[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 45 (Thursday, March 28, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3101-S3102]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         NO GIFT BAN EXEMPTION

  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, today in the Washington Post, and 
yesterday in the Congress Daily, there were some articles suggesting 
that Senator McConnell, Chair of the Senate Ethics Committee, was 
talking about a blanket exemption on the gift ban--and there may be 
changes to this, and I hope so--for the upcoming political conventions 
in San Diego and in Chicago.
  Mr. President, I want to speak very briefly--and I suspect that I 
speak on behalf of other colleagues, Senator McCain from Arizona, 
Senator Feingold from Wisconsin, Senator Lautenberg, Senator Levin--
after more than 2\1/2\ years of negotiations and several hard-fought 
battles, just as the ink is drying, for a major change like this to be 
proposed, I think would be a serious breach of faith with the people in 
our country.
  Mr. President, a friend and former Senator, Eugene McCarthy, who, by 
the way, will be 80 this weekend, has joked with me about being a 
``Calvinist'' on congressional gift rules, but the reason many of us 
Senators worked very hard on this reform is that we want people to have 
more confidence and more trust and more faith in the political process. 
I just want to say that I really think if there is any kind of blanket 
exemption here, it would be a terrible mistake.
  I can see the headlines now: ``Members of Congress Take a Holiday 
from New Ethics Rule;'' or ``Pressed By Special Interests, Members 
Backslide to Provide Access;'' or another headline, ``Safe Harbor From 
Ethics Rules Members Let Their Hair Down at the Conventions.''
  Mr. President, I just want to make it clear to colleagues that we 
would be making a terrible mistake. It is one thing if there are 
specific issues that have to be resolved, specific problems where maybe 
there could be minor clarifications. I say just maybe because I think 
this gift ban legislation is very reasonable.
  But, quite frankly, people do not want to see us go into these 
conventions and having special interests pay for our hotels or having 
them pay for various kinds of outings or having them pay for fancy 
dinners. It is just simply out of the question, Mr. President.
  We have a $50 limit on a gift. You can take one up to $50. I say if 
somebody is thinking about eating more than $50 worth of shrimp at a 
gathering, this is becoming more a health care issue, not an issue of 
gift reform.
  I do not mean to be just talking about this with a twinkle in my eye, 
but I want to say to colleagues, I do not know what was intended by 
these comments, but those who worked very hard on this certainly would 
be out on the floor. If there was any broad or blanket exemption, we 
would oppose it with all our might. And, more importantly, people in 
this country would not stand for it.
  Mr. President, let me just say one more time: The ink is barely dried 
on these new gift rules, and some are now proposing to relax them. All 
of a sudden we hear about possible exemptions from the gift rules while 
Members are at the conventions. For Democrats and Republicans alike--
let me be bipartisan--it would be a huge mistake to go

[[Page S3102]]

back on the very reform law that we passed a few months ago. We must 
not do it.
  There should not be any broad exemptions for these political 
conventions. We ought to live up to the law of the land that we passed. 
We ought to live up to this reform. We all ought to go by very high 
standards. I think people want us to.
  I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________