run every other year. With expensive reform because it is a little bit less. Let Mr. Chairman, H.R. 5400 puts us back on television advertising playing a bigger and me tell Members, if this is clean air the stump. It ensures account- ability. It should be passed. bigger part in congressional campaigns, the reform legislation, do not take too Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I yield cost of the average House race has gone deep a breath. Emphysema is on the such time as he may consume to the from $160,000, in 1980 to $312,000 in 1988. way. gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Consequently in each election cycle, each Mr. KOSTMAYER. Mr. Chairman, MOODY]. candidates for Congress-both incumbents will the gentleman yield? Mr. MOODY. Mr. Chairman, I rise and challengers-have to raise more and Mr. THOMAS of California. I am in strong support of the bill and the spend more in order to compete. These esca- happy to yield to the gentleman from Obey-Synar amendment. lating costs are little more than a political Pennsylvania. Over the last decade, two disturbing trends arms race and they have got to stop. The Re- Mr. KOSTMAYER. Mr. Chairman, I have emerged: First, there has been a sharp publican substitute has a number of flaws. But think it is terribly important to point rise in the proportion of contributions candi- the biggest is the total absence of spending out the bill could go forward. It places dates receive from both PAC's and wealthy in- limits. It would not stop the money chase, nor a limit of $275,000 on the amount we dividuals. Second, American voter turnout is at the excessive influence of the few. can get from political action commit- an all-time low, hovering near 50 percent. It is Total spending limits and public financing tees, and it does place limits. difficult to conclude that there is no correla- grants are the real key to reform. The Demo- Mr. THOMAS of California. What tion, no cause-and-effect relationship, be- cratic bill offers incentives of reduced broad- the gentleman ought to focus on are tween these two trends. casting and mail costs for candidates willing the true mechanics. It is $275,000 in In the last 8 months I have received nearly to accept voluntary spending limits of and election cycle. Once the general 200 letters from people in Wisconsin support- $550,000 per election. The Synar-Obey ends, and we tranfer that money into ing campaign finance reform. The people of amendment offers matching grants of $50 for the next election cycle, it get washed, Wisconsin are probably typical in calling for each individual $50 contribution, up to a total and we have a new $275,000 PAC limit, congressional action on this issue. The Ameri- of $100,000, in return for accepting personal and we can then run the next cam- can people in numerous polls have indicated and total spending limits, and total PAC contri- paign totally on PAC money, without that they feel PAC's and wealthy individual bution limits. This combination of public-pri- one dime from individuals. I think contributors have far too much influence in vate funding, with the critical spending limits, local control is the true answer of the the political process, and that this dispropor- returns the electoral process to everyday true reform. tionate influence stems from the current cam- Americans, to working people for whom $50 is Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 paign financing laws. a significant contribution. This amendment will minute to the gentlewoman from Today we have a chance to regain the pub- limit the influence of wealthy individuals and South Carolina [Mrs. PATTERSON], a lic's trust and restore the influence of small, PAC's for whom $50 is pocket change and Member who has been extraordinarily individual donors while at the same time sig- who think nothing of sending off a check for helpful on this legislation. nificantly limiting the influence of PAC's and $5,000. Mrs. PATTERSON. Mr. Chairman, I fat cat contributors. I strongly urge passage of true campaign fi- grew up in politics. As a young girl, I I strongly support the campaign finance nance reform, adoption of the Synar-Obey traveled around the State of South reform package before the House this amendment, and rejection of the Republican Carolina with my father during his evening, and also the Synar-Obey amendment substitute, which avoids the heart of the prob- campaign for Governor when he which further limits PAC contributions and, lem. served in the other body. We would go most importantly, institutes a voluntary experi- The time has come for this reform to revital- from small town to small town to mental public financing program. For those ize the role of average Americans in the elec- attend what we called stump meetings. who argue that public financing and spending toral process. They were called stump meetings be- limits will not work, I would point to the exam- Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, I yield cause often the candidates would get ple of my State of Wisconsin. Since 1976, the remainder of my time to the gen- up on a stump while the community Wisconsin has enforced limits on total PAC tleman from New York [Mr. gathered around. Then, he would tell contributions candidates may accept, on indi- McHUGH], a member of the task force them why they should support him vidual contributions, and on single PAC contri- who has long been a worker in efforts and talk about their hopes for the butions. In 1978, Wisconsin began partial to gain campaign finance reform and future. public funding of State campaigns. Individual has been a very major figure in the de- Today, we have a new version of the candidates who reach threshold of small, velopment of this legislation. stump meeting. It is called TV. But, it $100 or less, donations are eligible for public Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Chairman, this is not free. When people ask about the financing. The candidates in turn must accept year the House has considered a varie- cost of campaigns, there is no greater overall spending limits. They must also limit ty of important bills: the Civil Rights 22218 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 Act, clean air, the budget, the Ameri- rejected out of hand. It places no the aggregate limit on PAC contribu- cans With Disabilities Act, and a limits on campaign spending-the sky tions to 40 percent of the total spend- number of others. As significant as is the limit. It does nothing to reduce ing cap-as compared with 50 percent those bills are, the legislation before the influence of large individual con- in Swift. It would further limit big us today is at least as important. I say tributors, the high rollers in campaign donor PAC's-those that accept contri- that because this legislation touches financing, and it provides no incen- butions from Members over $240 per most directly on the confidence of the tives for the small, individual contribu- year-by imposing a sublimit on their American people in the political proc- tors, those average Americans whose contributions to candidates equal to 10 ess-the process by which the relative greater participation we need to en- percent of the total spending cap- rights, benefits and responsibilities of courage. $55,000. all Americans are determined. If our The Republican substitute's main The influence of big individual con- citizens lose confidence in the integri- claim to reform is that it reduces the tributors would also be reduced sub- ty of that process, if they conclude maximum contribution from PAC's- stantially under Synar-Obey, because that in the give and take of political political action committee-from the maximum individual contribution discourse judgments affecting their in- $5,000 per candidate to $1,000. But it would be cut in half, from $1,000 to terests are made not on the basis of places no limit on the aggregate $500. At the same time, there would be merit but on the strength of special in- amount a candidate can receive from genuine incentives for participation by terests, and on the influence of big PAC's, and it makes no distinction be- small, individual contributors. As in money in particular, public confidence tween PAC's that represent a large Swift, there would be a 100-percent in our Government will erode. Nothing number of small contributors and tax credit for instate contributions up could be more threatening to the those PAC's that represent a small to $50, but in addition those small con- fabric of a democratic society and to number of large contributors. tributions would be matched with the trust a free and diverse people In short, the Republican substitute public funds-up to a maximum of very effectively protect the in- must have in their government. would $100,000 in public funds. politicians we know fluence of the big money people in As practicing The Synar-Obey proposal clearly political campaigns, the backbone of the Na- that public confidence in our goes farthest toward meeting the process has been eroding. And it has tional Republican Party, but would do standards of reform that people really been eroding, at least in part, because little to address the concerns average expect of us: It puts a cap on total people believe that big money has a Americans have about campaigns. it reduces the in- disproportionate impact on our politi- The Swift bill, H.R. 5400, on the campaign spending; givers and cal judgments. This may be a harsh other hand, goes a long way toward fluence of large individual groups; and it provides and perhaps unwarranted conclusion, meeting those concerns. Swift provides special interest but there is no question that is how an a cap on campaign spending-$550,000 the most incentives to attract small, increasing number of Americans feel. in most campaigns. The Supreme individual contributors into the politi- Today, we have the opportunity to Court has ruled that a spending cap cal process. change that perception and to help re- cannot be mandated, but candidates I strongly urge my colleagues to store public confidence in our political are given real incentives to voluntarily reject the Republican substitute and process. agree to one, including lower broad- vote for the Synar-Obey amendment. We have three options to choose casting and postage rates. Swift also If Synar-Obey fails, support the Swift from, each one offering the promise of imposes an aggregate limit on PAC proposal on final passage. substantial reform: the Swift bill, the contributions, equal to 50 percent of Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in sup- Synar-Obey amendment, and the Re- the total spending cap. This assures port of the Campaign Cost Reduction and publican substitute. None of them is that PAC's will not dominate the fi- Reform Act and of the Synar and Obey perfect. None of them is ideally suited nancing of political campaigns. Swift amendment that will greatly improve this cam- to the conditions present in each of goes further in giving preference to paign reform legislation. our congressional districts, each with PAC's with small contributors only; I hope that this bill and this amendment will its own unique combination of politi- they could continue to contribute up succeed in turning the tide of voter discontent cal and economic characteristics. But to $5,000 per candidate, whereas big that has for too long embittered the American underlying all of these bills is a donor PAC's would be limited to voter to our election process. The most impor- common premise that the current $1,000. tant numbers in the past few elections have system of financing congressional cam- While placing limits on PAC's, par- not been the tallies of the Democratic or Re- paigns is in need of change. And so to ticularly those with big contributors, publican candidates, but rather the voting per- meet that need, we now must decide Swift encourages small contributors centages, which have shrunk lower and lower. which of these options will best re- by providing a 100-percent tax credit More voters chose to stay at home on elec- spond to the public's understandable for contributions up to $50. Personal- tion day in 1988 than in any Presidential elec- demand for reform. ly, I would like to see the credit avail- tion year since 1924. I do not know about your constitu- able for contributions up to $100. In The public has very little confidence in the ents, but mine believe that candidates my judgment that would give candi- system, and we have only ourselves to blame, for Congress spend too much money dates a more realistic incentive to raise for it is largely our actions that have led to this on campaigns, and that they are too money from small contributors. But erosion. I believe reducing the PAC limit, limit- often dependent on special interests the concept is sound-incentives in ing the size of individual large donor contribu- and high rollers in financing those campaign financing should favor small tions, and restricting the role of large donor campaigns. Many believe that the av- individual contributors, with some PAC's will go a long way to restoring public erage citizen, the one who can't afford limits being imposed on special inter- trust in our elections, and I therefore support to contribute very much, has less and est groups and big contributors. the Synar and Obey amendment. less influence on the political process. The Swift bill represents a signifi- But the public's misgivings about elections If we are to respond to their concerns, cant improvement over current prac- go beyond the issue of campaign financing. and I believe we should, then reform tice and deserves our support. Howev- They are also troubled by the fact that Feder- means controlling excessive campaign er, the option which would achieve the al campaigns are characterized too often by spending, it means reducing the influ- most meaningful reform is the Synar- sound bites and negative campaign commer- ence of big money, and it means en- Obey amendment-which I coauth- cials, rather than by substantive debate on the couraging the participation of small, ored. It improves upon Swift in a issues of importance. I am glad that the Swift individual contributors. number of important respects. legislation includes measures that will combat When judged by these standards, While preserving the same spending negative advertising and increase accountabil- the Republican substitute should be cap as Swift, Synar-Obey would cut ity in campaign advertising. August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOLISE 22219 To this same end, I have introduced a bill, Mr. Chairman, there is a strong congres- lieve the American people deserve better. H.R. 1733, that would mandate that Presiden- sional and public awareness that something This bill falls short of achieving necessary re- tial candidates participate in debates in order must be done. The system is not working. forms. Let us not be in such a hurry. Let us to receive Federal campaign funds. Obviously, Members of the House are spending more wait and do the full job. Let us have a full and there is no single solution to our current low time on fundraising and less time on the busi- fair debate so that our constituents know ebb in voter participation in elections. Howev- ness of Congress. Special interests are play- where we stand. Elections are the corner- er, it is past time when we can afford not to ing a larger role in our elections, while individ- stone of our democracy. Let us not undermine take action on reforms that the public sup- ual givers play a smaller role. Public distrust is that cornerstone in our rush to adjournment. ports. Mandatory Presidential debates, like the rising and voter participation declining. We Ms. SNOWE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposi- reforms we are voting on tonight, is one such need more disclosure. And we need to get tion to H.R. 5400-which, if accurately titled, improvement, and I hope this body will have some control in independent expenditures. would be called the Democratic incumbent the opportunity to consider this proposal After working on this issue for over 20 protection plan. The Democrats have been before Congress adjourns this fall. years, I realize the opportunity to address the majority party in the House for 34 years, Finally, I commend Representatives SWIFT, these issues does not come often. Today we and if this bill is adopted, they will be the ma- SYNAR, and OBEY for their diligent work on have that opportunity. The Campaign Cost Re- jority for the next 34 years. this important issue, and let me again express duction and Reform Act and the Synar-Obey Let's get one thing straight: This legislation my support for the bill and amendment before amendment are the corrections we need, and has nothing to do with reforming congression- us. