S4098 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE June 11, 2015 WYDEN, also wishes to provide separate port his interpretation of this provi- people gave a comparable amount of and related comments. sion. In accordance with longstanding $356 million through small-dollar dona- In setting out what is to be taken as historical practice, and because of im- tions of $200 or less. Astonishing as ‘‘major legislation,’’ the budget resolu- portant practical considerations, the these figures are, they don’t include tion specifies that legislation may be chair and vice chair of the Joint Com- the $173 million spent in the 2014 elec- designated to be ‘‘major’’ if the Sen- mittee on Taxation should exercise tion cycle by tax-exempt ‘‘dark ator or House Member who is chairman principal control over the revenue esti- money’’ groups that are not required to or vice chairman of the Joint Com- mating process, and section 3112 should publicly disclose their donors. mittee on Taxation, or JCT, designates not be interpreted to authorize the Deep-pocketed special interests are the legislation as such ‘‘for revenue chairs of the Budget Committees to aiming to control the agenda in Con- legislation.’’ Of course, such language interfere with JCT’s responsibility for gress. It is time to fight back and fun- is entirely consistent with existing and control over revenue estimates in damentally reform the way we finance laws and practice, under which the re- any part of the congressional budget congressional elections. We need a sys- sponsibility and control over revenue process. tem that allows candidates to focus on estimates in the congressional budget However, I must note that on the constituents instead of fundraising—a process lies squarely with the chair and broader point of dynamic estimates, I system that encourages ordinary vice chair of the JCT. am opposed, and I was therefore op- Americans to make their voice heard The budget resolution also specifies posed to section 3112 being included in with small, affordable donations to the that legislation may be designated to the budget resolution and conference candidate of their choice. be ‘‘major’’ if the chair of the Com- agreement to start with. Dynamic esti- That is why I am once again intro- mittee on the Budget in the Senate or mates rely on shaky math and conven- ducing the Fair Elections Now Act. the House designates the legislation as ient assumptions that reward advo- While this bill cannot solve all of the such ‘‘for all direct spending and rev- cates of tax cuts while punishing advo- problems facing our Nation’s campaign enue legislation.’’ Of course, existing cates of long-term investments in peo- finance system, the Fair Elections Now laws and practice assigns responsibility ple and our Nation’s infrastructure. Act will dramatically change the way and control over spending estimates f campaigns are funded. This bill allows with the Budget Committees. However, FAIR ELECTIONS NOW ACT candidates to focus on the people they the budget resolution includes ‘‘rev- represent, regardless of whether those enue legislation’’ as part of what the Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, it was 8 people have the wealth to attend a big Budget Committee chairs may use for years ago that I first introduced the money fundraiser or donate thousands designating legislation as being Fair Elections Now Act. Former Sen- of dollars. ‘‘major.’’ ator Arlen Specter, our late colleague I would like to thank Sens. BALDWIN, As I understand the intent of the lan- and former chairman of the Judiciary BOXER, BROWN, FRANKEN, GILLIBRAND, guage, when major legislation is to be Committee, was my lead cosponsor. We HEINRICH, KLOBUCHAR, LEAHY, MARKEY, considered, there can be cases in which introduced the bill because we believed MCCASKILL, MENENDEZ, MERKLEY, MUR- the legislation may require estimates that America needs a system that re- PHY, SANDERS, SHAHEEN, UDALL, and both from the JCT and from the Con- wards candidates with the best ideas WARREN for cosponsoring the Fair gressional Budget Office, or CBO. In and principles—not just the person who Elections Now Act and joining me in such cases, there is nothing to prohibit is the most talented in raising special this effort to reform our campaign fi- use of longstanding practice in which interest money. nance system. the Budget Committees consult with I noted that day that our democracy the chair and vice chair of the JCT to was in trouble because special interests The Fair Elections Now Act will help ensure that any necessary revenue esti- and big-donor money were choking the restore public confidence in congres- mates are arrived at by the JCT, for system and preventing us from facing sional elections by providing qualified use in scoring major legislation. To be up to the big challenges of our time. candidates for Congress with grants, clear, however, nothing