[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 137 (Wednesday, September 6, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H8548]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         INFLUENCE OF LOBBYISTS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Everett). Under a previous order of the 
House, the gentleman from California [Mr. Bilbray] is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Speaker, it is quite invigorating to see Members of 
Congress coming back from time in their districts. It is as if they 
have gotten a breath of fresh air of reality every once in a while. And 
I guess that is the best thing about Members of Congress going back to 
their districts. They leave the stifling air of Washington, where 
people start believing their own lies, and they go and really touch 
base with the real people who make this country operate, not those of 
us that stay within the beltway.
  I have to say, though, it is sort of interesting to see how fired up 
Members are at this time and then watch how it tapers off. I was quite 
interested in the gentlewoman from Colorado stating that somehow this 
Congress is not moving its budget agenda along quick enough, and that 
how previous Congresses had done it so much more quickly. Well, Mr. 
Speaker, I just wish to point out that the fact is, yes, previous 
Congresses have moved along the budget, but when you
 move garbage fast, it is still garbage. An unbalanced budget is an 
unbalanced budget.

  We may be taking a little more time because we are doing something 
that has not been done in too long a period, and that is we are going 
to have a balanced budget design for the next 7 years.
  Now, Mr. Speaker, there is a lot of talk about influence of lobbyists 
here in Congress. But I was here a year ago, and now I am here as a 
Member of Congress, and there is a big difference, and I want the 
members of the public to understand. You watch what is said and talked 
about here on the floor, but it is what happens off this floor that you 
really have to be aware of.
  Those of you that are in the gallery, if you come down on this floor 
now you do not see the floor lined with lobbyists, you do not see 
Members of Congress having to run a gauntlet of influence peddlers 
trying to get to a Congress Member before they vote because the new 
majority, the new Republican majority has done what the Democratic 
majority refused to do for 40 years: Tell the lobbyists to get off this 
floor and leave it for legislation.
  So all this talk about reducing the influence of lobbyists I think 
sounds great on the floor, but actions speak louder than words. And for 
those who want to come to Washington to see the difference, as a 
citizen I was shocked at how many lobbyists were on this floor a year 
ago. And as a legislator I am proud of what Newt Gingrich and the 
leadership with Mr. Armey has done to make sure we straighten this out.
  Mr. Speaker, I have here an edition of Surfer Magazine that was given 
to me by a surfer, $35. It was a gift because they wanted me to read 
the environmental issues that surfers are concerned about. At the same 
time, a political action committee can donate almost $10,000 to me 
politically every cycle. For the minority, the Democratic Party, to sit 
and say they want to limit the influence of lobbyists and special 
interests by talking about what kind of gifts we can take, when they 
are actively protecting the right of special interest groups to load 
money up into political action committees and drop thousands of dollars 
on us that an individual could not do, I think is really cynical.
  I will leave this challenge to the new minority: That if you really 
wanted to limit the influence of special interest groups, let us 
support the Wamp Congress Act, Zach Wamp's proposal, which means a 
political action committee can only give as much as an individual can 
give.
  Let us empower individuals to influence Congress as much as we 
empower the political action committees and the special interest 
groups. Let us have the guts to really talk about it. You talk about 
the donation to this Member, but the fact is that $10,000 around being 
pumped into a Member has a hell of a lot more influence than what 
anything we are talking about. I do not play golf, so I am not worried 
about this issue, but I do worry about the influence of political 
action committees.
  I call on you to join with Members on both sides of the aisle in 
limiting the level of contributions that political action committee can 
make, and make it equal to what an individual citizen of the United 
States can make to a Member of Congress. Let us raise the individual 
contribution to $2,000 for an individual and let us lower the political 
action committee's contribution to $2,000, and then we can talk about 
what kind of influence the political action committees and the 
lobbyists have on this Congress.
  We have cleared this floor of the lobbyists, let us clear the air. 
Let us not be self-righteous at this time and talk about a contribution 
from a surfing magazine. Let us talk about the thousands of dollars 
that political action committees pump into our campaigns, and let us 
all work together to limit that and encourage individual contributions, 
individual influence, not lobbyists' influence, not PAC influence.


                          ____________________