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting al campaign laws. It has everything to do with Mr. UDALL. Mr. Chairman, a few months them. stacking the odds even higher against chal- Mr. GALLO. ago I visited the University of Arizona library, Mr. Chairman, the purpose of lengers-most of them, coincidentally, will be where the papers of the Udall family are being campaign reform should be to make the Republicans. sorted through and catalogued. I rummaged American citizen the focus of the democratic Across my district and across the country, through a few boxes looking at old photos, let- process-to return the individual to the center the American public has been expressing their ters, and other documents. Among my father of power. frustration and outrage with a system they see Levi's papers was a campaign expenditure But, the passage of the legislation before us report for his successful run for the Arizona won't accomplish that. It is not genuine reform as pandering to special interests and the cre- Supreme Court. The total cost for the 1946 and the procedure available makes needed ation of a permanent Congress. The American race was $925.86 for a statewide campaign. If corrections impossible. public is demanding-and deserves-compre- an election were held today, my father would We cannot use the excuse that there is no hensive reform of our campaign finance be outspent by at least 100 to 1. time for an open and honest debate on key system to respond to these concerns. They The situation is critical. The high cost of issues like spending and contribution limits, are not demanding nor do they deserve the congressional campaigns has forced incum- PAC's, soft money, public financing and the dissembling of the Democratic incumbent pro- bents to spend too much time in the constant frank. Legislation has been before the House tection plan. pursuit of campaign funds. At the same time, for more than 6 weeks. That was the time to H.R. 5400 would establish a voluntary skyrocketing campaign costs have virtually begin debate; that was the time to let the spending limit for campaigns. Looks good, but locked out challengers who are not fortunate American people have input into the final bill. looks can be deceiving. In actuality, the limita- enough to have significant personal wealth. I think that it is a disgrace-the way we tion is placed on the ability of a challenger to Today, with the adoption of the Campaign bring up and rush through important legislation unseat an incumbent. Common sense tells Cost Reduction and Reform Act, and prefer- just before a recess or an adjournment. The you that a challenger may need to spend ably the Synar-Obey amendment, we have the American people have waited a long time, too more money to overcome the advantages in- opportunity to turn this trend around. The pro- long, for campaign reform. However, I think cumbents hold. visions in this legislation get us on the road to they would be willing to wait another month to The spending limit allows $300,000 to be equity in the area of campaign finance. get good legislation enacted. spent on the primary and $250,000 on the The expenditure of very large sums of There are a number of specific items in general election. Now, a challenger with an money poses a grave threat to the political H.R. 5400 that I cannot support. For example, expensive primary will be left with $250,000 process. Many American voters are saying this is the wrong time to use taxpayers' for a general election campaign-$25,000 less that a candidate who can afford to compete in money to finance elections. We are on the than the amounts the bill allows candidates to one of these races, and wins, probably does verge of having to make significant cuts in accept from PAC's. An incumbent with no pri- not have their best interests at heart. The Medicare, food stamps, and other desperately mary, therefore, could spend more money voters are beginning to believe that it is not needed programs. And taxpayers themselves raised just from special interest PAC's on a their vote that counts, but rather the money are increasingly hesitant to bankroll Federal race, than a challenger could spend on the that counts. In other words, special interests office seekers. Only 21 percent-down from entire election. This doesn't sound like reform matter more than people. I think evidence of 30 percent in 1980-check off the box on to me. this is the declining voter participation at the their tax returns to direct $1 to the Presiden- Noted congressional scholar Norman Orn- polls. tial Election Campaign Fund. stein explained the spending limitation impact While the answer to this dilemma is multifa- In addition, H.R. 5400 does not prohibit on challengers best by comparing the election ceted, it has to come primarily from campaign bundling. Rich individuals still will be able to to the 100-yard dash where currently the in- expenditure limitations and PAC reforms. The package money from friends and special inter- cumbent starts at the 50 yard line with the legislation we have before us today include ests and legally exceed the dollar limits. challenger at the starting line. Spending limita- provisions that address many concerns in the This bill leaves the building fund soft money tions shorten the race to 80 yards, but leave area of campaign finance reform. The primary loophole intact. The bill purports to set a limit the two candidates where they started. provisions, however, provide the changes nec- on PAC money, but it allows 20 percent more The Democratic Incumbent Protection Act essary in these primary issue areas. It sets PAC money than was spent last year when would also establish limits on the amount of voluntary limits on candidate expenditures in there was no limit. funding candidates can receive from PAC's to House races, and it significantly reduces I support an end to bundling. I believe that a $275,000-again, an idea noble in concept House candidates' reliance on PAC's. candidate should raise funds from individuals but far from it in this bill. PAC's gave an aver- The Synar-Obey amendment makes even in the district he or she hopes to represent- age of $217,000 to Democratic incumbents in further strides in this area. It provides for addi- not from national special interest groups. I the House in 1988 and $11,000 to their chal- tional PAC contribution limits and reduces the support a limit of $1,000 for all PAC contribu- lenger. amount an individual may contribute to a Fed- tions. Supporters of this bill, H.R. 5400, limits In 1988, 248 House Democratic incumbents eral candidate. It also calls for public financing PAC contributions, but only for some PAC's. raised $53 million from PAC's; yet under this as both an incentive for a candidate to collect Other PAC's can continue to give $5,000. proposal these same incumbents would be contributions of less than $50, and an incen- Supporters of the restrictive rule and H.R. able to raise $63 million-$10 million more. tive for opponents to stay within the voluntary 5400 say we have to act now to get the mem- Giving incumbents license to raise more guidelines. bers of Common Cause off our backs. I be- money from special interest PAC's is not 22220 CO NGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 going to help challengers run competitive But it takes several additional necessary legislating, and too many Members have races. steps to restore public confidence in our cam- become far too dependent upon wealthy con- Further, the way in which the bill's PAC limi- paign finance system. tributors and special interest funds. Even tations are constructed will have the practical Specifically, it would provide public financing when Members of Congress are voting their effect of hampering trade association and matching funds for individual contributions of consciences and expressing their best policy business PAC's, but not union PAC's. Shall $50 or less, up to a ceiling of $100,000. This judgment, the current system invites the cyni- we pause and think of which party receives is quite similar to the highly successful system cal conclusion that their votes are being influ- the overwhelming portion of union PAC contri- we now use at the Presidential level. enced by those campaign contributions upon butions? I know that some Members have doubts which they have come to rely. Mr. Chairman, let me briefly turn to the about this approach. The notion of funding The time for fundamental reform of our Synar-Obey amendment, which is founded someone who might use tax funds to run system of campaign finance is long overdue. upon the curious notion that American taxpay- against you can be unsettling. There are two keys to true reform. The first ers want to give their money to politicians to I want to assure my colleagues that we key is to put limits on campaign expenditures. spend on campaign ads. This amendment have used a similar approach at the State In too many instances, elections have become would allow up to $90 million to be spent on level in Wisconsin since 1977. auctions-with offices available to the highest congressional campaigns; I believe, as do my If we look back at the electoral results over bidder or the most successful fundraiser. This constituents, that at a time when the budget is the last 13 years in my State, it is clear that practice must stop. There can be no meaning- being squeezed, there are significantly higher one party has not benefited at the expense of ful reform that does not place effective limits priorities for that money. another due to public financing, nor have chal- on total campaign expenditures. In addition, the Synar-Obey amendment lengers received special favors. The second key to true reform is to de- cuts the ceiling for individual contributions The winners under this approach are the crease the ability of special interests and the voters. They have real confidence in the when most experts believe that individual con- wealthy, whether they operate individually or tributions should be encouraged, not discour- system of campaign finance. in groups, to exercise disproportionate influ- The losers, of course, are the special inter- aged. ence on the political process-influence By contrast, the Republican substitute, ests. Their influence is necessarily limited by beyond their numbers or the merits of their ar- which is the result of 1 V2years of work, unlike every public dollar invested in the electoral H.R. 5400 which appeared from some smoke process. guments. filled backroom this week, seeks to level the This amendment makes several other over- Mr. Chairman, in my judgment, the Cam- playing field for House elections. The substi- due changes in our electoral laws. paign Cost Reduction and Reform Act before tute does not set spending limitations, instead It would reduce in half, for example, the us passes both critical tests of true campaign it focuses on where the money is raised. The amount that any individual can contribute to a finance reform. It places a spending limit of provisions in the substitute place the empha- House candidate, from $1,000 to $500. This $550,000 on all House campaigns with incen- sis on contributions from individuals within will affect very few people, since only a tiny tives for lowered broadcasting and mail costs one's district. This will slow the inside the belt- sliver of the population can afford to contrib- for candidates who agree to such limits and it way fund raising which is a distinct advantage ute even $500 per candidate. This action will, provides a system of 100 percent tax for con- to the incumbent. however, limit the disproportionate influence tributions of $50 or less. It would cap the total It also diminishes the power of the PAC's by well-heeled donors now have on the electoral amount of PAC money a House candidate can decreasing the amount they can give to a process. receive, and it would lower the amount of candidate from $5,000 to $1,000. This puts In a similar vein, the amendment would also money that can be given to each candidate by their donation on a par with the individual con- limit, to 10 percent, the amount of campaign PAC's that are founded by large donations. tribution. funds a candidate may accept from a PAC This bill would also close a variety of cam- Adoption of the Republican substitute, which accepts contributions from any source paign loopholes dealing with independent ex- unlike the Democratic bill, will introduce real of more than $240 a year, or $20 a month. penditures and unreported soft money. changes in the way congressional campaigns Finally, Synar-Obey would require the Fed- The Synar-Obey amendment would are waged, and they are changes which make eral Elections Commission to computerize all strengthen the base bill by further limiting the it easier, not harder, for challengers to com- contributions over $200 or more, making it amount of campaign funds that a candidate pete. The question today is whether we are easier for the public and the press to follow may accept from PAC's which accept contri- going to do our duty to the American people the money trail. butions from any source of more than $240 a by reforming the system to produce a level Mr. Chairman, I urge the adoption of this year, or $20 a month. It would also cut in half playing field in House elections, or whether amendment. the amount an individual may contribute to we are going to revise and extend the rights Mr. WOLPE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong any House candidate, from the present $1,000 of the incumbents. support of H.R. 5400, the Campaign Cost Re- to $500. And, as a further incentive for candi- Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong duction and Reform Act, and also of the dates to wean themselves off their reliance on support of H.R. 5400, the Campaign Cost Re- Synar-Obey amendment. wealthy contributors and high donor PAC's, duction and Reform Act, and the Synar-Obey The very first bill I agreed to cosponsor Synar-Obey would provide public financing amendment to the bill. when I entered the Congress some 12 years matching funds for all individual contributions I would like to extend my thanks to Chair- ago was a campaign finance reform bill. Even of $50 or less up to a ceiling of $100,000. man AL SWIFT and others who have worked then it was clear to me that the integrity of our This would be financed with the existing Fed- so hard to craft H.R. 5400. entire political system was being seriously eral voluntary tax checkoff system. Enactment of major campaign finance compromised by the huge amounts of money Mr. Chairman, I will not take the time here reform this year, for the first time since the that were pouring into political campaigns, and to detail the elements of the Republican sub- Watergate period, would be a major accom- by the disproportionate influence wealthy indi- stitute that is being