in the budget Little did I know that almost a decade matching funds, and vouchers from the resolution should be taken to mean later, this problem would have grown Fair Elections Fund to replace cam- that the chairs of the Budget Commit- much worse. paign fundraising that largely relies on tees have authority to interfere with Through a series of recent cases—in- lobbyists, wealthy donors, corpora- the responsibility and control over rev- cluding the infamous Citizens United tions, and other special interests. In re- enue estimates in any part of the con- decision—the Supreme Court has al- turn, participating candidates would gressional budget process which, as I lowed wealthy, well-connected cam- agree to limit their campaign spending identified earlier, lies squarely with paign donors and special interests to to amounts raised from small-dollar the chair and vice chair of the JCT. unleash a deluge of cash in an effort to donors plus the amounts provided from It is my understanding that the budg- sway Federal, State, and local elec- the Fair Elections Fund. et resolution does not direct or allow tions across our Nation. When it comes The Fair Elections system would for any possibility of such interference, to understanding the influence of have three stages for Senate can- and my purpose in the remarks I am wealthy donors and special interests on didates. First, candidates would need making today is to make that under- Federal elections, the numbers speak to prove their viability by raising a standing clear. As I have mentioned, for themselves. minimum number and amount of longstanding practice has been that if In the 2012 election cycle, candidates small-dollar qualifying contributions a need arises for the CBO to obtain in- for both the House and Senate raised from in-state donors. Qualified can- formation on major legislation from the majority of their funds from large didates would then be required to limit the JCT in terms of revenue estimates donations of $1,000 or more. Forty per- the amount raised from each donor to or effects of legislative proposals on cent of all contributions to Senate can- $150 per election. marginal effective tax rates, Budget didates came from donors who maxed In the primary, participants would Committee members can ensure that out at the $2,500 contribution limit, receive a base grant that would vary in those estimates and effects are ob- representing just 0.02 percent of the amount based on the population of the tained by consulting with the chair and American population. State that the candidate seeks to rep- vice chair of the JCT. This long- We saw this trend continue during resent. Participants would also receive standing practice ensures smooth proc- the recent midterm elections. The 100 a 6 to 1 match for small-dollar dona- essing of the JCT’s workload, and pre- biggest donors gave a combined $323 tions up to a defined matching cap. vents any direct control or interven- million during the 2014 election cycle After reaching that cap, the candidate tion in JCT’s workload from other through official campaign contribu- could raise an unlimited amount of $150 committees with other jurisdictions. tions and donations to national party contributions, as well as contributions Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I share committees, PACs, Super PACs, and from small-donor People PACs. the concern of my colleague, the Fi- 527 organizations. In contrast to those In the general election, qualified can- nance Committee chairman, and I sup- 100 donors, an estimated 4.75 million didates would receive an additional VerDate Sep 11 2014 04:01 Jun 12, 2015 Jkt 049060 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G11JN6.071 S11JNPT1 smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SENATE June 11, 2015 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S4099 grant, further small-dollar matching, democracy, and we must address it. Ev- Opera of Chicago, Stroger Hospital, and and vouchers for purchasing television eryone is entitled to a seat at the in universities across the Nation. advertising. The candidate could con- table, but wealthy donors and big cor- Lester and his wife Renee have been tinue to raise an unlimited amount of porations shouldn’t be able to buy happily married for more than 60 years $150 contributions, as well as contribu- every seat. and have seven children. Renee serves tions from small-donor People PACs. The Fair Elections Now Act will re- as a founding member and former Under the Fair Elections Now Act, form our campaign finance system so president of the Women’s Board of candidates would have an incentive to that members of Congress can focus on Northwestern University and a life di- seek small donations. And citizens implementing policies in the best in- rector of the Multiple Sclerosis Soci- would have an incentive to donate to terest of the people who elected them— ety.