[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 41 (Wednesday, April 9, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H1378-H1383]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The gentleman from 
Massachusetts [Mr. Tierney] is recognized for the remainder of the 
hour.
  Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield at this time to the 
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Davis].
  Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from 
Massachusetts for yielding.
  Our Founding Fathers, the authors of our Constitution, created 
something that the world had never seen, a representative government 
based on the popular election of the legislative and executive 
branches. It was a powerful idea whose time had indeed come.
  Based on the study of the most advanced ideas of that date, it has 
taken us now more than 200 years to extend those basic ideas to include 
all of the people in this country, black, white, Hispanic, Asian, 
Native American, men and women; and I would like to add rich and poor 
to the list.
  But, unfortunately, our democratic system has been attacked by a 
virus of virulence that our Founding Fathers could never have imagined, 
money. By some estimates, our last national elections cost $2 billion. 
And according to a study by the Center for Responsive Politics, 9 out 
of 10 U.S. House races were won by candidates who outspent their 
opponents in the election, and in nearly 40 percent of the House races 
the winner outspent the loser by a factor of 10 to 1 or more.
  In competitive races, House candidates are spending 50 percent more 
in real terms on TV and radio advertising than they did 20 years ago at 
the time of Buckley versus Valeo. Thirty years ago, the average sound 
bite on the TV news was 42 seconds. By 1992, that bite was trimmed to 
less than 10 seconds. Literally, money talks, and because money talks, 
and when it talks it drowns out almost all other political discourse, 
money has distorted, corrupted, and perverted our political system.
  It is time to get back to the basic democracy of Benjamin Franklin, 
Elizabeth Stanton, Frederick Douglass, Susan Anthony, and Martin Luther 
King. We are past the time for halfway and halfhearted patches on the 
system. Belief that this closure alone will remedy the problem is akin 
to belief in the tooth fairy. Solving the problem by just regulating 
soft money is about as likely as expecting pigs to fly.
  I believe that the basic principles of campaign reform, at a very 
minimum, should be these:
  First, take money out of the equation; finance all Federal campaigns 
through voluntary full public funding; amend the Constitution to 
prohibit Federal candidates from using private funds; provide voters 
with enough unfiltered information to make informed choices; open up 
television, radio, and other media for a discussion of the issues by 
the candidates; shorten the election cycle; create a truly independent 
regulatory agency to monitor and make public the spending of public 
campaign moneys; require paid lobbyists to publicly report who and when 
they lobby; create universal voter registration; encourage 
experimentation with mail and electronic ballots and multiple day 
elections; require full disclosure of all independent expenditures.
  The fact that most Americans indicate that they have lost confidence 
in the functioning of our democratic elections and that most do not 
vote should be both a warning and a summons to action. The time to act 
is now, before

[[Page H1379]]

the American public continues to erode its faith in our democratic 
process.
  Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, I reclaim my time. I want to thank my 
colleague from Illinois and state, as a member of the Committee on 
Reform and Oversight, I would much rather be joining my colleagues 
debating and deliberating the issues you address than going down the 
avenue we are taking or seemingly going to take tomorrow.
  At this time, Mr. Speaker, I yield to my colleague from New York, 
Congresswoman Maloney.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, the Committee on Government 
Reform and Oversight will soon vote on whether to hold a serious 
campaign finance investigation or to hold a narrowly focused, partisan, 
wasteful charade. The chairman of that committee has begun a blatantly 
partisan investigation of the White House to embarrass the President. 
He proposes, he has an unprecedented proposal, and that is to limit the 
scope very narrowly only to the actions of the executive branch 
officials and only to the Presidential election. Doing so, limiting it 
only to the 1996 Presidential campaign and the executive branch, means 
it will focus only on the Clinton campaign and executive branch 
officials, means it will be only democratic violations that will be 
looked at.
  At the very least, if the chairman was serious about studying 
campaign finance violations, they would look at both campaigns; they 
would look at both the Democratic and the Republican campaigns. There 
have been published abuses in the Dole campaign and the Clinton 
campaign. We should study both campaigns if we are serious about 
finding solutions.
  Likewise, it should be expanded to cover the Congress, both branches, 
in the Senate campaigns and the House campaigns, if you are really 
looking at finding what is wrong with the system and trying to change 
it and make it better.
  The chairman plans to use $15 million for his investigation. That is 
three times more money investigating the President than the Senate is 
spending to investigate both the President and the Congress. That makes 
absolutely no sense, and it is wasteful.
  Mr. Speaker, the chairman has significantly broadened his own powers. 
He has issued more than 100 subpoenas without the committee's approval. 
Furthermore, the chairman is seeking unilateral authority to release 
the documents that he obtains by subpoena. The Senate, on the other 
hand, the Republican Senate, on the other hand, has voted unanimously 
and endorsed a bipartisan investigation of both Presidential and 
congressional campaigns regardless of party. They are looking at 
issues, not at politics.
  Led by Senator Fred Thompson and the Republican leadership, the 
Senate is charged with an investigation of both illegal and improper 
campaign finance practices during the past election. The scope is well 
defined and entirely appropriate to serve the public interest and to 
understand the full range of abuse. However, the House investigation 
which the chairman is proposing is not. The chairman's blanket 
authority to unilaterally issue subpoenas and release documents is 
without precedent.
  I want to state, Mr. Speaker, that this is the view that has been 
taken by all the good government groups. They are all criticizing the 
proposals that the Republican chairman has before the committee 
tomorrow: Public Citizen, the League of Women Voters, Common Cause, 
NYPIRG; they have all come out in opposition to this.