offered by Mr. MICHEL. But plishment. viduals and well-financed special interests had I do find it remarkable that a campaign fi- Without some form of public financing in the come to exercise on our political process. I nance reform bill would be offered that con- legislation now being debated, we will treat was convinced then-as I am convinced tains no spending limits whatsoever. Without the symptoms, not the cause, of the money now-that nothing would go further in restor- such limits, there simply is no reform. Without malady. ing public confidence in our political institu- spending caps, the games will continue. The The Synar-Obey amendment is very similar tions than to clean up the system by which we money chase will go on. In the absence of an to H.R. 14, a major piece of campaign finance finance our campaigns. expenditure ceiling, new limits on PAC's will reform legislation which I was proud to co- Whatever feelings I had on this matter 12 do little but to invite campaign operatives to sponsor. years ago have only been intensified by my find new and different back-door methods to This amendment would set a spending limit experience in the Congress. Our present fund their candidates. And the American at $550,000, similar to that of H.R. 5400. It system of campaign finance is demeaning to people will continue to be sacrificed on the would also limit PAC contributions to 40 per- all candidates. We all spend far too much time altar of the wealthy and the powerful. Our col- cent of the allowable spending limit. pursuing campaign funds when we should be league, DAVID OBEY, said it well when he ob- August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 22221 served that "the major test of any campaign ly urge my colleagues to support this impor- of government. Many people believe their reform legislation in determining whether it tant legislation to promote greater participa- elected officials are beholden to the PAC's serves the public interest should be not tion in the political process. and other special interests, and it is hard to whether money is given individually or collec- Mr. BRENNAN. Mr. Chairman, throughout blame them when they see hundreds of thou- tively, but whether the rules of the game allow my 25 years of public life, one aspect has sands of dollars pouring in from outside their the well-off and well-connected to have influ- always been troublesome-that is campaign districts to help elect their Congressman. ence on government that far surpasses the in- financing. And as the costs of political cam- I do not mean to point all of the blame at fluence of average American families." Unfor- paigns grow into the heavens, financing of the system. In my own case, I try to limit my tunately, the Republican substitute before us campaigns becomes even more troublesome. PAC contributions to a third or less of my total this evening simply does not pass this test. This measure, while not perfect, begins to receipts. Accordingly, I raise the vast majority Mr. Chairman, it is imperative that we re- address the problem plaguing those who run of my funds in small contributions from my spond to the growing public cynicism about for political office. A key feature of the legisla- own constituents in southern New Jersey. I our political institutions. Passage of the Cam- tion calls for limits on the size of contributions. think we could go a long way toward restoring paign Cost Reduction and Reform Act, and of I strongly support efforts to promote small do- voter confidence if all candidates voluntarily the Synar-Obey amendment, will be important nations and to involve more people in the adhered to these or similar guidelines. -elements of this response. I urge passage of electoral process. Unfortunately, that has not been the case, this critically needed reform legislation. There is growing cynicism across our and therefore we have no choice but to to Mr. STOKES. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in Nation, that big contributors are getting undue overhaul the entire system. In my judgment, influence. strong support of H.R. 5400, the Campaign We should not, and cannot, give the H.R. 5400 is a step in the right direction. Cost Reduction and Reform Act. I also urge appearance of being beholden to special in- Under this bill, a voluntary spending cap of my colleagues terests. to go a step further and sup- $550,000 will be imposed on House candi- port the Synar-Obey amendment, which will We can move forward tonight with legisla- dates, with flexibility for those candidates provide even greater protection against cor- tion, designed to tighten controls on inde- whose opponents ruption of the political process by wealthy spe- pendent campaign spending, that encourages do not agree to the spend- ing limits. cial interests. voluntary spending limits, that reduces media In addition, the bill The Campaign Cost Reduction and Reform costs, and curbs growing dependence on limits the amount of PAC Act calls for voluntary campaign spending PAC's. contributions which candidates can accept, limits for House candidates, with the cap set I urge my colleagues to join me in support both in terms of dollar amounts and percent- at $550,000 per election cycle. The act pro- of legislation that will help renew public confi- age of their total receipts; encourages contri- vides lower broadcast and postal rates for dence in their elected officials and once butions from small donors by providing a 100 candidates who accept the spending limits, again, make the candidate more accountable percent tax credit for small, in-State contribu- and establishes a system of heavy fines for to the individual voter, not special interests. tions; closes certain loopholes such as bun- exceeding the limit. I will support the Swift bill with the Obey- dling and soft money which make a mockery This bill also caps the total amount of PAC Synar amendment. of current campaign law; and it discourages money a House candidate can receive to 50 Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in negative campaigning by holding candidates percent of allowable spending, and cuts the support of H.R. 5400, the campaign finance responsible for the content of all ads on their PAC contribution limits to $1,000 per candi- reform bill. I do so with some reluctance, how- behalf. date per election unless the committee is a ever, because I still do not think this proposal Mr. Speaker, it is not a perfect bill but it is a small-donor committee. Under the bill, small- goes far enough in bringing about the signifi- start. By limiting the overall costs of cam- donor committees, which are committees that cant reforms we need to clean up the cam- paigns, we can reinstill fairness and competi- take only individual contributions of $240 or paign process and restore public confidence tion to the process. Just as importantly, we less each year, are allowed to contribute up to in the system. I view this legislation not as a can restore public confidence by shifting the $5,000 per election to each candidate.. panacea, but merely as a first step in what will emphasis away from the special interests and The Synar-Obey amendment builds on this hopefully be an ongoing process to truly back to the average voter. On balance, that is base, and further reduces the amount of PAC reform our campaign finance system. the direction that I believe we need to go. contributions which can be received by a can- It has been more than a decade since the Mr. VENTO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong didate to 40 percent of the allowable spending last significant campaign finance reform legis- support of the leadership package on cam- limit, and limiting to 10 percent of the allow- lation passed the Congress and became law. paign finance reform legislation, as well as the able spending limit the amount that can be ac- The changes that have taken place during amendment to be offered by our colleagues cepted from any PAC which receives contribu- that period are almost beyond belief. The av- from Wisconsin and Oklahoma. tions of more than $240 a year from any indi- erage cost of a congressional campaign has The time for action on campaign reform is vidual. The Synar-Obey amendment takes ad- virtually doubled from $160,000 to $312,000, long overdue. During my first years in Con- ditional steps to further reduce the ability of and it is not unusual for some races to cost a gress in the late seventies, campaign reform wealthy individuals to influence candidates by million dollars or more. These skyrocketing was a priority of the House. At that time, the cutting in half the amount an individual may costs have had a chilling effect on the cam- House debated and passed a responsible contribute to any House candidate. paign process in a number of ways. campaign reform measure, the Obey-Rails- Mr. Chairman, I believe that the reforms First, they are making it more difficult for the back bill, which I supported, and which would contained in H.R. 5400 and the Synar-Obey parties to recruit qualified candidates, thereby have limited PAC contributions to candidates. amendment will go a long way toward the undercutting the competitiveness which has Unfortunately, that measure was not adopted goal of returning the political process to the always been the hallmark of our democratic by the Senate. people, and removing the taint of wealthy, process. Second, they are taking incumbent Since then, serious campaign reform has special interest influence over candidates for Congressmen away from their legislative died on the vine. At the same time serious Federal office. It is an acknowledged fact that duties and forcing them to spend more and campaign spending has flourished. The cost the cost of a congressional campaign has sky- more time raising money for their reelection. of political elections has skyrocketed so that rocketed over the last decade. During this Third, they have vastly increased the influence the average cost of a House campaign is same period, the share of campaign funding of PAC's and other special interest organiza- nearly twice the amount that was spent in derived from PAC contributions has grown by tions which have the financial means to turn 1980. In addition, PAC contributions have ex- an astronomical 175 percent. out large and frequent donations. Fourth, they ploded during that same time, increasing by I find these trends very disturbing, and urge have squeezed the average person, who used 175 percent from $40,000 to $110,000. my colleagues to vote today to restore the to contribute $50 or $100 to a campaign, out As these numbers demonstrate, there is an American political process to the average of the process, since they do not feel their urgent need to curb congressional campaign American citizen. The public is demanding re- contribution make a difference anymore. spending. The House leadership bill and the forms in the system of campaign financing, Fifth, and perhaps most important of all, the Synar-Obey bill will best accomplish that goal. and H.R. 5400 addresses the problem in a high cost of campaigns has undercut the con- Establishing strict limits on PAC contributions comprehensive and effective manner. I strong- fidence of the American people in our system and voluntary overall spending limits will reign 222222 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 in the upward spiral of campaign spending by didates to be more responsive to the people To balance the problem of high cost cam- controlling it at both ends of the process. In who vote for them. It would also place limits paigns and questions of first amendment in- addition, the tax credit, the small donor PAC's on campaign spending because you could fringement, I strongly support the Synar-Obey and the proposed matching proposal will re- only spend what you are able to raise in the amendment. Its public financing provisions emphasize the importance of small contribu- district. help quash questionable PAC influence and tors. The Michel-Republican substitute limits the keep wealthy individuals from controlling the Mr. Chairman, I believe that campaigns influence of PAC contributions, it restores political process. This important amendment should be the competition of ideas not 30 local participation in the campaign finance also encourages all who are interested in run- second sound bytes. I recognize the need for process, and will make congressional elec- ning for elected office to do so regardless of adequate funds to convey a candidate's mes- tions more competitive: All of this without rely- personal means. sage to the voters but I also believe that that ing on the Federal Treasury or expanding the I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 5400 message should be conveyed on a one-on- Federal bureaucracy. and the Synar-Obey amendment. one contact between the candidate and the The Republican proposal is both fair and ef- constituency. That is why my own personal Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, many fective. Neither political party is favored by its Members have no desire to change campaign campaigns have been among the lowest con- provisions and, if enacted, it would help re- gressional spending races by an incumbent finance laws at all. Their seats are secure. store the election process to what was intend- They have the advantage of incumbency that Member from my own State of Minnesota. ed. leads to easy reelection, seniority, committee This proposed legislation is not a cure-all. Let's reduce the influence of PAC's, special chairmanships and power. Money keeps pour- While it takes a big step in resolving the cur- interests and large out-of-State contributions. rent inequities and problems in the political Let's return to the days when Members of ing in from the special interests. funding process, other action will undoubtedly Congress raised funds at home, from the But Members want to go home and tell con- be needed. An ongoing unaddressed concern people who send us here. I urge a "yes" vote stituents that Congress passed a landmark is the problem associated with independent on the Michel substitute. campaign finance reform package. So today Supreme Court ruling expenditures. Under the Mr. WEISS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in we are considering a bill that has been thrown in Buckley versus Valeo, the Court in essence strong support of H.R. 5400 and the Synar- together in the last few days, has received no ruled that the ability to spend money was the Obey amendment. The passage of these hearings, and does not have bipartisan sup- equivalent of free speech. I disagree. Until port. Members will not tell constituents that that problem is redressed and the authority to measures will reduce the importance of money in elections, enhance opportunities for this campaign reform bill has no chance of regulate campaign activities is once again a becoming law. executive branch of Govern- ordinary citizens to make their voices heard, legislative and The American people deserve better than ment policy responsibility, our political process and make campaigns more accountable to the this. Citizens should not tolerate a partisan will be unwieldy. This phenomena of unlimited electorate. independent expenditures that can be target- Two central tenets of our political system standoof. ed for or against any candidate without rhyme are that all citizens have an equal say in elec- What do citizens have at stake? or reason. While the pending bill seeks to tions as well as an equal opportunity to seek Laws that are fair. equalize the political process, independent ex- public office. Yet, due in part to the skyrocket- Laws that treat them fairly. penditures represent an ever present storm ing costs of congressional campaigns, these Their hard earned dollars. threat that can easily destroy