[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 6 (Thursday, January 23, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S673-S674]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM

  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, for just a brief period of time today, 
I want to talk about reform because I think the whole issue of the mix 
of money and politics and what we are going to do to change the system 
is going to become the key issue of this 105th Congress.
  People have been reading in the newspapers and they have been hearing 
on the radio or they have been seeing on TV all sorts of comment about 
the abuses which took place in this past campaign. My argument is that 
these abuses are embedded in the very ways in which we finance our 
campaigns.
  What has happened--and I do not think any of us should fool ourselves 
here, whether we are Republicans or Democrats--is that to most of the 
people in the country, from Pennsylvania to Minnesota to California, it 
does not even look like elections; it looks like auctions, and I think 
all too many people believe that national political leaders are for 
sale.
  I would like to say today on the floor of the Senate that I do not 
believe that is the case. I do not want to have anything to do with 
bashing of people in public service. I believe in public service. That 
is why I am here. That is why we are here.
  I also want to say today on the floor of the Senate that as a matter 
of fact we are talking about a certain kind of corruption, not as in 
the wrongdoing of individual officeholders, but it is systemic, and it 
is more serious. It has to do with the ways in which money determines 
what issues are on the table. It has to do with the ways in which money 
determines who has the disproportionate amount of access to 
decisionmaking. It has to do with the relationship between money and 
political clout. It has to do with the political system where too few 
people probably have too much wealth, power and say and the vast 
majority of the people feel locked out, not well represented.
  I would argue that the way big money has come to dominate politics 
has become the ethical issue of our time. I say to all of my 
colleagues--I make this appeal, and I want to follow

[[Page S674]]

up on this appeal with every bit of leverage I have as a Senator--that 
all of us in office should hate this system. On the one hand, it is a 
bit like the play ``Fiddler on the Roof''--you can argue that, well, 
no, people should not hate the system because in a way the current 
system is wired for incumbents. They can raise more money. But I really 
think all of us should hate this system, because even if you believe in 
your heart of hearts, even if you are absolutely convinced that the 
compelling need to raise money never has affected any position you have 
taken on any issue, even if you believe that, and hopefully it is the 
case, it sure does not look that way to people. If we want people to 
believe in this political process, and we want people to believe in our 
work, and we want people to believe in the Congress, and we want people 
to believe in us, then we better get this big money out of politics and 
we better turn this system not upside down--it is upside down right 
now--we better turn this system right side up.
  It is just crystal clear. The spending continues to skyrocket, and in 
1996 spending was up and participation down--more disillusionment, more 
indignation, more people in the country losing faith in the elections 
and losing faith in this political process.
  There are any number of different approaches that can be taken, and I 
want to talk about three. I have for the better part of last year, year 
and a half, worked with Senators Feingold and McCain, Senator Kassebaum 
was involved in this--she will be sorely missed--Senator Thompson, 
Senator Graham, and this effort, this piece of legislation, which still 
keeps too many big private dollars in politics, sure represents a very 
important and positive step forward: getting rid of all the soft money, 
all of the huge amounts of money that people can contribute in the name 
of party building, getting the costs of campaigns down, voluntary 
spending limits, some resources for candidates to help challengers. It 
goes in the right direction, and I will work hard with Senator McCain 
and Senator Feingold.

  There is a separate issue of soft money and all the ways in which 
people can contribute huge amounts of money, way beyond any spending 
limit, again, all in the name of party building. With more time, I will 
go into all of this in specifics. We ought to abolish that. And that 
would be a focus of mine. I will have a bill on soft money.
  In the best of all worlds, if you want to talk about desirability, I 
will tell you something. People in the country are in a downright anti-
status-quo mood, and I really think we ought to model ourselves after 
what Maine has done. Maine led the Nation. Maine passed the clean money 
option. And I will be introducing a bill, I hope with other Senators, 
as well, that essentially says, look, we are going to get all of the 
interested money out, and what we are going to essentially say to 
people in the country is, look, for around $5 per person, how about a 
system where the people own the elections? It is your election. And 
because it is your capital, it becomes your Government and we move all 
of this interested, big, private money out. We really do have a level 
playing field between challengers and incumbents, and we really do have 
clean money politics.
  I think that is the best system of all, and I look forward to 
introducing that bill with other Senators and pushing that forward as 
well.
  A final point. It may be that none of these approaches in their 
entirety will pass the Senate. And other people will have other ideas.

  But first, to people in the country who might be watching, and I will 
figure out other ways of having a wider forum: You have to turn up the 
heat, people. The citizens in this country have to turn up the heat. On 
February 22, in Minnesota, we are going to have a town meeting, 
hopefully with the whole congressional delegation. Lots of people are 
going to be there from Minnesota. They are going to come, and they are 
going to say: Senators and Representatives, we may not know all the 
specifics of each bill, but we want reform. We want you to change this 
system. We are tired of all the big money and we are tired of all the 
vicious attacks.
  People need to turn up the heat. I think we need something like Earth 
Day. I think we need Reform Day. I think we need to have congressional 
delegations from every State meeting with people back in the States on 
the same day within the next couple of months, because this Congress 
has to take action. And anybody listening, citizens who are listening, 
it has to happen in the first 100 days, because if it does not happen 
at the beginning of this Congress, the atmosphere is going to become 
poisonous. There will be finger pointing and accusations on both sides. 
Everybody is going to try to figure out their own angle, and it will 
not get done. But this is the time for the reform. Let us move towards 
real grassroots citizen action.
  Second, President Clinton, it is important for you to be outspoken. 
Presidential leadership, Presidential power--you need to push for the 
reform. Both parties have made plenty of mistakes. There have been 
plenty of transgressions. There is plenty of wrong, and the accusations 
can go back and forth in perpetuity. Why do we not, once and for all, 
change the system?
  Finally, for myself, at the beginning of this Congress--for a short 
period of time I had an interesting discussion with both leaders in 
which I maintained I did not know whether we should even go into 
recess. I thought between January 7 and January 20 we ought to focus 
just on reform. Now we have another recess period coming up in mid-
February. I think we need to give very serious thought to focusing on 
reform at the very beginning. I am going to try to use whatever 
leverage I have as a Senator to push in that direction.
  In the Labor and Human Resources Committee the other day I suggested 
another possibility. Again, these are just proposals as we try to 
figure out how we can move this process forward. I suggested that 
maybe, until we have the reform, what we need to do in every committee 
is to have people come in and testify, file written testimony as to 
whether or not they have given contributions or the organizations they 
represent have given contributions to the members of the committee in 
the year prior to testimony and the year after testimony. I do not know 
whether that is something to push forward and have a vote on or not.
  But I think, again, all of these approaches are not efforts to point 
the finger at a Senator or Representative. That is bashing. I want 
nothing to do with it. Or, for that matter, at anybody who is 
testifying. But I want to bring into sharp focus what is wrong with 
this process, the perceptions people have about it around the country, 
all the ways in which it has undercut democracy. You cannot have all of 
these huge amounts of money pouring into politics and elections and at 
the same time have real democracy where each person counts as one and 
no more than one. This is the compelling issue for this Congress.
  Mr. President, we have to take action.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. MURRAY. I thank the Chair.
  (The remarks of Mrs. Murray pertaining to the introduction of S. 200 
are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills 
and Joint Resolutions.'')
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Ashcroft). The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, I ask that I be allowed to speak for 10 
minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________