                              {time}  1545

  The Perot party has come out in opposition to this. This is not 
partisan opposition; this is good government, commonsense opposition.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to quote from Common Cause: ``This issuance 
of a formal subpoena is a serious matter subject to great potential 
abuse.''
  They go on, and I quote, ``It is inappropriate for a committee 
chairman to have the unchecked authority to unilaterally issue a 
subpoena which could be intended to harass, to embarrass, or oppress 
the other party.''
  Deans of this House on both sides, and the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania, Mr. Clinger, I served with him, a Republican who was the 
chairman of this committee, he would never, never do anything like 
this. I heard both Mr. Clinger and the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. 
Dingell] on our side of the aisle say that the best legislation is 
legislation that is bipartisan, that is thoughtful, that is intended to 
help public policy.
  The proposal that the Republican chairman is putting forth before the 
committee, according to Common Cause, Public Citizen, the League of 
Women Voters is unprecedented, wrong, anti-Republican, anti-Democrat, 
anti-good government, anti-common sense, wasteful, and should not be 
done.
  I would like to caution all Members of this body on both sides of the 
aisle that everyone should think very carefully before they would vote 
for a proposal that absolutely the entire country seems to be opposed 
to except the chairman of this particular committee. I hope everyone 
will read the documents he is putting forward and read the statements 
of the groups that have come forward in opposition.
  Mr. Speaker, I am entering into the Record the statements of Common 
Cause, Public Citizen, NYPIRG, the League of Women Voters, and other 
government groups that have uniformly and with great force come out in 
opposition to the proposal that the chairman, Republican chairman, is 
putting forth.

 Statement by Tom Andrews, National Program Director, Citizen Action--
                     News Conference, April 7, 1997

       When it comes to the way political campaigns are financed 
     in this country, Americans have two fundamental beliefs: 1) 
     they are disgusted with the way things are and 2) they are 
     highly cynical about the prospects of politicians cleaning it 
     up.
       Incredibly, it is possible that the House Committee on 
     Government Reform and Oversight may exclude from its 
     investigation into campaign fundraising practices illegal or 
     improper campaign fundraising by members of Congress. 
     Apparently Chairman Burton would like to restrict the scope 
     of his Committee's work to only one party by probing only 
     into the White House and the Democratic National Committee. 
     Apparently we are to believe that there is nothing to worry 
     about when it comes to any other politician's fundraising 
     practices--certainly not the U.S. Congress.
       In light of how disgusted Americans are with politics as 
     usual, Chairman Burton's move needs to be entered into 
     Ripley's Believe it Or Not. It is unbelievable that a House 
     Committee would actually vote to begin an investigation of 
     the campaign fundraising practices of politicians by 
     systematically excluding the U.S. Congress. I know how out of 
     touch some politicians can become from real people but you 
     would have had to have traveled to Mars for the Congressional 
     recess not to know how angry people are with big money in 
     politics and how disgusted they will be with any 
     investigation that attempts to sweep the truth under the rug 
     before it even begins.
       The issue here is clear. The Senate voted unanimously to 
     open up their investigation to the entire campaign 
     fundraising problem as it relates to all Washington 
     politicians. To do anything else on the House side will 
     render their investigation at best incomplete and, at worse, 
     a partisan hatchet job that exhibits what Americans have come 
     to hate most about politics.
       The vote on this issue will become a marker for members of 
     the Committee. Those who vote against a complete and fair 
     investigation that includes Congress as well as the White 
     House, will clearly identify themselves as a major part of 
     the problem. Because every politician has learned to talk a 
     good game on this issue, this vote will be very useful for 
     citizens to know which side their member of Congress is 
     really on when it comes to cleaning up our political system.
       Every member of the committee needs to know that you can 
     run but you cannot hide on this issue. Your vote will be 
     counted and you will be held accountable. There is no excuse 
     for anything less than a full and fair investigation of the 
     mess and the scandal of the role of big money in our 
     political system. Any member who votes against such a full 
     investigation can expect to be asked by their constituents at 
     home: ``What do you have to hide?''
       People are tired of the excuses, the inaction and the 
     partisan manipulation. They want and deserve to have a 
     democracy taken back from the monied special interests that 
     bankroll candidates and returned it to it's rightful owners--
     the American people.
                                                                    ____