any balance to are not holding true. Soaring campaign costs Each man, woman, and child is now esti- the political election process. are posing new threats to our democratic mated to owe $2,000 to $3,000 for the sav- Mr. Chairman, some have criticized the system: wealthy interests and individuals have ings and loan bailout. spending limits set in this bill as too large and too much influence and opportunity, while How did the savings and loan crisis come not reflective of the needs of their State. I Americans of average and limited means have about? In part, it came about when a lot of would urge those Members to contact their too little. key policymakers creating the laws to control State legislatures to enact more restrictive Under the present system, candidates also the savings and loan industry were getting a spending limits as my own State of Minnesota suffer under the pressure of big money. It be- whole lot of money from that industry. has enacted and then to voluntarily abide by comes immediately obvious to any congres- No progress has been made in the deficit such limitations. I support Minnesota's tighter sional candidate of limited personal means reduction talks because Members are unable spending restrictions and intend to easily that the campaign is as much for money as it to make tough decisions. Cutting programs abide by them in the upcoming election. is for votes. Once elected the fundraising could mean losing valuable PAC contributions. Mr. Chairman, in 1979, opponents of cam- begins anew within weeks. Today's Members House Members receive 47 percent of their paign finance reform argued against passage of Congress spend nearly as much time fund- total receipts from PAC's. PAC contributions claiming that the reform was unnecessary, raising as they do representing their constitu- to House Members have more than tripled and protected incumbents. They had their day ents. since 1978. So has the deficit. In 1978, the in court and the resultant 11-year delay has Many claim that if the political action com- Federal deficit was just over $59 billion. Today brought yet more money into congressional mittees are reigned in, the problem will be it is nearing $200 billion. campaigns, a greater voice for big contributors solved. It is clearly not that simple-PAC re- The average House committee chairman re- and less of a role and a voice for many Ameri- ceipts do not tell the whole story. Campaign ceives nearly 60 percent of his funds form be established to control can voters. It is time for a real change and for spending limits must PAC's. A committee chairman plays a major in campaign fundrais- real congressional campaign spending reform. the spiraling increases role in determining which programs will be ing and spending. That is why I am urging the adoption of the created or expanded. Special interests have a leadership package and the Synar-Obey Since 1976, House campaign spending has clear influence over legislation. amendment which offer the most significant increased almost fourfold, from $61 million to connection be- changes that we have had before the House $223 million in the 1988 elections. The current In short, there is a basic in many ways. system discourages challengers from throwing tween our campaign financing system and the Mr. PURSELL. Mr. Chairman, for those of their hats in the ring. Setting reasonable most critical problems facing our Nation today. you here in Congress who return to your dis- spending limits would enhance fair and com- Congress should be ashamed of itself for tricts as often as I do, it has become all to petitive electoral races. the political game it is playing with campaign clear that it's time to put campaign financing The voluntary limit on total campaign finance reform today. Rather than considering back in the hands of those who send us to spending set by H.R. 5400 goes a long way in a bipartisan proposal that will affect all candi- Washington in the first place: The American addressing these concerns. The measure's dates equally and eliminate some of our politi- people. aggregate PAC limit also weans candidates cal system's most serious problems, the lead- Campaign finance reform needs to happen off their reliance on PAC's. Furthermore, the ership is throwing out three last minute pro- by requiring that a majority of a candidate's bill substantially increases the role of small posals that have no chance of being enacted funds come from local sources. By doing this, donors through a 100-percent tax credit for into law. But Congress will be able to grab we encourage Members of Congress and can- contributions of less than $50. credit for passing a bill before recess. August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 22223 It is easy to see why citizens believe their H.R. 5400 tives candidate and such rate reduction is elected officials are taking advantage of their Be it enacted by the Senate and House of made available during the 90-day period public offices for political gain. Representatives of the United States of before the election involved.". Recently I introduced a bill that would sig- America in Congress assembled, SEC. 103. AMENDMENTS TO DEFINITION OF EX- nificantly improve the campaign finance SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. PENDITURE. reform process with one simple step. The bill This Act may be cited as the "Campaign (a) VALUATION FORMULA AMENDMENT; EN- is the Fairness in Campaign Finance Act. Cost Reduction and Reform Act of 1990". COURAGEMENT EXPENDITURE AMENDMENT; Under the bill, a clear line would be drawn to TITLE I-AMENDMENTS TO THE FED- CLEARLY IDENTIFIED CANDIDATE AMEND- limit PAC contributions to one-third of a candi- ERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT OF MENT.-Section 301(9)(A) of the Federal 1971 Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. date's total contributions. 431(9)(A)) is amended- The purpose is to strike a reasonable bal- SEC. 101. DEFINITION OF QUALIFYING HOUSEOF REPRESENTATIVES CANDIDATE. (1) in clause (i)- ance between PAC receipts and individual (A) by inserting after "anything of value" contributions. I believe that balance is one- Section 301(19) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431(19)) is the following: "(such value to be determined third PAC contributions and two-thirds individ- amended to read as follows: by the highest of: cost to the person making ual contributions. "(19) The term 'qualifying House of Rep- the expenditure, fair market value on the A percentage limitation will tell all Ameri- resentatives candidate' means a candidate date of acquisition by the person making cans that individual contributions are the main for the office of Representative in, or Dele- the expenditure, or fair market value on the financial force behind every congressional gate or Resident Commissioner to, the Con- date of the expenditure) and race. It is a simple, self-enforcing change that gress, whose principal campaign committee (B) by striking out "and" after the semi- includes in its statement of organization a colon; the public will recognize as a way to give the (2) in clause (ii), by striking out the period campaign field back to the people. declaration of intention under section 303(b)(7) and, by reason of such declaration, and inserting in lieu thereof "; and"; and Of the several bills that have been offered is subject to the expenditure limitations (3) by adding at the end the following new to accomplish this goal, only the Fairness in specified in section 315(h) or section clause: Campaign Finance Act offers a solution that is 315(i).". "(iii) any purchase, payment, distribution, fair to all parties and avoids future loopholes. SEC. 102.AMENDMENTS TO DEFINITION OF CONTRI- loan, advance, deposit, or gift of money or I do not favor spending limits. Spending BUTION. anything of value (such value to be deter- limits would unfairly help incumbents. They (a) VALUATION FORMULA AMENDMENT; EN- mined in the manner described in clause (i)) made by any person for the purpose of en- would only make it more difficult for citizens to COURAGEMENTCONTRIBUTION AMENDMENT; CLEARLY IDENTIFIED CANDIDATE AMEND- couraging any specific individual who is not hold their elected representatives accounta- a candidate to become a candidate.". ble. MENT.-Section 301(8)(A) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. (b) CLARIFICATION OF EXCLUSION OF MAIL- Outlawing PAC's is not a feasible solution. 431(8)(A)) is amended- ING COSTS FROM PARTY-BUILDING PROVI- Citizens have a right to collectively give to (1) in clause (i)- sIONs.-Section 301(9)(B)(viii)(1) and sec- candidates of their choice just as they do to (A) by inserting after "anything of value" tion 301(9)(B)(ix)(1) of the Federal Election give individually. the following: (such value to be determined Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. The proposal to limit the amount PAC's can by the highest of: cost to the person making 431(9)(B)(viii)(1) and 2 U.S.C. 431(9)(B)(ix)(1)) are each amended by strik- contribute would result in PAC's dividing into the contribution, fair market value on the date of acquisition by the person making ing out "direct mail" and inserting in lieu small units that, together, could continue to thereof "mail". contribute at current levels. Nothing would the contribution, or fair market value on the date of the contribution) and SEC. 104. REGISTRATION AS QUALIFYING HOUSE OF change. (B) by striking out "or" after the semi- REPRESENTATIVES CANDIDATE. Public financing is not the answer either. colon; (a) IN GENERAL.-Section 303(b) of the Why should the Government be asked to do (2) in clause (ii), by striking out the period Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 what only a free people can do for them- and inserting in lieu thereof "; and"; and U.S.C. 433(b)) is amended- selves-make representative Government (3) by adding at the end the following new (1) in paragraph (5), by striking out "and" work. Taxpaying citizens want candidates that clause: after the semicolon at the end; can command their support. They don't want "(iii) any gift, subscription, loan, advance, (2) in paragraph (6), by striking out the or deposit of money or anything of value period at the end and inserting in lieu there- to shell out $100,000 tax dollars to every (such value to be determined in the manner of the following: "and"; and person who thinks it might be fun to run for described in clause (i)) made by any person (3) by adding at the end the following: Congress. for the purpose of encouraging any specific "(7) in the case of a principal campaign Undoubtedly, my proposal would make individual who is not a candidate to become committee of a candidate for the office of some incumbents uncomfortable. Some candi- a candidate.". Representative in, or Delegate or Resident dates would have to work harder to reestab- (b) CLARIFICATION OF EXCLUSION OF MAIL- Commissioner to, the Congress, who desires lish that local base of financial support. But it ING COSTS FROM PARTY-BUILDING PROVI- to be a qualifying House of Representatives would be well worth the effort to restore confi- SIoNs.--Section 301(8)(B)(x)(1), section candidate, a declaration of intention of the 301(8)(B)((xi), and section 301(8)(B)(xii)(1) candidate to use broadcast time under sec- dence in the campaign process and in Con- of the Federal Election Campaign Act of tion 315(c) of the Communications Act of gress. 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431(8)(B)(x)(1), 2 U.S.C. 1934 or to receive reduced postal rates under I sincerely hope that when Congress recon- 431(8)(B)(xi), and 2 U.S.C. 431(8)(B)(xii)(1)) section 3629 of title 39, United States venes in the fall, we can set our own political are each amended by striking out "direct Code.". interests aside and agree on a bipartisan solu- mail" and inserting in lieu thereof "mail". (b) AMENDMENT TO STATEMENT OF ORGANI- tion to the problems of campaign finance. We (c) EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN ITEMS FROM: ZATION.-Section 303 of the Federal Election must return elections to individual citizens and DEFINITION.-Section 301(8)(B) of the Fed- Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 433) is restore faith in our representative Govern- eral Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 amended by adding at the end the following U.S.C. 431(8)(B)) is amended- new subsection: ment. (1) by striking out "and" after the semi- "(e)(1) In the case of a political committee 0 1950 colon in clause (xiii); referred to in paragraph (7) of subsection (2) by striking out the period at the end of (b), if the statement of organization does The CHAIRMAN. The time of the clause (xiv) and inserting in lieu thereof "; not include a declaration referred to in that gentleman from Washington [Mr. and"; and paragraph, the committee may amend the SwIFT] has expired. (3) by adding at the end the following: statement to include such declaration, if Pursuant to the rule, an amendment "(xv) the value of any advertising rate re- such amendment is filed under section in the nature of a substitute printed in duction made available to a qualifying 302(g) not later than the day the candidate State part 1 of House Report 101-659 will be House of Representatives candidate by a becomes a candidate for purposes of newspaper, magazine, broadcasting station law. considered as an original bill for the (as defined in section 315 of the Communi- "(2) A declaration of intention that is in- purpose of amendment under the 5- cations Act of 1934), or cable system (as de- cluded in a statement of organization under minute rule, and is considered as read. fined in section 602 of the Communications paragraph (7) of subsection (b), whether in The text of the amendment in the Act of 1934), if such reduction is made avail- the original filing or by amendment, may nature of a substitute is as follows: able to any qualifying House of Representa- not be revoked.". 