[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 54 (Wednesday, April 30, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H2052-H2053]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
INTRODUCTION OF ``APPREHENSION OF TAINTED MONEY'' BILL
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Gekas] is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. GEKAS. Mr. Speaker, today I have introduced a special piece of
legislation that goes to the heart of campaign finance reform about
which we hear so much.
How many will recall that during the election and immediately
following there were revelations of moneys being contributed to the
Democratic National Committee, and then a decision made by the
Democratic National Committee to return the funds to X, Y, and Z
because the Democratic National Committee determined that they were
illegally contributed?
Now, the question arises, does this money go back to the people who
may have violated the law in making the contribution to the Democratic
National Committee?
We have a situation, for instance, of a drug dealer who took
thousands of dollars from profits made in the drug business and used
that money to make a $20,000 contribution to the Democratic National
Committee. Now we hear announcement by the Democratic National
Committee that it will return that money.
Well, is that not wonderful. That money will be returned to a drug
dealer to be reused, perhaps, in the drug business or to make some
other kind of contribution. Who knows what.
I have introduced a bill here today which we call the ATM bill,
believe it or not. Apprehension of Tainted Money. ATM. What does it do?
It says that if, indeed, a national committee, the Republican committee
or the Democrat committee, should receive contributions and they are
questionable donations, questionable contributions, where the committee
believes it may come from a tainted source, a criminal source, some
illegal contributor, then instead of returning it back for further
possible illegal spending, my bill would call for this money to go to
the Federal Elections Commission in an escrow account, and the Federal
Elections Commission then would investigate the source of this
contribution.
If it is determined that indeed this is drug money or illegal money
or some other tainted source of money, then the Federal Government, our
Government, can latch onto this money and use it for fines and
penalties against those people who violated the law in that instance.
In this way we would be preventing the possibility of impacting on our
election system by foreign sources and illegal sources.
At the same time, if indeed those contributions have been illegal, we
could use that money to help defray the expense of the investigation
and the prosecution and the restitution that must be made by the
wrongdoers.
We believe that it fills a large gap in the election process and in
the question of who can contribute what to what entity. We have strong
laws on the books right at this moment, as we speak, but we fail in
many instances to enforce the law. We fail to bring wrongdoers to
justice in the hundreds of different ways that they can violate the
election laws and the criminal laws of our Nation.
We believe that this could be a gigantic step towards signaling to
the American people that we will not countenance violation of the
criminal laws or violation of the election laws.
Every day the news brings us more revelations--and more lurid
details--about the lengths to which some people went during the 1996
election to gain victory for their candidates. Unfortunately, the
lengths to which many parties went were beyond the bounds of the law.
Though the investigations into campaign finance law violations have
only barely begun, and, to be sure, only scratched the surface, we know
very well about some egregious violations of the law involving very
large amounts
[[Page H2053]]
of money. Many more cases are rife with impropriety and unethical
behavior, even if illegality has not yet been proven.
Let me address just a few: Mr. Johnny Chung, described as a
``hustler'' by a member of the National Security Council, made
donations to the Democratic Party numerous times. Among these was a
$50,000 check handed over to Margaret Williams on the White House
grounds during one of his 51 visits. The Democratic National Committee
has announced it will return contributions totaling $366,000 from
Johnny Chung because it cannot verify the source of this money.
Mr. Charles Yah Lin Trie raised and contributed more than $\1/2\
million to the Democratic National Committee. This money has been
linked to funds transferred to him from the Bank of China, which is
operated by the Chinese Government. The Democratic National Committee
has returned $187,000 that Mr. Trie contributed and plans to return
another $458,000 that he helped raise from others.
In November, 1995, Mr. Jorge Cabrera wrote a check for $20,000 to
the Democratic National Committee from an account that included
proceeds from smuggling cocaine into the United States. Within 2 weeks,
he met with Vice President Gore. He also attended a White House
Christmas reception hosted by the First Lady. The Democratic National
Committee returned his contribution almost a year later and he is now
serving time in a Miami prison.