   Statement by Becky Cain, President, League of Women Voters of the 
                          U.S.--April 8, 1997


 Calling on the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight to 
        Broaden the Scope of its Campaign Finance Investigation

       Good afternoon, I'm Becky Cain, President of the League of 
     Women Voters.
       We are here today to call upon the House Government Reform 
     and Oversight Committee to conduct a fair and comprehensive 
     investigation into campaign finance practices. We are deeply 
     concerned that the committee is poised to head in the wrong 
     direction, to

[[Page H1380]]

     conduct an investigation that will not have the confidence of 
     the American people.
       Last month the Senate voted to expand the scope of its 
     probe into campaign finance to include presidential and 
     congressional fundraising practices, both illegal and 
     improper. That vote was unanimous. Senators understood that 
     if their investigation was to have any credibility, it had to 
     include congressional as well as presidential fundraising 
     practices. They understood that the investigation had to be 
     conducted with fair procedures.
       Here on the House side, however, we face a very different 
     situation. The chairman of the House Committee on Government 
     Reform and Oversight has insisted on excluding Congress from 
     the House investigation. This simply is unacceptable.
       On Thursday, the full committee will vote on a ``protocol'' 
     to guide the House investigation. We call upon the committee 
     to vote for an investigation that explicitly includes 
     Congress in its scope. We call upon the committee to vote for 
     procedures that ensure fairness.
       Simply leaving the scope undefined is not an acceptable 
     option. The chairman has made abundantly clear his desire to 
     strictly limit the scope, so the committee must make 
     explicitly clear that the Congress is included.
       If the House investigation is to have a dime's worth of 
     credibility, members must send the chairman a simply message: 
     expand the probe to include Congress, and adopt fair 
     procedures. The Senate investigation provides a good model.
       Under the chairman's proposal, members of the committee 
     will be voting to exempt their own fundraising practices from 
     investigation. Members of the committee who do not demand and 
     vote for an expanded inquiry will be putting themselves 
     beyond the reach of the probe. Congress must not exempt 
     itself from investigation. Congress isn't supposed to be 
     above the law. How can members of Congress exempt their own 
     campaign fundraising from investigation? The American people 
     won't buy it.
       Anyone who believes that campaign finance abuses are 
     limited to one branch of government simply isn't reading the 
     papers these days. The system is a mess and needs to be 
     examined from top to bottom.
       An investigation focusing solely on presidential 
     fundraising activities will be seen for what it is, just one 
     more political game. Instead, Congress must be included in 
     the House investigation.
       Members who think that this vote will slide under the 
     radar, think again. The New York Times reported today that 
     nearly nine out of ten Americans said that hearings should 
     investigate the fundraising activities of both parties. In 
     voting to exclude Congress, the committee acts in defiance of 
     the public's clear desire for a fair, bi-partisan 
     investigation
       The decision lies in the hands of Republican moderates on 
     this committee. Their votes will decide whether the House 
     will conduct an investigation that is credible and fair. 
     Their votes will decide whether the investigation goes after 
     wrongdoing wherever it can be found. By voting for the 
     chairman's proposal, these moderates would guarantee a 
     continuation of the partisan games that have characterized 
     the debate on campaign finance for too long.
       We are relying on moderates like Chris Shays, Connie 
     Morella, Steve Horn and Tom Davis to do the right thing.
       Local Leagues are taking action and calling on their 
     members who serve on this committee to stand up for a fair 
     investigation.
       The Senate faced this same question and voted for a 
     comprehensive investigation that looks into illegal or 
     improper activities in connection with 1996 federal election 
     campaigns, congressional as well as presidential. There is no 
     good reason for the House not to do the same. We believe that 
     members of this committee understand the importance of voting 
     to broaden the scope of the House investigation. We trust 
     they have the will to vote with their convictions.
       Thank you.
                                                                    ____


  Statement of Ann McBride, President of Common Cause, Regarding the 
 Upcoming Committee Vote on the House Government Reform and Oversight 
  Committee's Investigation Into Campaign Finance Abuses in the 1996 
                               Elections