22224 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 SEC. 105. RESTRICTION ON CONTROL OF CERTAIN relating to such general or special election) three times the amount of the excess ex- TYPES OF POLITICAL COMMITTEES for the office of Representative BY CANDIDATES FOR FEDERAL in, or Dele- penditures. OFFICE. gate or Resident Commissioner to, the Con- "(3) Any qualifying House of Representa- Section 303 of the Federal Election Cam- gress; tives candidate who makes expenditures paign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 432) is amended "(B) $300,000 with respect to a primary that exceed a limitation under subsection by adding at the end the following: election for such office, except that, if (h) or subsection (i) by 10 percent or more "(j) A candidate for Federal office may under State law, a candidate who receives a shall pay to the Commission, for deposit in not establish, maintain, or control a politi- majority of votes in the primary election is the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts, an cal committee, other than an authorized elected to the office involved and in such amount equal to three times the amount of committee of the candidate or a committee case there is no general election, the limita- the excess expenditures plus a civil penalty of a political party. For one year after the tion with respect to such primary election in an amount determined by the Commis- effective date of this Act any such political shall be $400,000; or sion.". committee may continue to make contribu- "(C) $100,000 with respect to a runoff SEC. 109. LIMITATION ON ACCEPTANCEOF POLITI- tions. At the end of that period such politi- election for such office. CAL COMMITTEECONTRIBUTIONS BY cal "(2) If any candidate in an election re- HOUSEOF REPRESENTATIVES CANDI- committee shall disburse all funds by DATES. one or more of the following means: making ferred to in paragraph (1) (other than a Section 315 of the Federal Election Cam- contributions to an entity qualified, under qualifying House of Representatives candi- section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue date) receives contributions or makes ex- paign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a), as amend- Code of 1986, or making a contribution to penditures aggregating more than ed by sections 107(b) and 108 of this Act, is further amended the treasury of the United States; or, con- $200,000- by adding at the end the following new tributing to the national, State or local com- "(A) such candidate shall so notify the subsection: "(k) A candidate mittees of a political party, or, making con- commission within 72 hours; and for the office of Repre- tributions not to exceed $1,000 to any candi- "(B) the limitation under that paragraph sentative in, or Delegate or Resident Com- date for elective office.". shall not apply to any candidate in the elec- missioner to, the Congress, and the author- ized political committees of SEC. 106. AMENDMENT TO DEFINITION OF INDE- tion. such candidate, PENDENT EXPENDITURE. "(3) Each limitation established by para- may not accept any contribution from a po- litical committee with respect to- Section 301(17) of the Federal Election graph (1) shall be adjusted in the manner "(1) a general or special election (and any Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431(17)) is provided in subsection (c), except that- primary election relating to such general or amended by adding at the end the follow- "(A) such adjustment shall be made with special election) for such office which ex- ing: "An expenditure is not an independent respect to each 4-year period beginning ceeds 50 percent of the limitation specified expenditure is- after calendar year 1992; in subsection (i)(1)(A) when added to the "(A) there is any arrangement, coordina- "(B) such adjustment shall be rounded to total of contributions previously made by tion, or direction with respect to the ex- the nearest $1,000; political committees to such candidate and penditure between the candidate and the "(C) the price index average shall be com- the authorized political committees of such person making the expenditure; or puted for each 4-year period ending before a candidate with respect to the general or spe- "(B) with respect to the election, the presidential election year; and cial election (and any primary election relat- person making the expenditure- "(D) the applicable base period shall be ing to such general or special election); "(i) is authorized to solicit contributions the 4-year period ending with calendar year or "(2) a runoff election for such office or make expenditures on behalf of the can- 1992. which exceeds 50 percent of the limitation didate or an authorized committee of the "(4) If, in a primary election with respect specified in subsection (i)(l)(C) when added candidate; to a general election, a qualifying House of to the total of contributions previously "(ii) is an officer of an authorized commit- Representatives candidate- made by political committees to such candi- tee of the candidate; or "(A) receives the greatest number of votes date and the authorized political commit- "(iii) receives any compensation or reim- and becomes the nominee of the political tees of such candidate with respect to such bursement from the candidate, or an au- party involved; and election.". thorized committee of the candidate.". "(B) receives less than 66.7 percent of the total number of votes cast in the primary SEC. 110. ALL CONTRIBUTIONSIN ELECTIONS FOR SEC. 107. AMENDMENTS RELATING TO LIMITATION FEDERAL OFFICE TO BE SUBJECT TO ON EXPENDITURES IN A SINGLE election; STATE BY CANDIDATESFOR PRESI- THE FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN DENTIAL NOMINATIONWHO ACCEPT the limitation applicable to the qualifying ACTOF 1971. AMOUNTS FROM THE PRESIDENTIAL House of Representatives candidate under Section 315 of the Federal Election Cam- PRIMARY MATCHINGPAYMENT AC- paragraph (1)(A) shall be increased by 30 paign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a), as amend- COUNT. percent except that the total of expendi- ed by sections 107(b), 108, and 109 of this (a) REMOVAL OF LIMITATION.-Section tures of the candidate with respect to the Act, is further amended by adding at the 315(b)(1)(A) of the Federal Election Cam- general election may not exceed $550,000. end the following new subsection: paign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(b)(1)(A)) is "(5) In computing expenditures for pur- "(1) No candidate or authorized political amended by striking out ", except the" and poses of paragraph (1), no amount of legal committee of a candidate may accept any all that follows through "$200,000". or accounting fees shall be taken into ac- contribution with respect to an election for (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.-Section 315 count. Federal office if the gift, subscription, loan, of the Federal Election Campaign Act of "(6) In computing expenditures for pur- deposit, thing of value, or payment consti- 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a) is amended by striking poses of paragraph (1)- tuting the contribution is given or made out subsection (g) and by redesignating sub- "(A) expenditures for broadcasting, news- with respect to an election for State office section (h) as subsection (g). papers, magazines, billboards, mail, and or otherwise is not subject to this Act.". SEC. 108. LIMITATIONSON EXPENDITURES BY similar types of general public adverting SEC. 111. INTERMEDIARY OR CONDUIT AMEND- QUALIFYING HOUSE OF REPRESENTA- shall be allocated to the election time period MENTS. TIVES CANDIDATES. during which the advertising appears; and Section 315(a)(8) of the Federal Election Section 315 of the Federal Election Cam- "(B) other expenditures shall be allocated Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(8)) paign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a), as amend- to the election period in which the expendi- is amended- ed by section 107(b) of this Act, is further ture is made. (1) by redesignating paragraph (8) as amended by adding at the end the following "(j)(1) Any qualifying House of Repre- paragraph (8)(A); new subsections: sentatives candidate who makes expendi- (2) in the first sentence of paragraph "(h) A qualifying House of Representa- tures that exceed a limitation under subsec- (8)(A), as so redesignated by paragraph (1), tives candidate shall not make expenditures tion (h) or subsection (i) by 5 percent or less by striking out "For purposes" and inserting derived from personal funds of such candi- shall pay to the Commission, for deposit in in lieu thereof Except as provided in sub- date in excess of $75,000 with respect to an the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts, an paragraphs (B) and (C), for purposes"; election for the Office of Representative in, amount equal to the amount of the excess (3) in the second sentence of paragraph or Delegate or Resident Commissioner to, expenditures. (8)(A), as so redesignated by paragraph (1), the Congress. "(2) Any qualifying House of Representa- by striking out "The" and inserting in lieu "(i)(l) Except as provided in paragraph tives candidate who makes expenditures thereof "In addition to any other report re- (2), (3), or (4), a qualifying House of Repre- that exceed a limitation under subsection quired by law, the"; and sentatives candidate shall not make expend- (h) or subsection (i) by more than 5 percent (4) by adding at the end the following: itures in excess of- and less than 10 percent shall pay to the "(B) Except as provided in subparagraph "(A) $550,000 with respect to a general or Commission, for deposit in the Treasury as (C), a contribution made by a person special election (and any primary election miscellaneous receipts, an amount equal to through an intermediary or conduit, as de- August 3, 1990 COiNGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 22225 scribed in subparagraph (A), shall be treat- clause (x) or clause (xii) of section 301(8) "(f) Any statement described in subsection ed as a contribution by that person and as a (8), is excluded from the definition of the (a) that is contained in a newspaper, maga- contribution by the intermediary or con- term 'contribution' and zine, direct mailing, or other printed com- duit, if- "(2) any payment, including any part of munication shall- "(i) the contribution is in the form of a such payment that is for a State or local "(1) afford a reasonable degree of color check or other negotiable instrument made candidate or political activity, that, under contrast between the statement and the payable to the intermediary or conduit; or clause (viii) or clause (ix) of section 301(9) background of the communication; and "(ii) the intermediary or conduit is a polit- (8), is excluded from the definition of the "(2) be printed in a minimum uniform ical committee, an officer, employee, or term expenditure.". character height of 0.20 inch. other agent of such a political committee, or SEC. 115.PROVISIONS RELATINGTO SEPARATE SE- "(g) A communication described in subsec- an officer, employee, or other agent of a GRATEDFUNDS. tion (a)(I) or subsection (a)(2) that is broad- connected organization acting in its behalf. Section 316(b)(2) of the Federal Election cast over a radio station shall include the "(C) Subparagraph (8) shall not apply Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441b(b)(2)) following statement: 'Paid for by -- . to- is amended- - --- takes full responsibility for the "(i) bona fide joint efforts conducted (1) in subparagraph (8), by striking out content of this advertisement.', with the solely for the purpose of sponsorship of a "and" after the semicolon; blanks to be filled in with the name of the fundraising reception, dinner, or other (2) by striking out subparagraph (C) and political committee or other person paying event by (I) two or more candidates, or (II) inserting in lieu thereof the following: "(C) for the communication, and the name of the two or more national, State, or local com- the costs of establishment, for political pur- candidate, respectively. mittees of a political party acting on their poses of a separate segregated fund by a cor- "(h) A statement described in subsection own behalf; or poration, labor organization, membership (a)(3) that is broadcast over a radio station "(ii) fundraising efforts for the benefit of organization cooperative, or corporation shall be in the following form: 'Paid for by a candidate which are conducted by another without capital stock; and (D) administra- -- - -. Not authorized by any candi- candidate.". tion and solicitation costs of such a fund, if date.', with the blank to be filled in with the SEC. 112. ENCOURAGEMENTAMOUNTS TO BE amounts disbursed from the fund are used name of the person paying for the commu- TREATED AS CONTRIBUTIONS. solely for communication or campaign costs nication and the name of any connected or- Section 315(a) of the Federal Election under subparagraph (A) or (B), contribu- ganization of that person.". Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(a)), as tions with respect to elections for Federal or SEC. 118. PROHIBITION OF FALSE REPRESENTA- amended by section 111, is further amended State office, or nonelection-related pur- TION TO SOLICIT CONTRIBUTIONS. by adding at the end of the following: poses.". Section 322 of the Federal Election Cam- "(10) For purposes of paragraph (1)(A) SEC. 116. DISCLOSURE IN SOLICITATIONS BY CER- paign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441h) is amend- and paragraph (2)(A), any contribution de- TAIN UNAUTHORIZEDCOMMITTEES. ed- scribed in section 301(8)(A)(iii) shall be Section 318 of the Federal Election Cam- (1) by inserting after "SEC. 322." the fol- treated, with respect to the individual in- paign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441d) is amended lowing: "(a)"; and volved, as a contribution to a candidate, by adding at the end the following new sub- (2) by adding at the end the following: whether or not such individual becomes a section; "(b) No person shall solicit contributions candidate.". "(c) Whenever any political committee by falsely representing himself as a candi- SEC. 113. CONTRIBUTIONSTO CANDIDATESFROM (other than an authorized committee or a date or as an agent of a candidate, a politi- STATE AND LOCAL COMMITTEESOF committee of a political party) makes a com- cal committee, or a political party.". POLITICAL PARTIES TO BE AGGRE- munication that is a solicitation for contri- SEC. 119. CONTRIBUTIONLIMITATIONS FOR SMALL GATED. butions with respect to an election for Fed- DONOR POLITICAL COMMITTEES; Section 315(a) of the Federal Election eral office, such person shall include in the ELIMINATIONOF SPECIAL CONTRIBU- Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(a)), as communication a clear statement that nei- TION LIMITATIONSFOR MULTICANDI- amended by sections 111 and 112, is further ther the committee nor the communication DATEPOLITICAL COMMITTEES. amended by adding at the end the following is authorized by a candidate or under the (a) IN GENERAL.-Section 315(a)(2) of the new paragraph: control of a candidate.". Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 "(11) A candidate for Federal office may SEC. 117. SPECIFIC DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS U.S.C. 441a(a)(2)) is amended to read as fol- not accept, with respect to an election, any FOR CERTAINCOMMUNICATIONS. lows: contribution from a State or local commit- Section 318 of the Federal Election Cam- "(2) A small donor political committee tee of a political party (including any subor- paign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441d) as amend- may make contributions to any candidate dinate committee of such committee), if ed by adding at the end the following new for Federal office and the authorized politi- such contribution, when added to the total subsections; cal committees of such candidate with re- of contributions previously accepted from "(d) A communication described in subsec- spect to an election which, in the aggregate, all such committees of that political party, tion (a)(I) or subsection (a)(2) that is broad- do not exceed $5,000.". exceeds a limitation on contributions to a cast over a television station shall include a (b) DEFINITION.-Section 301 of the Feder- candidate under this section.". photographic or similar image of the candi- al Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. SEC. 114. APPLICATION OF LIMITATIONS AND RE- date. The image shall be- 431) is amended by adding at the end the PORTING REQUIREMENTS TO CERTAIN "(1) readily identifiable as that of the can- following new paragraph: AMOUNTSNOT DEFINED AS CONTRI- didate; "(20) The term small donor political com- BUTIONSOR EXPENDITURES UNDER "(2) accompanied by the following state- mittee means a political committee that has THE FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN been registered under section 303 for at ACTOF 1971. ment: 'Paid for by takes full responsibility for the content of least 6 months, has received contributions Title III of the Federal Election Cam- this advertisement.', with the blanks to be from more than 50 persons, has made con- is paign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431 et seq.) filed in with the name of the political com- tributions to 5 or more candidates for Feder- amended by adding at the end the following mittee or other person paying for the com- al office, accepts contributions only from in- new section: munication, and the name of the candidate, dividuals, and does not accept contributions "APPLICATION OF LIMITATIONS AND REPORTING respectively; totaling more than $240 from any single in- REQUIREMENTS TO CERTAINAMOUNTS NOT DE- "(3) shown for a period of at least 4 sec- dividual in a calendar year.". FINED AS CONTRIBUTIONS OR EXPENDITURES onds; and (c) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.- "SEC. 324. (a) Any amount received or used "(4) of sufficient size to cover at least one- (1) Section 315(a)(I) of the Federal Elec- by a State or local committee of a political third of the television screen. tion Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. party for an excluded payment shall be sub- "(e) A statement described in subsection 441a(a)(1)) is amended by striking out "No" ject to limitation and reporting under this (a)(3) that is broadcast over a television sta- and inserting in lieu thereof "Except as pro- Act as if such amount were a contribution tion shall be- vided in paragraph (2), no". or expenditure, as applicable. No part of "(1) in the following form: 'Paid for by (2) Section 315(a)(4) of the Federal Elec- such amount may be allocated to a non-Fed- . Not authorized by any candidate.', tion Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. eral account or otherwise maintained in, or with the blank to be filled in with the name 441a(a)(4)) is amended by striking out the paid from, an account that is not subject to of the person paying for the communication second sentence. this Act. and the name of any connected organization SEC. 120. CLARIFICATION RELATINGTO CERTAIN "(b) As used in this section, the term 'ex- of that person; CONTRIBUTIONS. cluded payment' means- "(2) shown continuously throughout the Section 301(8)(A) of the Federal Election "(1) any payment, including any part of communication; and Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431(8)(A)) is such payment that is for a State or local "(3) of sufficient size to be clearly visible amended by adding at the end the following candidate or political activity, that, under to the viewer. new sentence:

39-059 0-91-4 (Pt. 16) 22226 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 "For purposes of clause (i), a gift or other tion of their activities to elections for Feder- SEC. 202. AMENDMENT TO SECTION 315 OF THE item referred to in that clause is for the al office), meetings, and conducting party COMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1934, RE- purpose of influencing an election for Fed- elections or caucuses; LATING TO CANDIDATE ACCESS. eral office if it is given in response to a solic- "(xv) research pertaining solely to State Section 315 of the Communications Act of itation that states or implies that it is to be and local candidates and issues; and 1934 (47 U.S.C. 315) is amended by adding at used for that purpose, whether or not, by "(xvi) maintenance of voter files.". the end the following new subsection: document or otherwise, the gift or other "(e) In providing access to use of a broad- item is characterized as being for another SEC. 123. ADDITIONAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. casting station with respect to a campaign, a purpose.". Section 304 of the Federal Election Cam- licensee shall give priority to legally quali- SEC. 121. COORDINATED EXPENDITURES TO BE paign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 434) is amended fied candidates for public office in connec- MADE ONLY FROM AMOUNTS SUBJECT by adding at the end the following new sub- tion with their campaigns.". TO THE FEDERAL ELECTION CAM- sections: PAIGN ACT OF 1971. SEC. 203. AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 315 OF THE "(d)(1) In addition to any other report re- COMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1934, RE- Section 315(d) of the Federal Election quired by law, each State committee of a po- LATING TO USE OF BROADCASTING Campaign Act (2 U.S.C. 441a(d)) is amended litical party shall file with the Commis- STATIONS BY CANDIDATES. by adding at the end the following new sion- (a) USE OF BROADCASTING STATION.-Sec- paragraphs: "(A) any report of non-Federal receipts tion 315(a) of the Communications Act of "(4) Any expenditure under this subsec- and disbursements filed by the committee 1934 (47 U.S.C. 315(a)) is amended- tion may consist only of amounts that- under State law; and (1) by striking out "or" after the comma "(A) as received by the committee making at the the expenditure, are subject to limitation "(B) such supplementary material as the end of paragraph (3); Commission may require to assure compli- (2) by inserting "or" after the comma at and reporting under this Act; and the end of paragraph (4); and "(B) are paid from an account that is sub- ance with this Act. ject to the requirements of this Act. "(2) Each national committee of a politi- (3) by adding after paragraph (4), the fol- "(5) If any part of an expenditure is for a cal party shall file, as part of each report to lowing: purpose provided for under this subsection, the Commission, a statement of all receipts "(5) debate between candidates,". the entire expenditure (including any part and disbursements by the committee in the (b) CHARGEs.-Subsection (b) of section for a State election or other purpose) shall reporting period, including receipts and dis- 315 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 be subject to the applicable limitation under bursements for non-Federal purposes. U.S.C. 315(b)) is amended by striking out this section.". "(e)(1) Any individual who makes contri- "exceed-" and all that follows through the end of the subsection and inserting in lieu SEC. 122. ADDITIONAL EXCLUSIONS FROM THE butions that are subject to limitation under thereof the following: "exceed DEFINITIONS OF CONTRIBUTION AND section 315(a) (3) shall report to the Com- the charges EXPENDITURE. mission in accordance with paragraphs (2) for comparable use of such station by other (a) CONTRIBUTION.-Section 301(8)(B) of users. In determining charges to legally and (3) the information specified in para- qualified candidates for public office, a li- the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 graph (4). (2 U.S.C. 431(8)(B)) is amended- censee may not take into consideration any "(2) Not later than 7 days after making charge for special or nontypical commercial (1) by striking out "and" at the end of contributions aggregating $20,000 or more, clause (xiii); use by other users. but less than $25,000, in a calendar year, the (c) ADDITIONAL TIME.-Section 315 of the (2) by striking out the period at the end of individual shall report to the Commission clause (xiv); and Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 315), (3) by adding at the end the following new the information specified in paragraph (4). as amended by section 202, is further clauses: "(3) Not later than 7 days after making amended- "(xv) any amount for a candidate for contributions aggregating $25,000 in a calen- (1) by redesignating subsections (c), (d), other than Federal office; dar year, the individual shall report to the and (e) as subsections (d), (e) and (f), respec- "(xvi) any amount in connection with a Commission, with respect to contributions tively; and State or local political convention; not previously reported under paragraph (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the "(xvii) any campaign activity, including (2), the information specified in paragraph following new subsection: broadcasting, newspaper, magazine, bill- (4). "(c)(1) If, with respect to an election for board, mass mail, and newsletter communi- "(4) The information required to be re- the office of Representative in, or Delegate cations, and similar kinds of communica- ported under this subsection is as follows: or Resident Commissioner to, the Congress, tions or public advertising that is exclusive- (A) the name of the person making each a licensee permits a qualifying House of ly on behalf of State or local candidates; contribution, (B) the amount and recipient Representatives candidate to purchase time "(xviii) administrative expenses of a State of each contribution.". for at least 2 political advertisements on a or local committee of a political party, in- broadcasting station or cable system, the li- cluding expenses for overhead, staff (other SEC. 124. TRANSFERS BETWEEN ELECTIONS. censee shall make additional time for politi- than individuals devoting a substantial por- Section 315 of the Federal Election Cam- cal advertisements on such broadcasting sta- tion of their activities to elections for Feder- paign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a), as amend- tion or cable system available to such candi- al office), meetings, and conducting party ed by sections 107(b), 108, 109, and 110 of date in accordance with paragraph (2). elections or caucuses; this Act, is further amended by adding at "(2) The time so made available shall be- "(xix) research pertaining solely to State the end the following new subsection: "(A) without additional cost to the quali- and local candidates and issues; and "(m) Notwithstanding any other provision fying House of Representatives candidate; "(xx) maintenance of voter files.". of this Act or any other law, a candidate and (b) EXPENDITURE.-Section 301(9)(B) of may transfer any unexpended campaign "(B) equal in market value to one-half of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 funds for use with respect to any later elec- the market value of the total time pur- (2 U.S.C. 431(9)(B)) is amended- tion.". chased. (1) by striking out "and" at the end of TITLE II-AMENDMENTS TO THE COM- "(3) As used in this subsection- clause (ix); MUNICATIONS ACT OF 1934 AND "(A) the term 'cable system' has the (2) by striking out the period at the end of TITLE 39, UNITED STATES CODE meaning given that term in section 602; clause (x); and "(B) the term 'licensee', where used with (3) by adding at the end the following new SEC. 201. AMENDMENT TO SECTION 312(a) OF THE respect to a cable system, means the opera- clauses: COMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1934, RE- tor of such system; and "(xi) any amount for a candidate for other LATING TO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST "(C) the term 'qualifying House of Repre- than Federal office; CONDIDATES. sentatives candidate' has the meaning given "(xii) any amount in connection with a Section 312(a) of the Communications Act that term in section 301 of the Federal Elec- State or local political convention; of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 312(a)) is amended- tion Campaign Act of 1971.". "(xiii) any campaign activity, including (1) in paragraph (6), by striking out "or" (d) EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES FROVISION.-Sec- broadcasting, newspaper, magazine, bill- after the semicolon; tion 315(a) of the Communications Act of board, mass mail, and newsletter communi- (2) in paragraph (7), by striking out the 1934 (47 U.S.C. 315(a)), as amended by sub- cations, and similar kinds of communica- period at the end and inserting in lieu there- section (a), is further amended by adding at tions or public advertising that is exclusive- of "; or"; and the end the following new sentence: "In af- ly on behalf of State or local candidates; (3) by adding at the end the following: fording equal opportunities to candidates "(xiv) administrative expenses of a State "(8) for willful or repeated discrimination under this subsection, a licensee is not re- or local committee of a political party, in- against such a candidate in the amount, quired to make time available to a candidate cluding expenses for overhead, staff (other class, or period of time made available to without cost because additional time is than individuals devoting a substantial por- such candidate on behalf of his candidacy.". made available to a qualifying House of August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 22227 Representatives candidate under subsection "SEC. 24. CONTRIBUTIONS TO CERTAIN QUALIFYING in order and they shall be considered (c). HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES CANDI- DATES. in the following order: SEC. 204. AMENDMENT TO SECTION 315 OF THE COMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1934 RE- "(a) GENERAL RULE.-In the case of an in- First, the amendments printed in LATING TO DISCLOSURE REQUIRE- dividual, there shall be allowed as a credit part 2 of House Report 101-659, which MENTS FOR CERTAIN POLITICAL COM- against the tax imposed by this chapter for shall be considered en bloc and shall MUNICATIONS. the taxable year an amount equal to the not be subject to a demand for a divi- Section 315 of the Communications Act of total of contributions to qualifying House of sion of the question; and 1934 (47 U.S.C. 315), as amended by sections Representatives candidates which are made 202 and 203, is further amended by adding by the taxpayer during the taxable year, Second, the amendment in the at the end the following new subsection: with respect to elections in the State of nature of a substitute printed in the "(g) A licensee may not permit any use of which the taxpayer is a resident. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of August 2, a broadcasting station for a communication "(b) LIMITATIONS.- 1990, submitted by the gentleman that is not in compliance with subsections "(1) MAXIMUM CREDIT.-The credit allowed from Illinois [Mr. MICHEL]. (d), (e), (g), and (h) of section 318 of the year shall by subsection (a) for a taxable Said amendments shall be debatable Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971.". not exceed $50 ($100 in the case of a joint SEC. 205. AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 39, UNITED return under section 6013). for 1 hour each, equally divided and STATES CODE, RELATINGTO POSTAL "(2) VERIFICATION.-The credit allowed by controlled by the proponent and a RATESFOR CERTAINELECTION MATE- subsection (a) shall be allowed, with respect Member opposed, and shall not be sub- RIALS. to any qualified political contribution, only ject to amendment. (a) IN GENERAL.-Subchapter II of chapter if such contribution is verified in such 36 of title 39, United States Code, is amend- manner as the Secretary shall prescribe by AMENDMENTSEN BLOCOFFERED BY MR. SYNAR ed by adding at the end the following new regulations. Mr. SYNAR. Mr. Chairman, pursu- section: "(c) DEFINITIONS.-For purposes of this ant to the rule, I offer amendments en "§ 3629. Reduced rates for certain House of Rep. section, the terms 'contribution' and 'quali- bloc. resentatives candidates fying House of Representatives candidate' The Clerk read as follows: "(a) The rates of postage for matter have the meanings given those terms in sec- tion 301 of the Federal Election Campaign Amendment en bloc offered by Mr. SYNAR: mailed with respect to a campaign by quali- In section 315(k)(1) of the Federal Elec- fying House of Representatives candidate Act of 1971.". (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.- tion Campaign Act of 1971, as proposed to (as defined in section 301 of the Federal be added by section 109, strike out "50 per- Election Campaign Act of 1971) shall- (1) Section 642 of such Code (relating to "(1) in the case of first-class mail matter, special rules for credits and deductions of cent" and insert in lieu thereof "40 per- be one-half of the rates otherwise applicable estates or trusts) is amended by adding at cent". to such matter under this title; and the end the following new subsection: In section 315(k)(2) of the Federal Elec- "(2) in the case of bulk third-class mail "(j) CREDIT FOR POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS tion Campaign Act of 1971, as proposed to matter, be the same as the rates of postage NOT ALLOWED.