[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 35 (Thursday, March 24, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: March 24, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                        S. 349--LOBBYING REFORM

                                 ______


                             HON. TOM LEWIS

                               of florida

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, March 24, 1994

  Mr. LEWIS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, due to family obligations I was 
unable to be present to vote on S. 349, the Lobbying Disclosure Act. 
Had I been present, I would have voted against this resolution for the 
following reasons.
  The Constitution of the United States grants each House of the 
Congress the power to, ``Determine the Rules of its Proceedings, (and) 
punish its Members for disorderly Behavior. . .'' Yet, Congress has 
been unable to establish standards that say to the American public, 
``We are here to represent you--not a paid lobbyist.'' By passing this 
bill Congress would be saying to the American public that the 
institution is not capable of enforcing any type of fundamental ethical 
standard and, to that extent we are asking those who lobby to take that 
responsibility.
  Proponents of this bill claim that it is true reform, because it, 
``bans gifts, meals, entertainment, travel-related expenses, 
reimbursements and loans from registered lobbyists to members of 
Congress and their staff.'' Yet, this bill details a number of 
exemptions. These exemptions will perpetuate what has created the 
public perception that precipitated the introduction and calls for 
passage of this legislation. With this in mind, I believe that Congress 
has the responsibility not to legislate on the basis of misguided 
public perceptions, Congress has a responsibility to clarify public 
opinion. Congress should legislate in a manner that when true reform is 
necessary--true reform is achieved. S. 349 does not fit this criteria.
  In addition Mr. Speaker, S. 349, creates a whole new bureaucracy for 
the purpose of registering all paid lobbyists a process which has been 
in place since established in 1946. I find this fiscally irresponsible 
as the Congressional Budget Office has not made a cost estimate on this 
bill. With all the authority granted to this new bureaucracy, and the 
number of lobbyists already registered in Washington, the size of this 
office has not even been discussed. Thus, amid calls for smaller 
government the bill would create a new agency at the taxpayers expense 
further burdening a Government which already has a $ five trillion 
debt.
  Mr. Speaker, finally, I am concerned about the procedure in which 
this legislation was brought before the House. Under the rule passed, 
an extremely closed legislative procedure was enacted for the 
consideration of this bill. Furthermore, this bill was never even 
considered at the full committee level. I find it ironic that the 
supporters of this bill claim that it is intended to ``open up the 
process. . . to ensure a fair and open legislative procedure . . . to 
end the perception that this is a closed institution''--yet, the bill 
itself was being considered under an extremely narrow Congressional 
procedure which does not permit amendments to the legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, it is for these reasons why, had I been present, I would 
have voted against S. 349.

                          ____________________