       On Thursday, members of the House Government Reform and 
     Oversight Committee are scheduled to decide whether they will 
     spend the almost $4 million in taxpayer funds the Committee 
     has been allocated to conduct a partisan sideshow or a 
     thorough, complete investigation of the campaign finance mess 
     in Washington. The campaign finance abuses and violations in 
     the 1996 elections represent far too serious a crisis of 
     American democracy for this Committee's investigation to be 
     used for partisan game playing.
       The American public simply will not trust an investigation 
     that gives one party a free ride. A New York Times/CBS poll 
     published today found that 9 out of 10 Americans want these 
     hearings to investigate the fund-raising activities of both 
     parties.
       Any congressional investigation of campaign finance 
     practices to be conducted by the House Government Reform and 
     Oversight Committee must be comprehensive, fair and 
     bipartisan. Only an investigation which is comprehensive, 
     fair and bipartisan will have public credibility.
       To be comprehensive and bipartisan, the Committee must look 
     at fundraising improprieties and possible violations of law 
     by both the presidential and congressional campaigns as well 
     as by executive branch officials. Excluding congressional 
     campaign finance practices, as Chairman Burton proposes, 
     means the Committee will see only a partial picture of the 
     abuses with the existing campaign finance system. Among the 
     activities missed will be the growing soft money fundraising 
     and spending practices of the party congressional campaign 
     committees, the influence and access provided to special 
     interests and their lobbyists for campaign money, the use of 
     non-profits for partisan political activities and the misuse 
     of so-called independent expenditures by party committees in 
     congressional campaigns. Any credible campaign finance 
     investigation must include these and similar very serious 
     practices.
       Further, should the Committee narrow its scope to 
     wrongdoing by only executive branch officials, and not by 
     both 1996 presidential campaigns, it will fail to consider 
     possible serious violations by the Dole campaign. Common 
     Cause laid out last October in a letter to the Justice 
     Department how both the Clinton and Dole campaigns also 
     violated the applicable spending limit and misused soft 
     money. In order to be bipartisan, the investigation must 
     examine both campaigns.
       The Committee hearings also must be scrupulously fair. 
     Fairness will be insured only if the Committee follows 
     congressional precedents for investigative procedures, and 
     gives minority members a voice in the investigation. Chairman 
     Burton has proposed giving himself apparently extraordinary 
     powers including unilateral authority to issue subpoenas and 
     make public disclosures of investigative documents without 
     prior consent of, or even notification to, the ranking 
     minority member.
       The issuance of a formal subpoena is a serious matter, 
     subject to great potential abuse. While a ranking minority 
     member should not be allowed to block a subpoena in order to 
     obstruct an investigation of abuses by his party, it is also 
     dead wrong for a committee chairman to have unchecked 
     authority to unilaterally issue a subpoena.
       If the Committee does not conduct its investigation in a 
     manner that is--and that appears to be--comprehensive, fair 
     and bipartisan, then not only will the House have squandered 
     an important opportunity to understand the nature of this 
     crisis in order to correct it, but the House majority will be 
     seen by the American people as attempting to gain short term 
     partisan profit at the expense of acting responsibly to 
     address and solve these very serious problems.
       The American people will be watching what happens in the 
     Government Reform Committee on Thursday. Each member who 
     serves on the Committee bears personal responsibility to 
     stand up and be counted: To vote to ensure that both 
     presidential campaigns as well as congressional campaigns are 
     covered, and that the Committee's procedures are bipartisan 
     and fair.
                                                                    ____


   U.S. PIRG Urges House Committee To Broaden Campaign Investigation

       The U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) today joined 
     other reform organizations in calling on the House Government 
     Reform and Oversight Committee to broaden the scope of its 
     investigation into campaign finance reform practices. PIRG 
     urged the Committee to include both Congressional and 
     Executive Branch fundraising, as well as both improper and 
     illegal activities, in its investigation. The Committee, 
     chaired by Rep. Dan Burton (R-IN), has to date not decided to 
     hold a broad investigation that includes congressional 
     fundraising practices, in sharp contrast to the investigation 
     of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, chaired by Sen. 
     Fred Thompson (R-TN). The House committee will vote on the 
     protocol for its investigation this Thursday, April 10th.
       ``Limiting this investigation is like wearing dark glasses 
     to look in the shadowy corners of a dark house. Unless they 
     turn on the lights, the committee will miss a huge part of 
     the problem: fundraising practices in Congress itself,'' said 
     Bill Wood, democracy advocate with U.S. PIRG. ``We urge the 
     House Committee to, at a minimum, rise to the level of the 
     Senate investigation, and use their authority to illuminate 
     all kinds of problems in our current political fundraising 
     system,'' he continued.
                                                                    ____


Repudiate Representative Burton's One-Sided Investigation Into Campaign 
              Financing Consumer Group Asks House Members

       Washington.--Citizen Action, the nation's largest 
     independent consumer watchdog organization, today called on 
     the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee to vote 
     for a full investigation of all illegal and improper campaign 
     fundraising activities by both political parties, by the 
     White House and Congress.
       Citizen Action blasted the effort by Rep. Dan Burton (R-IN) 
     to conduct a narrow investigation that only includes the 
     White House and Democratic National Committee, but excludes 
     fundraising activities by Members of Congress.
       Joining with the League of Women Voters and other 
     organizations supporting campaign finance reform at a press 
     conference this afternoon, former Congressman Tom

[[Page H1381]]

