[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 104 (Tuesday, July 16, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H7641-H7642]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Farr] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight on the eve of 
this august body going into a debate on campaign finance reform. I 
think it is important in this hour of special orders to really discuss 
what is reform. The choice before this Congress is going to very clear. 
One bill will come before us that says we need to spend more money in 
campaigns. The other bill will be coming before us that says we have to 
spend less. I believe that less money is reform. More power to small 
contributors is reform. Preventing rich people from buying public 
office is reform. Eliminating soft money is reform. Leveling the 
playing field is reform. Limiting special influence in campaigns is 
reform.
  The bill that I authored, called the Farr bill does all these things. 
The Farr bill is reform. The Farr bill imposes voluntary spending 
limits. It imposes aggregate PAC limits. It reduces the PAC's max out 
from $10,000 to $8,000. It imposes aggregate large donor limits. Large 
donor in my bill is defined as anyone who gives $200 or more. It 
provides public benefits to all candidates, challengers, and incumbents 
alike. It levels the playing field for those who abide by the spending 
limits. It curbs campaign persuasion mail that is sent out under the 
phony guise of educational information.
  The American people want reform, not more of the same. For a Congress 
that despite its partisan differences has addressed the issue of 
reform, the gift ban, the lobbying reform, the congressional 
compliance, we should not let the opportunity for real campaign finance 
reform get away from us now. The American people want this.
  In the past months my office has logged 368 constituent letters in 
support of limits on money in congressional raises. In that same period 
of time, my office has logged exactly two constituent letters against 
limits on money in congressional races. I submit to my colleagues, if 
they check their offices, I think they will find the same ratio.
  My bill, which I hope to offer on Thursday during the floor debate, 
has one priority and one priority only: To control campaign spending. 
The money chase now in this country is out of control. In the past 
years, Congress has tried to put the break on the money chase. But each 
time the Republican leadership has prevented that from happening.
  Let us look at the record. In 1987, the Republicans filibustered a 
camapaign fiance bill in the Senate. In 1989, the House passed a bill 
but the Republicans delayed action in 1990 and set it until it was too 
late to appoint the conferees.
  In 1991, the House and Senate passed bills and later, in 1992, a 
final conference report was signed and sent to President George Bush 
and he vetoed it.
  In 1993, the House and Senate passed bills but in 1994, the 
Republicans

[[Page H7642]]

blocked the appointment of conferees. Since 1987, Democrats have been 
in the forefront of moving campaign finance reform. Here we are again 
today. We have toiled at bringing campaign finance reform to American 
politics for nearly a decade. We will not rest until we get it.
  The Democrat bill which I offer contains real reform that will make 
real changes to the electoral process in this country. My will seeks to 
reduce the power of money in elections and return that power to the 
people. Too much money too often decides who gets to Congress and who 
does not. Congress should be more reflective of the American 
population. Right now Congress is full of, and I must admit, white 
males like me. But my bill levels the playing field so that we will see 
more minorities, more women, more moderate income persons serving in 
the United States Congress, those who can run for office and be 
competitive.

  If we do not stop the money chase, if we do not stop wealthy people 
from buying office, this Congress will be one big elitist white boys 
club. If we do not impose some limits, as my bill does, if we do not 
enhance disclosure requirements, as my bill does, if we do not level 
the playing field, as my bill does, the American people will continue 
to complain about the influence of money in elections, about not being 
able to trace where the money comes from, about Congress not doing what 
it is supposed to to clean up the system.
  We have a chance this week on Thursday to clean up the system. I urge 
Members to take a look at my bill, take a look, and I speak to my 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle, take a look at H.R. 3505 and 
join me in voting for something that is really positive. Join me in 
showing the American people that like the gift ban, like lobbying 
reform, like the compliance act, this Congress can do what is right and 
enact serious reform to bring order out of chaos.

                          ____________________