-An estate or trust shall not be added by section 109, strike out "50 per- for a qualified political committee under be allowed the credit against tax provided cent" and insert in lieu thereof "40 per- section 3626 of this title. by section 24.". cent". "(b) The reduced rates provided under (2) The table of sections for subpart A of At the end of title I, add the following subsection (a) of this section shall be avail- part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of such new sections: Code is amended by inserting after the item able only with respect to matter mailed SEC. 125. LIMITATION ON ACCEPTANCE OF POLITI- relating to section 23 the following new during the 90-day period ending on the day CAL COMMITTEE CONTRIBUTIONS, item: before the date of the election involved.". OTHER THAN SMALL DONOR POLITI- (b) REVENUES FORGONE.- "Sec. 24. Contributions to certain qualifying CAL COMMITTEE CONTRIBUTIONS, BY (1) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.- House of Representatives can- HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES CANDI- Section 2401(c) of title 39, United States didates.". DATES. Code, is amended by striking out "and (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.-The amendments Section 315 of the Federal Electidn Cam- 3626(a)-(h) of this title," and inserting in made by this section shall apply to taxable paign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a), as amend- lieu thereof "3626(a)-(h), and 3629 of this years beginning after December 31, 1990. ed by sections 107(b), 108, 109, and 110 of title. SEC. 207. AMENDMENT TO SECTION 9003 OF THE IN- this Act, is further amended by adding at (2) OTHER AUTHORITY.-Section 3627 of TERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986. the end the following new subsection: title 39, United States Code, is amended by Section 9003 of the Internal Revenue "(m) A candidate for the office of Repre- striking out "or 3626 of this title, and insert- Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the sentative in, or Delegate or Resident Com- ing in lieu thereof 3626, or 3629 of this end the following new subsection: missioner to, the Congress, and the author- title". "(e) SPECIAL CONDITION RELATING TO NON- ized political committees of such candidate, (C) AMENDMENT TO DEFINITION OF QUALI- ACCEPTANCE OF CERTAIN FUNDS.-An individ- may not, with respect to an election, accept FIED POLITICAL COMMITTEE FOR CERTAIN ual who is a candidate referred to in subsec- contributions from political committees RATE REDUCTIONS.-Section 3626(e)(2) of tion (a) shall not be eligible to receive any (other than small donor political commit- title 39, United States Code. is amended to payment under section 9006 with respect to tees) in excess of 10 percent of the limita- read as follows: a presidential election, if, during any period tion specified in subsection (i)(1)(A).". the term "(2) As used in this subsection, in which the individual is a candidate (as de- SEC. 126. REDUCTION IN LIMITATION AMOUNT FOR qualified political committee means the fined in section 9001 or 9032) with respect to INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO CAN- principal campaign committee of a qualify- the election- DIDATES. ing House of Representatives candidate (as "(1) the individual directly or indirectly 301 Section 315(a)(1)(A) of the Federal Elec- defined in section of the Federal Elec- solicits or receives funds in connection with tion Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. tion Campaign Act of 1971).". an election for Federal office or other politi- 441a(a)(1)(A)) is amended by striking out (d) TECHNICAL AMENDMENT.-The table of cal office; and in lieu thereof of title 39, United "$1,000" and inserting sections for chapter 36 "(2) such funds are not subject to limita- "$500". States Code, is amended by inserting after tion and reporting under the Federal Elec- the item relating to section 3628 the follow- tion Campaign Act of 1971 or are allocated SEC. 127. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION TO ing new item: to a non-Federal account or otherwise main- MAINTAIN CERTAIN REPORT INFOR- tained in, or paid from, an account that is MATION IN COMPUTER FORMAT. "3629. Reduced rates for certain House of Section 304 of the Federal Election Cam- Representatives candidates. not subject to that Act.". TITLE III-EFFECTIVE DATE paign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 434), as amended SEC. 206. AMENDMENTS TO THE INTERNAL REVE- by section 125 of this Act, is further amend- NUE CODE OF 1986 RELATING TO THE SEC. 301. EFFECTIVE DATE. the end the following new TO CER- ed by adding at CREDIT FOR CONTRIBUTIONS Except as otherwise provided in this Act, subsection: TAIN QUALIFYING HOUSE OF REPRE- made by this Act shall SENTATIVES CANDIDATES. the amendments "(f) The Commission shall- apply with respect to elections for Federal "(1) maintain computer files of the report (a) GENERAL RuLE.-Subpart A of part IV office beginning with the general election of of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal information referred to in subparagraphs November 3, 1992 (and any primary election (A) and (B) of paragraph (3) of subsection Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to nonre- relating to such general election). fundable personal credits) is amended by in- (b); and serting after section 23 the following new The CHAIRMAN. Only the follow- "(2) make such files available to the section: ing amendments to said substitute are public by remote access at reasonable cost.". 22228 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 SEC. 128. NEWTITLE OF THE FEDERAL ELECTION (1), if any candidate (other than a qualify- such amounts, or portions thereof, to all eli- CAMPAIGN ACT OF 1971. ing House of Representatives candidate) re- gible candidates from whom amounts have The Federal Election Campaign Act of ceives aggregate contributions or makes ag- been withheld, but, if there are not suffi- 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431 et seq.) is amended by gregate expenditures in excess of $200,000 cient moneys in the account to satisfy the adding at the end the following: with respect to the general election. full entitlement of an eligible candidate, the "TITLE V-VOLUNTARY EXPENDITURE "(b) Payments received by a candidate amounts so withheld shall be paid in such LIMITATIONS AND PARTIAL PUBLIC under this section shall be used only to manner that each eligible candidate receives FINANCING FOR QUALIFYING defray expenditures incurred with respect a pro rata share of the full entitlement. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES CAN- to the general election for such candidate. "EXAMINATION ANDAUDITS; REPAYMENTS DIDATES IN GENERAL ELECTIONS Such payments shall not be used to make "SEC. 505. (a)(l) After each general elec- "ELIGIBILITY FOR PAYMENTS any expenditures other than expenditures to further the election of such candidate. tion, the Commission shall conduct an ex- "SEC. 501. (a) To be eligible to receive pay- "CERTIFICATION BY COMMISSION amination and audit of the campaign ac- ments under section 504, a qualifying House counts of 10 percent of the eligible candi- of Representatives candidate shall, at the "SEC. 503. (a) Not later than one week dates, as designated by the Commission time of filing the statement of organization after an eligible candidate files a request through the use of an appropriate statisti- under section 303(b), agree in writing that with the Commission to receive a payment cal method of random selection, to deter- the candidate and the candidate's author- under section 502, the Commission shall cer- mine whether such candidates have com- ized committees- tify to the Secretary of the Treasury the eli- plied with the conditions of eligibility and "(1) will deposit all payments received gibility of the candidate for payment in full other requirements of this title. In selecting under this section in a separate checking ac- of the amount to which the candidate is en- the accounts to be examined and audited, count in a depository institution referred to titled. The request referred to in the preced- the Commission shall select all candidates in section 302(h)(1), which shall contain ing sentence shall contain- in a general election where any eligible can- only amounts so received and from which "(1) such information and be made in ac- didate is selected for examination and audit. cordance with the procedures, as the Com- all expenditures of such amounts shall be "(2) After each special election, the Com- made; mission may provide by regulation; mission shall conduct an examination and "(2) will furnish campaign records, evi- "(2) a verification, signed by the treasurer audit of the campaign accounts of all candi- of the principal campaign committee of the dence of contributions and other appropri- dates in the election if any candidate is an candidate, stating that the information fur- ate information to the Commission; and eligible candidate to determine whether the "(3) will cooperate in any audit and exami- nished in support of the request is correct candidates have complied with the condi- nation conducted by the Commission under and complies with the requirements of this tions of eligibility and other requirements section 505; title; and of this title. "(b) To be eligible to receive payments "(3) a request for a payment for at least "(3) The Commission may conduct an ex- under section 504, a qualifying House of $10,000 except for the final payment re- amination and audit of the campaign ac- Representatives candidate shall certify to quest which may be for a lesser amount, if the Commission that- such request is filed for a payment under counts of any eligible candidate in a general "(1) the candidate and at least one other section 502(a)(1). election if the Commission, by an affirma- candidate have qualified for the general "(b) The Commission may not delay a cer- tive vote of 4 members, determines that election ballot under State law; and tification under this section, unless the there exists reason to believe that such can- "(2) subject to subsection (c), the candi- Commission determines that the request didate has violated any provision of this date has received $25,000 in contributions filed by the candidate is clearly incorrect. title. with respect to the general election (and "(c) Certifications by the Commission "(b) If the Commission determines that any primary election relating to the general under subsection (a) and all determinations any amount of a payment to a candidate election) from individual residents of the made by the Commission under this title, under this title was in excess of the aggre- State in which the general election is held. shall be final and conclusive, except to the gate payments to which such candidate was "(c) For purposes of subsection (b), in de- extent that they are subject to examination entitled, the Commission shall so notify the termining the amount of contributions re- and audit by the Commission under section candidate, and the candidate shall pay to ceived by a candidate and the candidate's 505 and judicial review under section 506. the Secretary an amount equal to the excess. authorized committees- "ESTABLISHMENT OF ACCOUNT; PAYMENTS TO "(c) If the Commission determines that "(1) no contribution other than a contri- ELIGIBLE CANDIDATES bution of money made by a written instru- any significant amount of a payment to a "SEC. 504. (a) The Secretary shall main- candidate under this title was not used as ment which identifies the individual making tain in the Presidential Election Campaign the contribution shall be taken into ac- provided for in this title, the Commission Fund established by section 9006(a) of the count; shall so notify the candidate and the candi- Internal Revenue Code of 1986, in addition date shall pay to the Secretary an amount "(2) no contribution by an intermediary or to any other accounts maintained under conduit under section 315(a)(8) shall be equal to 200 percent of the amount in- such section, a separate account to be taken into account; and volved. known as the House of Representatives "(3) no contribution shall be taken into "(d) The Secretary shall deposit all pay- Election Campaign Account. The Secretary account to the extent such contribution ex- ments received under this section in the shall deposit in the account, for use by eligi- House of Representatives Election Cam- ceeds $50 when added to the amount of all ble candidates, the amounts available after other contributions made by the individual paign Account. the Secretary determines that the amounts with respect to the election. in the Fund necessary for payments under "JUDICIAL REVIEW "ENTITLEMENT OF ELIGIBLE CANDIDATES TO subtitle H of the Internal Revenue Code of "SEC. 506. (a) Any agency action by the PAYMENTS 1986 are adequate. The amounts designated Commission made under this title shall be "SEc. 502. (a) An eligible candidate shall for such account shall remain available subject to review by the United States Dis- be entitled to- without fiscal year limitation. trict Court for the District of Columbia "(1) matching payments under section 504 "(b) Upon receipt of a certification from upon petition filed in such court within 30 in an amount equal to the amount of contri- the Commission under section 503, the Sec- days after the agency action by the Com- butions received by the candidate and the retary shall promptly pay to the candidate mission for which review is sought. candidate's authorized committees, except from the account the amount certified by "(b) The provisions of chapter 7 of title 5, that such payments may not exceed the Commission. United States Code, apply to judicial review $100,000, and, in determining the amount of "(c) If at the time of a certification by the of any agency action, as defined in section such contributions, the provisions set forth Commission under section 503 for payment 551(13) of title 5, United States Code, by the in subsection (c) of section 501 shall apply to an eligible candidate, the Secretary deter- Commission. (except that the limitation in paragraph (3) mines that the moneys in the account are of that section shall apply on a calendar not, or may not be, sufficient to satisfy the "PARTICIPATION BY COMMISSION IN JUDICIAL year basis and only contributions from indi- full entitlement of all eligible candidates, PROCEEDINGS vidual residents of the State in which the the Secretary shall withhold from such pay- "SEC. 507. (a) The Commission is author- general election is held shall be taken into ment the amount necessary to assure that ized to institute actions in the district courts account); and each eligible candidate will receive a pro of the United States to seek recovery of any "(2) additional payments under section rata share of the candidate's full entitle- amounts determined under section 505 to be 504 in the amount of one dollar for each ment. Amounts so withheld shall be paid payable to the Secretary. dollar of matching payments which a candi- when the Secretary determines that there "(b) The Commission is authorized to peti- date is eligible to receive under paragraph are sufficient moneys in the account to pay tion the courts of the United States for such August 3, 1990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOLrSE 22229 injunctive relief as is appropriate to carry primary election relating to such general nancing system. This is an idea which out this title. election). will be tested to help cleanup cam- "(c) The Commission is authorized on (b) SPECIAL RULE AND SUNSET PROVISION.