     Andrews, Citizen Action National Program Director, declared, 
     ``In light of how disgusted Americans are with politics as 
     usual, Chairman Burton's move needs to be entered into 
     `Ripley's Believe it Or Not'. It is unbelievable that a House 
     Committee would actually vote to begin an investigation of 
     the campaign fundraising practices of politicians by 
     systematically excluding the U.S. Congress,'' continued 
     Andrews.
       ``It seems that Chairman Burton would like to restrict the 
     scope of his Committee's work to only one party by probing 
     only into the White House and the Democratic National 
     Committee. Apparently we are to believe that there is nothing 
     to worry about when it comes to any other politician's 
     fundraising practices--certainly not the U.S. Congress.
       ``I know how out of touch some politicians can become from 
     real people but you would have had to have traveled to Mars 
     for the Congressional recess not to know how angry people are 
     with big money in politics and how disgusted they will be 
     with any investigation that attempts to sweep the truth under 
     the rug before it even begins.
       ``The issue here is clear. The Senate voted unanimously to 
     open up their investigation to the entire campaign 
     fundraising problem as it relates to all Washington 
     politicians. To do anything else on the House side will 
     render their investigation at best incomplete and, at worst, 
     a partisan hatchet job that exhibits what Americans have come 
     to hate most about politics.
       ``The vote on this issue will become a marker for Members 
     of the Committee. Those who vote against a complete and fair 
     investigation that includes Congress as well as the White 
     House, will clearly identify themselves as a major part of 
     the problem. Because every politician has learned to talk a 
     good game on this issue, this vote will be very useful for 
     citizens to know which side their member of Congress is 
     really on when it comes to cleaning up our political system.
       ``Every member of the Committee needs to know that you can 
     run but you cannot hide on this issue. Your vote will be 
     counted and you will be held accountable. There is no excuse 
     for anything less than a full and fair investigation of the 
     scandal that is the role of big money in our political 
     system. Any Member who votes against such a full 
     investigation can expect to be asked by their constituents at 
     home: What do you have to hide? And there will be no excuse 
     for anything less than action that will take our political 
     system away from the monied special interests and returning 
     it to its rightful owners--the American people,'' concluded 
     Andrews.
                                                                    ____


  Reform Party Defends Public's Right to Know--Joins Coalition Urging 
             Broad Brush in Campaign Finance Investigation

       ``Citizens will not look kindly on an investigation that is 
     artificially restricted to prevent political damage,'' states 
     a letter mailed today to members of Congress. The letter 
     represents the interests of millions of Americans in getting 
     to the bottom of campaign finance abuses, once for all.
       The Reform Party has joined five citizen action 
     organizations, urging the Government Reform and Oversight 
     Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives to approve a 
     protocol for their investigation of campaign finance abuses 
     that is fair and bi-partisan in its scope. The other 
     organizations include the League of Women Voters, U.S. Public 
     Interest Research Group, United We Stand America, Public 
     Campaign and Public Citizen.
       Addressing the members of the Government Reform and 
     Oversight Committee of the Congress, the letter urges them, 
     as they vote on the protocol establishing the scope and 
     procedures for their investigation, to ``. . .broaden the 
     scope of the investigation to include the fundraising 
     practices of both parties' presidential and congressional 
     campaigns.'' The Senate has set a precedent for such a move 
     by voting to broaden the scope of their own investigation to 
     look at presidential and congressional fundraising, both 
     improper and illegal.
       ``The notion that the Committee's investigation should 
     exclude congressional fundraising practices smacks of a self-
     serving disregard for the public's right to know,'' the 
     letter states. ``In addition, it is imperative that the 
     investigation be conducted in a fair and non-partisan manner. 
     Procedural rules that put one party or the other at a 
     distinct disadvantage will cast doubt on the integrity of the 
     investigation. Scope and procedures that are anything less 
     than comprehensive and fair will completely undermine the 
     credibility of the House investigation from the outset.''
       Reform Party Chairman Russell Verney says, ``Every day, the 
     public trust is further eroded by more news of possible 
     improprieties and even illegal acts in both presidential and 
     congressional fundraising, from the selling of access in 
     exchange for big campaign contributions to the use of federal 
     property for fundraising. We're looking to the Congress to do 
     the people's business and conduct the fair, nonpartisan 
     investigation the situation demands one that digs deep and 
     lays out the truth, no matter what it is or who it touches. 
     The people will settle for nothing less.''
       For more information on campaign finance reform or about 
     the Reform Party, call the national Reform Party office at 
     (972) 450-8800, or contact your state Reform Party 
     headquarters.
                                                                    ____


     Statement of Joan Claybrook, President, Public Citizen, House 
              Investigation of Campaign Fundraising Abuses

