[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 145 (Monday, September 18, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S13678-S13679]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            REIMBURSING MEMBERS' COSTS AT CHARITABLE EVENTS

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, sometimes this body resembles, at least 
to me, perhaps ``The Gang That Couldn't Shoot Straight.'' Let me share 
an example from Alaska relating to Senate passage of new restrictions 
on the acceptance of gifts by Senators, which was recently adopted by 
this body.
  In crafting this new rule, we were certainly shooting at the Senate's 
past practices, where some Members inappropriately did accept gifts 
from lobbyists. Unfortunately, the target that we actually hit with our 
shots were the charities that had committed absolutely no wrongdoings, 
unless trying to raise money from time to time for the needy is now, 
somehow, inappropriate in this body.
  First, let me make it clear that I fully support the new rule 
limiting gifts to Senators from any one source to $100 and making all 
gifts over $10--whether they be lunch or a fruit basket--count against 
the limit. Through that limit, the Senate has gone a long way to end 
the public perception that lawmakers give special favors to those who 
take us to lunch or take us to dinner or whatever.
  But the new rule contains a glaring inconsistency and a level of 
hypocrisy that leaves a sour taste in my mouth. The chief problem is 
that under the measure we now have adopted, private parties would not 
be able to reimburse Members for the costs of transportation and 
lodging to a charitable event. But Senators still would be permitted to 
be privately reimbursed if 

[[Page S 13679]]
they travel to a fundraising event, in Hollywood or San Francisco or 
Florida, for another Senator, and they could receive reimbursement for 
lodging--a clear inconsistency. We cannot do it for charity; but we can 
do it for politics.
  Some suggest that politics is our business and that is why we should 
be allowed to continue to do it. But charity is also a worthy cause. 
Every Senator has, at one time or another, made a campaign appearance 
for his party or another member of his party. But the Senate now has 
created a system where politicians can travel all over this country 
attending political fundraisers and be reimbursed for travel and 
lodging but cannot be reimbursed for participating in charity events. 
This means the Senator can accept travel, lodging and dinner in some 
plush spot, elbow to elbow, on occasion, perhaps, with lobbyists, if he 
or she is raising money for a political group but cannot be reimbursed 
for participation in a charity event.
  The source of funds for both charity and political events is often 
the same, donations of lobbyists and political action committees. The 
irony is that inside the beltway, charities still will be able to 
encourage the participation of business executives with the presence of 
Senators as a lure, but the charities in the distant States such as 
mine, in Alaska, will be shut out of the means to raise funds for 
worthy causes such as breast cancer detection screening.
  Last year my wife, Nancy, and I were the honorary chairs of a charity 
fishing tournament held outside Ketchikan, AK. The tournament raised 
$150,000 for the Breast Cancer Detection Center of Fairbanks. Money for 
the center was used to pay for a new mammography machine. The center, 
founded in 1976 by my wife and a group of Fairbanks women, provides 
free or reduced-cost breast cancer examination for about 2,200 women a 
year on average. Over the years, women from 81 Alaska villages have 
benefited from these tests.
  This year, we proceeded with a second event at a place called 
Waterfall, near Ketchikan. We raised approximately $210,000 and were 
able to give the Breast Cancer Detection Center of Alaska $200,000 to 
allow them to order a mobile mammogram unit, which will be traversing 
the highways of Alaska next spring. It will be able to be utilized on 
the ferry systems and by barge systems and will be brought into the 
remote villages. This is a van, equipped with a mammography machine. It 
will also be able to be transported by the Air National Guard into some 
of the 220 rural villages in my State.
  This unit is going to be vital to preserve the health of Alaska's 
women, including many Native women. I might add, the State's breast 
cancer mortality is the second highest in the Nation. One in eight 
Alaska women will develop breast cancer, with about 50 a year dying 
from that disease. Breast cancer screening can reduce this rate by some 
30 percent.
  My clear preference would have been to allow Senators to continue to 
come to this charity event, events approved previously by the Senate 
Ethics Committee to guarantee that they were legitimate charities. It 
seems to me, when Congress attacks charity events while leaving big 
loopholes for political travel, it simply puts us all in the bull's 
eye, furthering the public's growing skepticism toward public 
officials.
  The gift rule and related lobbying reform legislation that the Senate 
has approved overall are certainly good steps to restore public 
confidence in the Senate and Congress. But why shoot down legitimate 
charities? Mr. President, that is just what we have done.
  I thank the Chair and yield the floor.
  I thank my colleague for allowing me this extra time.

                          ____________________