- paign financing. behalf of the United States to appeal from, The amendments made by sections 109, 126, We are going to test and to petition the Supreme Court for certi- 127, and 129, shall take effect on January 1, it. It sunsets unless the public demon- orari to review, judgments or decrees en- 1991, and shall cease to have effect on Janu- strates dramatic support for it, which tered with respect to actions in which it ap- ary 1, 1999, unless extended by law. The would lead the Congress to renew it. It pears pursuant to the authority provided in amendments made by such sections and the is voluntary because, if a taxpayer this section. amendment made by section 208 shall be re- does not want his taxpayer dollars "REPORTS TOCONGRESS; REGULATIONS pealed, effective January 1, 1999, unless ex- used for this, he simply does not check tended by law, and from and after such "SEc. 508. The Commission shall, as soon the box, and his tax money is not as practicable after each election, submit a repeal, the provisions of law amended by such sections, including section 208, shall be used. My colleagues would have to go full report to the House of Representatives through the private sector and first setting forth- effective as if this Act had not been enacted. "(1) the amounts certified by the Commis- Mr. SYNAR (during the reading). obtain contributions in the private sion under section 503 for payment to each Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con- sector from individuals of less than eligible candidate; and sent that the amendments en bloc be $50 before we can receive any match. "(2) the balance in the Presidential Elec- considered as read and printed in the Mr. Chairman, I have been in the tion Campaign Fund and any account main- RECORD. business of campaign finance reform tained in such Fund.". The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection for about 15 years. The last bill that At the end of title II, add the following passed the House new sections: to the request of the gentleman from that would have been a major transformation of the SEC. 208. INCREASE IN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION Oklahoma? CAMPAIGN FUND INCOME TAX CHECK- There was no objection. campaign law was the Obey-Railsback OFF. The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the bill in the 1970's. This package tonight (a) IN GENERAL.-Section 6096(a) of the In- rule, the gentleman from Oklahoma in many ways reflects a lot of what I ternal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by [Mr. SYNAR] will be recognized for 30 have learned over that 15-year period. striking out "$1" each place it appears and minutes and a Member opposed will be Mr. Chairman, one thing I have inserting in lieu thereof "$3" and by strik- recognized for 30 minutes. learned is that the issue is not wheth- ing out "$2" and inserting in lieu thereof "$3" and by striking out "$2" and inserting The Chair recognizes the gentleman er one gives individually or through in lieu thereof "$6". from Oklahoma [Mr. SYNAR]. PAC's. The issue is how much influ- (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.-The amendments Mr. SYNAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 ence the very wealthiest people in this made by subsection (a) shall apply with re- minutes to the gentleman from Wis- society have on the political process, spect to income tax liability for taxable consin [Mr. OBEY], the cosponsor of whether they give individually or col- years beginning after December 31, 1990. the amendments. lectively. SEC. 209. REPORT TO CONGRESS ON THE EFFEC- The CHAIRMAN. Before the gentle- TIVENESS OF CERTAIN REPORTING We could have zeroed out PAC's. AND DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS OF man from Wisconsin [Mr. OBEY] pro- Only two problems with that. First, it TIE FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ceeds, does the gentleman from Min- is clearly unconstitutional, and, sec- ACT OF 1971. nesota [Mr. FRENZEL] seek the time in ondly, PAC's are changing the way Not later than 6 months after the date of opposition? they do business, and so it would have the enactment of this Act, the Federal Elec- Mr. FRENZEL. I do, Mr. Chairman. no practical effect. tion Commission shall submit to the Con- The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman I had one PAC director in my own gress a report containing- from Minnesota [Mr. FRENZEL] will be (1) an analysis of the effectiveness of the State tell me, "OBEY, 5 years from now provisions of the Federal Election Cam- recognized for 30 minutes in opposi- we're not going to contribute a single paign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431 et seq.) that tion to the amendments en bloc of- dime through our PAC. The way we do require reporting and disclosure of the occu- fered by the gentleman from Oklaho- it is we send out our message, mail- pation and employer of an individual who ma [Mr. SYNAR]. ings, seven or eight times a year, tell makes contributions subject to that Act; Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, the pur- the people who the good guys are, who (2) a description of any administrative pose of this amendment is to strength- action the Commission intends to imple- the bad guys are. We work through en the Swift package, which we fully our local organizers. We get a pretty ment to improve compliance with such re- support, and weaken the clout of the quirements; and good idea whose going to contribute (3) a draft of legislation (including techni- high rollers in this country on Ameri- how much, and then, after filing day, cal and conforming provisions) recommend- can politics, especially within this we said, 'OK, boys, hit the button,' Chamber, and give average Americans ed by the Commission to improve the provi- money goes out to the candidate, it a better opportunity than they have sions referred to in paragraph (1). never runs through the PAC, but it In lieu of title III, insert the following: had over the last 15 years to actually was delivered by the PAC nonethe- TITLE III-EFFECT OF PARTIAL INVA- have their voices heard on this floor. less." LIDITY, EFFECTIVE DATE, AND Mr. Chairman, the amendments SUNSET PROVISIONS limit the amount of campaign spend- So, Mr. Chairman, as a practical matter, I have learned, as a prime SEC. 301. EFFECT OF PARTIAL INVALIDITY. ing which candidates may take from If any amendment made by section 109, PAC's to 40 percent, and it imposes a mover and campaign reformer for 15 126, 127, 129, or 208, or the application of further limit on PAC's by saying that years, that, if we zero out PAC's, we do such amendment with respect to any person only 10 percent of their campaign nothing but drive the money trail un- or circumstance, is held invalid by a final money can come from any PAC that derground. We are fooling ourselves. decision of the courts of the United States, We would hide where the money no amendment made by any such section accepts a contribution larger than $240. It cuts the maximum individual comes from and where it goes. and no application of any such amendment we would not shall be valid with respect to any person or contribution allowed from $1,000 to Second, Mr. Chairman, circumstance, and, from and after the effec- $500. It provides that every $50 contri- solve the problem. Drexel-Burnham, tiveness of such decision, the provisions of bution from an individual within a for instance, contributed $122,000 law amended by such sections shall be in State, $50 or less, will be matched with from their PAC's last year to help can- effect as if this Act had not been enacted. public financing. The public financing didates. They contributed $300,000 SEC. 302. EFFECTIVE DATE AND SUNSET PROVI- portion of this package is temporary, through individual corporate office SIONS. it is limited, and it is voluntary. It is holders. Solomon Brothers contribut- (a) IN GENERAL.-Except as otherwise pro- ed $120,000 through their PAC last made by temporary because it sunsets in 8 vided in this Act, the amendments year. They contributed $280,000 this Act shall apply with respect to elections years so that we, in effect, say to the for Federal office beginning with the gener- American public that we are not through individual corporate execu- al election of November 3, 1992 (and any making a judgment on the public fi- tive contributions. 22230 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE August 3, 1990 So, Mr. Chairman, we do not solve Mr. FRENZEL. Mr. Chairman, I Americans checked off, 80 percent de- the problem that way. yield myself 4 minutes. cided it was a lousy idea, and the 20 There is another phony argument Mr. Chairman, it is interesting to percent who voted for it did so secure which goes, "Why don't you lower the note that the wealthiest people in this in the knowledge that they did not PAC level to $1,000 instead of $5,000?" country have controlled politics and have to pay the extra dollar. Mr. Chairman, I will tell my col- elected this wonderful Democrat ma- Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, will the leagues what that means. That means, jority over here. I hope they are en- gentleman yield on that point? if there are 100 guys working in a pa- joying the base of their support. Mr. FRENZEL. I yield briefly to the permill, they get together and, Mr. Chairman, we have here a gentleman from Wisconsin. through their PAC's, contribute $10 pretty simple matchup. It is a little Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I would apiece so it can go to their Congress- more difficult to compare Michel and ask the gentleman what percentage of man. They have $1,000. It means one Swift because the rule forces us to Americans give individually to any guy in the front office making look at comprehensive packages and candidate for public office? Is it not Obey- $100,000 can cancel out the contribu- compare one against the other. considerably less than the 20 percent Synar is pretty simple because all it tions of 100 guys who work every day who check off on the income tax? does is lay the Swift bill a series of in the shop for a living. That is not a Does not the income tax checkoff balanced system. That is not fair. new costs, new expenses, for the tax- payer. have a far better record of participa- That is what the Republicans are tion than the other system in exist- trying to set up in their package. O 2000 ence now? Mr. Chairman, the fact is that Mr. It has been said by some of the Mr. FRENZEL. I do not have the fig- Keating and his associates, Keating of speakers here, although I was sur- ures, but it is pretty hard to avoid the the S&L scandal, did not exercise his prised to hear it, that the public would checkoff when it is stuck on your tax influence through PAC's. Keating and like to have the taxpayers pay the form and sent to your house, and yet a bunch of his cronies got together, costs of the same old Members of Con- 80 percent of those who get it manage contributed $200,000 individual contri- gress getting reelected. to avoid it. It is astonishing. butions of $750 or more. Mr. Chairman, for 10 years, between Now, I cannot send an appeal to ev- The key to successful campaign fi- 1977 and 1986, an institution called erybody in my district, so I do not nance reform is balance. What our the Civic Service Inc. made a poll and know how to compare those who con- amendment does is to bring PAC's they asked the same question. The tribute to me with those who contrib- down to 40 percent of the allowable question was: ute or think they contribute through spending level, and then it says that It has been proposed in Congress that the the checkoff. you get the difference, not by going to Federal Government provide public financ- But, Mr. Chairman, I want to go the highest income people, in this ing for congressional campaigns for the U.S. deeper than that. I want to go to the country as the Republican plan would House of Representatives and the Senate. Would you approve or disapprove of the States which had systems that said, encourage, but you get the difference OK, you can participate through your by going to regular people through proposal to use public funds, Federal money, to pay the cost of congressional tax form, but it will cost you some this country, and ask them for a tiny campaigns and how strongly do you feel? money. contribution, $50 or less, so that we The State of Maine has such a pro- truly spread the influence around, Now, the strongest the public felt in favor of that was in 1977, when 32.5 gram. down to the average family in the The CHAIRMAN. The time of the country. We help them maximize their percent approved and the strongest disapproval was registered in 1986, gentleman from Minnesota has ex- ability to compete with the big boys. when 70.6 percent disapproved. As a pired. We help them to maximize their abili- matter of fact, the figures were so Mr. FRENZEL. Mr. Chairman, I ty to compete with the well-off and close over the 10 years that polling yield myself 1 additional minute. the well-connected. That is what com- was abandoned because it was quite Its participation rate is 1.06 percent. paign finance reform ought to be. clear that the public had a pretty clear The test is whether we limit the in- I doubt the gentleman from Wisconsin and certain opinion that taxpayer fi- will challenge that private contribu- fluence of the wealthy. The test is nancing of elections was a bad deal. whether we stop turning elections into tions are less than 1.06 percent. Looking at the last year, one might Massachusetts, another late great auctions. This amendment meets both say, well, probably all Republicans tests because, together with the spend- State, has less than 2 percent. were opposed and some of us wonder- The chairman's own State of Mary- ing limits-which are crucial if we ful Democrats were for it. Actually, want to reform politics-it helps to land used to have a program, but it did the Republicans were opposed by 72.2 not work. Nobody contributed to it, so take all political candidates, both in- percent and the Democrats slightly cumbents and nonincumbents, off the they threw it in the ashcan. In fact, higher in opposition at 74.3 percent. they still have $2 million laying money trail. It democratizes the pop- Now, that is one example of the they do not system. It recognizes that we have le- financing of elec- around somewhere that ularity of taxpayer know what to do with. gitimate interests in this country. But tions. It just is not there. The people it requires balance with other individ- do not want their elections controlled The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is ual forces. by the bureaucracy and they expect correct. Most of all, Mr. Chairman, it reduces that the incumbents are going to Mr. FRENZEL. Well, that is the the influence of the wealthiest 1 per- feather their own nests with the tax- public approval of this wonderful cent of people in this country who payers' money. system of public financing. have dominated tax policy, dominated But there is a better poll of whether I want to get to one other point regulatory policy, dominated all other people like taxpayer funding of elec- about public financing, and that is the policy, in this country for the last 10 tions. It occurs each April 15, or as cost. It is not just what you give to the years, a decade of excess, a decade of close to that as you file your income candidates, the same old people who ripoffs, which came about in very tax. That is: How many people check have been in Congress before that is large part because the wealthiest off on their income tax that they want the cost; CBO has estimated that cost people in this country have the most a buck to go into the Federal fund to from $25 million in 1987. But there is influence. That is what this amend- pay for Presidential elections? also the extra cost of administration. ment will help bring to an end. Now, at no time has that number The CHAIRMAN. The time of the Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues' gone over 30 percent, and in the last gentleman from Minnesota has again support. year, last year only 20 percent of expired.