       Public trust in our system of government is dangerously 
     low. Political gamesmanship and partisan sniping are 
     destroying voters' confidence in their lawmakers. So is the 
     corrupting spiral of legalized bribery better known as 
     special interest money.
       Attempts to limit the scope of the House investigation are 
     a transparent attempt to cover up the misuse of special 
     interest money swamping Congressional races and the methods 
     used to raise such sums.
       Congressional candidates poured $743 million into their 
     1996 campaigns. The disease of special interest corruption is 
     not confined to the executive branch of our government, so 
     why should the Government Reform and Oversight Committee's 
     investigation be confined only to the executive branch?
       The voters are demanding to know the full story behind the 
     litany of fundraising abuses in both the Administration and 
     Congress and by Democrats and Republicans alike.
       The Government Reform and Oversight Committee investigation 
     must not close its eyes to suspect activities like the 
     Republican donor access programs, where those who gave 
     $50,000 were guaranteed at least three private meetings with 
     GOP senators.
       The Committee must not close its eyes to the Republican 
     fundraising letter of 1995 promising that corporate 
     contributions of $25,000 or more would go ``directly to fund 
     House races''--an activity that would have been illegal.
       And it cannot close its eyes to public demands for action. 
     Today's poll in the New York Times shows almost nine of ten 
     people wanting fundamental changes or even a complete 
     overhaul of the political fundraising system, and nearly nine 
     of ten people wanting the Congressional investigations to 
     cover fundraising abuses by both parties.
       Chairman Burton must not be allowed to turn this 
     investigation into a partisan vendetta against the White 
     House that sweeps Congressional fundraising abuses under the 
     carpet. Giving him the power to control this investigation is 
     like appointing Pete Rose Commissioner of Baseball. Dan 
     Burton must not be allowed to seize unilateral power of 
     subpoena, and he must not be allowed to destroy the 
     credibility of the House of Representatives by confining its 
     investigation to one corner of a very huge problem.
       The Committee as a whole, not its chair must decide what 
     subpoenas are issued, or the power will become a partisan 
     weapon. The Committee as a whole should also control what 
     documents are released to the public. The Committee's probe 
     is far too important for it to be controlled by one 
     individual whose own activities are being investigated by the 
     Justice Department for abuses but who wants to decide which 
     abuses will be investigated and which will be ignored.
       Representatives must choose between a wide-ranging, 
     principled and fair investigation, or one that is conducted 
     for narrow partisan purposes that shields the indefensible 
     Congressional campaign finance system from scrutiny.
       Last month, because a handful of Republican senators stood 
     tall, the Senate voted unanimously to expand the scope of its 
     probe into campaign finance practices to include Presidential 
     and Congressional activities, both illegal and improper.
       Today, the question is whether the House--and the 
     Government Reform and Oversight Committee--also has the 
     courage to listen to the American people and investigate the 
     whole story.

  Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, at this point in time I would like to yield 
to my friend, the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Blagojevich].
  Mr. BLAGOJEVICH. Mr. Speaker, let me say that as a freshman this is 
my maiden voyage, this is the first time that I have addressed the 
House with regard to a question of an issue relating to procedure and 
an issue that relates to a committee.
  Let me say that as long as we are talking about investigations, I 
must confess, Mr. Speaker, that I have to plead guilty. I have to plead 
guilty to naivete.
  When I ran for Congress this last fall, I ran with the notion that 
Members of both political parties were going to try to work together to 
improve our country on the issues that are important to people in our 
respective communities. We were going to work to try to improve the 
quality of education; we were together to try to improve and repair our 
schools; we were going to try to fight crime and balance the Federal 
budget.
  I thought Congress was going to operate under the rule of law. I 
believe then, and I still believe, that Members of both parties want to 
act in good faith together to solve these problems and many other 
problems that face our communities. I must confess, however, that I was 
somewhat naive, and I must confess to being somewhat demoralized by the 
fact that as a freshman member of the Committee on Government Reform 
and Oversight what I have seen

[[Page H1382]]

