[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 170 (Tuesday, October 31, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H11578-H11579]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         OUT-OF-CONTROL BUDGET

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Gutknecht] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, this House has performed some 
groundbreaking work by ranging in on the Nation's out-of-control 
budget. Before we passed a reconciliation bill last week, Americans had 
been weighed down by the annual deficits that exceeded $200 billion a 
year. Their children were saddled with a national debt of almost $5 
trillion. On its way to that historical reconciliation bill which 
balances the Federal budget in less than 7 years, Members of this House 
made some difficult decisions to lift that weight from Americans' 
shoulders and to free future generations of a lifetime of government 
servitude.
  However, Mr. Speaker, the House's work is not finished. There is one 
more tough decision left on the table, the decision to lift and end 
subsidies for special interests. This welfare program is actually a 
Federal grant system. Under this system, Federal agencies award money 
to private organizations to perform various services. Unfortunately, 
these services and the agencies that are paid to perform them, are not 
always the wisest use of taxpayers' dollars. Expense amounts, and this 
expense, and this is important, this expense amounts to $40 billion a 
year.

  Fortunately, just as Americans called on Congress to balance the 
Federal budget, so they have called on Congress to end this unofficial 
entitlement for special interests. The interests I speak of are those 
who represent advocacy groups that, because they are classified by the 
Internal Revenue Service as tax exempt, see themselves as charities. 
But some of these organizations do not practice charity. Charity is 
generosity, helpfulness, relief given to needy or suffering people.
  What some of these advocacy groups practice, however, is really greed 
and influence. These organizations do not extend a helping hand to the 
poor and the needy, they extend their open hand, palm up, to the 
taxpayers for a handout. Many times, this money goes directly into the 
organization's coffers to hire more lobbyists who, in turn, ask 
Congress and Federal agencies for even more money and more legislation 
and regulations sympathetic to their organization's political agenda.
  Americans cannot afford to have special interest charities double-
dipping from the public trough, using the net gain from this tax-exempt 
status to pay lobbyists to hit Congress up for additional money and 
power. Americans are no longer interested in funding this profane grant 
system.
  A national study performed just last month showed that a strong 
majority of Americans do not believe that special interest groups who 
receive funding from the Federal Government should be using these 
funds, either directly or indirectly, to lobby the Federal Government. 
By a margin of 70 to 26 percent, Americans agree that tax dollars 
should not be used to fund political activities. Of course, many of 
these nonprofit advocates claim that they are not using Federal money 
to lobby Congress. They maintain that there is a law against such a 
practice, and that they follow this law. But there is no way to verify 
this, because no group is required to open their books to Federal 
inspection.
  What is wrong here, and what is wrong with this picture? If an 
organization is going to use a taxpayer dollar, especially at a time 
when the dollar is spread so thin, then the organization should account 
for every penny and prove that the money is being spent appropriately 
and as it was supposed to be spent.

  Mr. Speaker, there is legislation pending in this House that would 
bring integrity to the Federal grant system and end this unofficial 
entitlement for lobbyists. Members will soon have an opportunity to 
vote on the Istook amendment to the Treasury-Postal conference report. 
If passed, any portion that receives more than one-third of its revenue 
in Federal funds, could spend no more than $100,000 on advocacy 
activities. Any nonprofit group with able activities of 300 million or 
more that engages in political activities will be prohibited from 
receiving Federal grants.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. GUTKNECHT. Yes, I do.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to mention to the gentleman from 
Minnesota that in the Treasury-Post Office conference committee I 
offered an amendment to the Istook-McIntosh bill that said groups and 
organizations that spend less than $25,000 a year on 

[[Page H11579]]

lobbying efforts and government outreach and contact would be exempted. 
That actually exempts 96 percent of these groups that we do need to 
have input from homeless shelters, museums, art galleries, symphonies 
and so forth, and that amendment takes away so much of the argument 
against the Istook bill that people have been giving us, where we need 
input, and we said okay, we have an amendment that took care of that.

  You know, I agree with the gentleman that the big, big money involved 
in this has been abused by people who say well, we are not lobbying. If 
they are not, why not support the bill?
  Mr. GUTKNECHT. I was just going to get to that, that the amendment 
that you offered would exempt 96 percent of those groups. What we are 
really talking about is a handful of people that have abused this 
system. But frankly, the abuse could amount to $200 million a year. It 
is time for it to stop. We cannot afford a subsidy for special 
interests. I think most people agree that it is wrong, and we will have 
an opportunity in the next several weeks to end subsidies for special 
interests.
  Mr. Speaker, I see my time has expired. I yield back the balance of 
my time.

                          ____________________