[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 30 (Tuesday, March 11, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E429]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           WE DON'T ALL DO IT

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. TOM CAMPBELL

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Tuesday, March 11, 1997

  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. Speaker, the most disappointing phrase anyone 
serving in public office can hear today is they all do it. That is, 
essentially, the White House defense of the crass sale of Presidential 
perks to major donors to the President's party. From the public polling 
data, it appears the President and Vice President are winning with this 
defense. Since everyone does it, it sounds almost hypocritical for 
critics to point out the unique venality of the White House political 
machine. There is a surmise that Members of Congress also sell perks of 
office for campaign advantage. In fact, we do not.
  Let me contrast what we have learned about the President and Vice 
President with what is typical of a congressional office. In my 
congressional office, I receive letters of praise and letters of 
criticism. I do not send the letters of praise over to my campaign 
office so that funds can be solicited from those who wrote. I receive 
an extra ticket to the State of the Union address and to speeches by 
visiting heads of state to Congress. I do not auction those off, but 
give them to my staff. When people ask to get on my schedule to talk 
about a political topic, I schedule the meetings for the coffee shop 
across from my district office in California; in Washington, I schedule 
them at the private Capitol Hill Club. I don't make fundraising calls 
from my congressional office--and I don't know any Members of Congress 
who do. I know that Government locations are for carrying out the 
Nation's business, not for dialing-up contributors. So does everyone 
with any ethical sense above numbness.
  That's why I found the Vice President's excuse that he thought the 
law didn't apply to him so bizarre.
  In his White House news conference, which some in the press called 
surreal, the Vice President stated--no less than seven times--that 
counsel had advised him that ``there was no controlling legal 
authority'' showing him in violation of the law.
  First--there is such ``controlling legal authority.'' It's called the 
U.S. Code.
  Section 607, of title 18, of the United States Code states that, ``It 
shall be unlawful for any person to solicit or receive any contribution 
* * * in any room or building occupied in the discharge of official 
duties by any person mentioned in section 603 * * *.'' Section 603 of 
Title 18, defines ``any person'' to include ``an officer or employee of 
the United States or any department or agency thereof, or a person 
receiving any salary or compensation for service from money derived 
from the Treasury of the United States * * *.'' Violators of section 
607 can be fined and/or imprisoned for up to 3 years. How much more 
clear can it be?
  Second--put the law to one side. What about a sense of personal 
ethics? Do we really need a law to say--``Don't use the public's money 
for personal political gain?''
  Mr. Speaker, in light of the President and Vice President's actions, 
Congress needs to send a signal of hope and self-confidence to the 
entire country that we don't all do it. Regrettably, many people 
looking at Congress think each of us does pretty much the same sort of 
thing, or at least looks the other way when one of our colleagues does. 
Well, as a matter of fact, not everyone does use public office for 
personal political gain. And not every one of us looks the other way, 
either.

                          ____________________