thus far has been nothing but a political witch-hunt designed to 
embarrass the President of the United States and designed to embarrass 
one particular political party.
  The American people, Mr. Speaker, recognize, rightfully so, that 
there is something wrong with the way our financing of campaigns is 
being presently operated in the United States. The American people, I 
believe, rightfully so, want us to reform the campaign financing laws.
  This Congress must, in my judgment, act now to address these 
problems, and in doing so, we have to do it in a bipartisan manner, not 
only to look at transgressions of Members of both parties; not only to 
see where Members of Congress, Members who are Democrats and 
Republicans, as well as candidates for the Presidency, have failed and 
transgressed in laws. We have to make sure that we reform the financing 
system.
  So as we investigate the transgressions, I urge this Congress, and in 
particular, the committee of which I am a member, the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight, to make sure that when we investigate 
fundraising transgressions, we do so by addressing not only the White 
House, but also Members of Congress and Members of both political 
parties.
  In the final analysis, Mr. Speaker, I firmly believe that Democrats 
and Republicans alike, Members of Congress, Members of the U.S. Senate, 
fundamentally love our country, love the democracy that we have the 
opportunity to serve. The fundamental integrity of this process is 
being called into question when our committee is not addressing these 
investigations in a fair-minded manner and does not seek to investigate 
all transgressions, and is merely looking to focus on one particular 
party, and in particular, the President of the United States.
  Mr. Speaker, I hope that tomorrow when the Committee on Government 
Reform and Oversight meets we determine to hold a fair investigation 
and a nonpartisan investigation.
  Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, at this time I would like to yield to my 
colleague from Michigan, [Ms. Kilpatrick].
  Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, with nearly 100 days now into the 105th 
Congress, I am puzzled and baffled that we have not yet begun to take 
care of the business of the people. Quality education, good-paying 
jobs, a clean environment, medical care for the people of this great 
country, all have not yet been addressed.
  I want to give you an example of what can happen when a legislature 
works together in a bipartisan way. In 1993, President Clinton 
initiated and passed the Empowerment Zone Act. Since that time, there 
have been established 15 empowerment zones across America and 25 
enterprise communities where jobs are created, where people are 
trained, where the displaced worker is put back to work.
  I contend that this 105th Congress must get back on track. One 
hundred days and still no real issues, no real opportunity for 
children, for people. We have got to get back on track.
  I am happy to report that Detroit, the city that I represent, among 
six other cities, was the No. 1 application put in and won that 
rightful first place empowerment zone designation. We have 2 billion 
dollar's worth of private investment; we have over 100,000 jobs 
committed and we are in the process of rejuvenating that.
  I am happy to report that beginning next Monday, Tuesday, and 
Wednesday, the White House will sponsor and hold in Detroit the first 
annual meeting of the empowerment zones and the enterprising 
communities. This will be the first time that the enterprising 
communities and the empowerment zones will come together to see what is 
working, how many they have employed, how many they have retrained, 
what has happened in terms of assistance to schools and education.
  I am happy that Detroit is being selected, I am happy that President 
Clinton had the foresight to establish the empowerment zones, and what 
I want to see this 105th Congress do is to expand that opportunity. Let 
us put Americans back to work. Let us provide educational opportunities 
for our children. Let us have pensions and security for seniors who 
have worked so hard for this country.
  We are now almost 100 days into the 105th Congress. How long will it 
be before we get back to work? I am asking our Republican leadership, 
let us deal with the issues of America. Let us put Americans back to 
work. Let us provide security for our children so that they too can 
have wonderful, exciting lives that we have all been blessed by.
  One hundred days. Is it not time that this Congress, the 105th 
Congress under Republican leadership deal with the real issues? 
Enterprise zones, working Americans, sending children to school, 
providing health care, securing pensions, that is what the American 
people want to talk about.
  I would hope that we begin the work of the people of this great 
Nation, that as we move to a new millennium we talk about those real 
issues, and let us get to work, Congress. We are 435 of the most 
powerful people in the world. People sent us to this Congress to do 
their work. Let us get started on it.
  Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, at this time I would like to yield to the 
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Kucinich].
  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise to address an issue in which the 
credibility of Congress is at stake and the credibility of a 
congressional committee is at stake.
  Our Government was set up, the Government of the United States was 
set up to provide for a separation of powers, and that separation of 
powers was to prevent the abuse of power, a system of checks and 
balances to prevent the abuse of power, a House and a Senate to prevent 
the abuse of legislative power, a district, appellate, and Supreme 
Court to prevent the abuse of judicial power.
  Democracy is the greatest form of government known to the world, and 
it works, as long as we do not abuse power. The American people are 
very aware of this. That is why they favor a system which distributes 
the power throughout the Government.
  We have a situation on our committee, the Committee on Government 
Reform and Oversight, which lends itself to the great concern of the 
American people as to whether or not power is being abused, because we 
have a condition set up which permits the chairman of that committee to 
be a policeman, a prosecutor, a judge, and a jury over matters relating 
to the investigation of campaign finance.
  The American people have a right to know what is going on with 
respect to campaign finance, but they also have a right to make sure 
that it is done in an even-handed way, where power is not abused, so 
that there is credibility to any investigation.
  Mr. Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives, we need to 
go very slowly on our efforts to investigate campaign finance if it is 
not being done in a bipartisan manner and if it refuses to recognize 
the demand and the requirements which the American people have for 
checks and balances and for the prevention of the abuse of power.
  I implore the chairman of the committee to consider our requests so 
that we will have the committee make the decisions as a whole for the 
calling of witnesses, for the subpoena of documents, and for any other 
matters which come before our committee. I would ask the gentleman from 
Indiana [Mr. Burton] as a gentleman and as a Member of this House to 
consider the grave responsibility he has to protect this democratic 
process in this moment of great concern of the people.
  Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, at this time I would like to yield to my 
distinguished colleague from Connecticut [Ms. DeLauro].

