[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 111 (Thursday, July 25, 1996)]
[House]
[Page H8519]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM, CLEAR CHOICE: MORE MONEY IN THE PROCESS, OR 
                                 LESS?

  (Ms. KAPTUR asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, the House voted down two campaign finance 
proposals today, neither of which solves the fundamental problem: the 
excessive influence of wealthy interests on our political process 
crowding out and even alienating average citizens from their own 
democracy. It is increasingly true that the real two-party system in 
our country consists not of Republicans and Democrats, but the party of 
donors and the party of voters.
  I voted in favor of the Farr substitute today because voluntary 
spending limits are better than no limits at all, and I completely 
disagree with Speaker Gingrich, who says that he would emphasize far 
more money in the political process.
  That is absolutely ludicrous. In fact the New York Times in a recent 
story says money is not speech, it is raw power, and that is why the 
only answer to this problem, because of the Supreme Court decisions, is 
passage of H.J. Res. 114 to allow Congress and the States to set 
mandatory limits on campaign expenditures.
  The choice is clear: More money in the process or less.

                          ____________________