Mr. Speaker, these are just three examples, but they serve to
illustrate a situation that is intolerable. The Democratic National
Committee has given, and plans to give, huge sums of money back to the
drug dealers, international hustlers, and foreign agents who broke the
law in giving that money in the first place.
The penalty being suffered by Mr. Johnny Chung, Mr. Charlie Trie, and
Mr. Jorge Cabrera is to have mountains of tainted money given back to
them to use as they wish.
Mr. Speaker, these people are criminals. The American people, and
particularly the people I represent, will not stand for it when the law
allows them to be rewarded with hundreds of thousands of dollars in
cash.
Mr. Speaker, I am introducing a bill today to remedy this
extraordinary situation. The Apprehension of Tainted Money Act would
require political committees that intend to return certain
contributions to transfer those contributions to the Federal Election
Commission.
The Commission would establish an interest-bearing escrow account,
deposit returned contributions in it, and notify the Attorney General.
The Commission and the Attorney General would be able to apply this
money toward any fine or penalty imposed against the contributor under
Federal election or criminal law. In addition, if a fine or penalty is
imposed, the Commission or Attorney General could use deposited funds
to cover the costs incurred in investigating the contribution. If the
contributor were cleared, if the Commission and Attorney General failed
to act, or if some portion of the money was used, the remaining
contribution would be returned.
Mr. Speaker, my bill would prevent the Johnny Chungs, the Charlie
Tries, and the Jorge Cabreras from getting their dirty money back and
spending it--or making it disappear--before Federal officials have a
chance to investigate them and apply appropriate fines and penalties.
Let me make one other point that I think is very important: We are
seeing that, in many instances, the tainted money is being returned
after an election has intervened. This means that money from an
unknown, possible illegal source has been used by a campaign to
influence an election. Anyone with a healthy skepticism and sense of
watchfulness about our Government could not help but want to
investigate whether there has been collusion between questionable
campaign contributors and the individuals and parties to whom they
gave. This makes the apprehension of tainted money bill all the more
important.
I urge my colleagues in the House to join me in passing this
legislation and getting it before the President for signature. There
can be no time lost, because each returned contribution gives undue
benefit to some of our Nation's most pernicious lawbreakers.
Let me briefly describe the bill in some more detail: The
Apprehension of Tainted Money Act adds a new section to the Federal
Election Campaign Act. the new section provides the following:
When a political committee intends to return a contribution of more
than $500, it must transfer the contribution to the Federal Election
Commission [Commission] and ask the Commission to return it. This
requirement does not apply to contributions returned within the times
set by Commission rules for return or reattribution of contributions,
but it does apply to contributions that a political committee discovers
to be illegal after the Commission's deadline for return of illegal and
nonreattributable contributions.
The Commission must establish an interest-bearing escrow account,
deposit returned contributions in it, and notify the Attorney General
when it receives such contributions. Interest from the funds placed in
the escrow account shall be used to cover administrative costs of the
account, all excess going to the U.S. Treasury.
The Commission must consider the return of the contribution in
determining whether it has reason to believe that election laws have
been violated.
The Commission or the Attorney General may apply returned
contributions toward any fine or penalty imposed against the
contributor under Federal election or criminal law. If a fine or
penalty is imposed, the Commission or Attorney General may use
deposited funds to cover the costs incurred in investigating the
contribution.
The Commission must return the contribution if: First, the Commission
and Attorney General certify that the contribution is not the subject
of an investigation; second, the contribution will not be applied to
any fine, penalty, or charge for cost of investigation, or the portion
to be used has been subtracted from the returnable amount; or third,
for any 120-day period, neither the Commission nor the Attorney General
have pursued an investigation of the contribution.
The act applies from the date it is enacted, whether or not the
Commission or Attorney General have issued regulations. Notwithstanding
the Administrative Procedures Act, the Commission and Attorney General
must issue final regulations within 30 days of the enactment of the
act.
____________________