                              {time}  1600

  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for yielding 
to me. Also, I want to commend my colleagues for coming down this 
afternoon to talk about the issue of this investigation.
  I wanted to be here as well to join in the commentary in order to 
support the efforts of my colleagues in calling for an open and a fair 
investigation of campaign finance issues, campaign finance reform, and 
of what our administration practice is. But I also believe that we 
ought to take a look at the Congress as well and what has happened, and 
look at what may be potentially there to have an open and fair 
investigation.
  However, I would just say to my colleagues that I think that there 
are

[[Page H1383]]

clear motives on the part of the Republican majority to have a one-
sided investigation, and the reason is what they do not want to do is 
to look into the practice that they were heavily engaged in in the last 
session of this Congress and during the election, of lobbyists writing 
the legislation in this body in exchange for campaign contributions.
  Today on the floor of this House, the majority whip gave us his own 
revisionist history lesson on campaign finance reform. The majority 
whip, the gentleman from Texas, was widely criticized during the last 
Congress for allowing lobbyists to write legislation in his office. 
Article after article documented meetings where GOP donors were invited 
to draft bills on issues of concern to their special interests.
  One such article from the Washington Post on March 12, 1995, and 
these are the words of the article and I am not making this up, this is 
documentation, documents an organization called ``Project Relief'' that 
included 350 industry members and lobbyists. Instead of just proposing 
legislation, the majority whip let them draft the laws directly. In 
other words, he would let paid lobbyists do what House Members, Members 
who are duly elected by the 500,000 or 600,000 people they represent in 
their districts to come here to carry the interests of those folks to 
this body, to craft that legislation in terms of good and meaningful 
public policy in the lives of American taxpayers, he would let the 
lobbyists do what House Members are elected to do.
  The gentleman even admitted the practice, saying that the lobbyists 
have, and this is a quote, ``They have the expertise.'' Today the 
gentleman from Texas claimed it never happened. Once again Republicans 
do not want an open investigation.
  I will tell the Members the other items they do not want to look 
into. The tobacco industry gave the [RNC] Republican National 
Committee, $7.4 million. They passed a product liability that would 
have saved the tobacco company millions of dollars. The NRA gave $2 
million. The GOP worked to try to kill the assault weapons ban in the 
last session of the Congress.
  The GOP Congress let big business help write a workplace safety bill. 
In January of 1995 big business lobbyists wrote up a 30-item wish list 
for limiting certain workplace safety regulations. When the bill was 
finished in early June, virtually every single item on that wish list 
had been incorporated into the final version of the bill. Business 
lobbyists even worked closely in drafting the legislation.
  There were other areas in terms of other non-legislative outrages. I 
am just going to hold up this book. This is the National Republican 
Campaign Committee, this is the tactical PAC project, PAC being 
Political Action Committees. These were folks who were given a friendly 
or unfriendly notation by their name. This was circulated to the GOP 
representatives based on how much money these folks gave to Republicans 
or Democrats.
  The majority whip, who was nicknamed ``the Hammer,'' and is very 
proud of this appellation here, for his fund raising techniques, has 
been known to greet lobbyists with this book, thumbing through it, and 
saying, see, you are in the book, one way or the other.
  The long and short of it, I think what we ought to do is to continue 
with a lot of this information, to get it out. The public ought to know 
this. We ought to try to get it out, so that the public has both sides. 
This needs to be a fair and open investigation.
  No one is saying that we should not investigate. We should, because 
wrongdoing, wherever it occurs, ought to be stopped. Let us do the 
right thing by the American people. Let us open this investigation and 
make sure that both sides are heard. I thank my colleague for having 
this special order today and for allowing me some time to speak.
  Mr. TIERNEY. I thank my colleague for taking the time to point out in 
the remaining 2 minutes that I have, Mr. Speaker, just to continue to 
point out some of the issues that the gentlewoman brought to light, and 
being that what we are really discussing here is the fact that this is 
a proposal by a committee and a committee chairperson to run a totally 
extraordinary and unusual type of campaign investigation that focuses 
only on one party, one office, instead of doing what the other body, 
the Senate, did in terms of broadening it out.
  The fact of the matter is, as our minority leader, the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Waxman], pointed out, the fact of the matter is that we 
can do better. We need not have two separate investigations, 
particularly when one of them is really compromised the way the one in 
the House pretends to be.
  We ought to do what they have done over in the Senate side, or let 
them do it if we cannot work jointly with them, save the American 
taxpayer some $14 million, and deal with both parties, all offices, and 
have a credible investigation, and not one where we have one individual 
unilaterally, without any constraints, issuing subpoenas.
  In every other investigation that has been done by these bodies of 
any notoriety, the gentlewoman will note that there was never a case of 
the unilateral issuance of subpoenas by the chairperson, whether it be 
Watergate, Iran-Contra, the House Ethics Committee, or the proposed 
Senate investigation, nor have there been unilateral releases of 
privileged and confidential documents in any of those.
  Yet our chairperson in the House purports to do both of them, but he 
purports to do it by silently not stating specifically the context of 
his investigation and the protocol, so those Members of his committees 
who profess to be moderate or profess that they would be embarrassed by 
such a venture can hide behind that lack of specificity.
  I want to thank all of my colleagues who came to the floor today to 
highlight this matter, and urge, Mr. Speaker, that we see some 
leadership on the other side of the aisle here, that we do something 
that will have credibility, that we move forward so the American people 
will know that this Congress is working for them.

                          ____________________