[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 132 (Monday, September 29, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H8057-H8058]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          PEOPLE'S BUSINESS DELAYED BY CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM

  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, last week my colleagues on the other 
side of the aisle held the House hostage in an attempt to score 
political points. In apparently a panic mode over the endless scandals 
from the 1996 Presidential election, they repeatedly forced procedural 
votes that delayed our work on the appropriation bills. They justify 
delaying the people's business as an attempt to force consideration of 
campaign finance reform.
  Mr. Speaker, campaign finance reform is an important issue, but it is 
also a complex issue. Before acting, we should first fully understand 
all that is involved with the current system.
  From the beginning of this year, scandal after scandal involving the 
Clinton White House, the Democratic National Committee, and their 
liberal political allies have dominated the headlines.
  Given this onslaught of negative press coverage, I understand why my 
Democratic colleagues would like to change the subject and create the 
appearance that they are good Government reformers. But I believe it is 
critically important for Congress to act in a deliberative fashion on 
this issue. It is not enough to say that the system stinks. We need to 
identify the people who make the system stink and hold them accountable 
for skirting the law.
  The money laundering schemes involving illegal foreign contributions 
are serious allegations, and they are allegations that need to be fully 
investigated before campaign finance legislation is considered.
  I am not saying that there is no need for reform. In fact, I have 
introduced a bill that would make Members of Congress more accountable 
to their constituents and less beholden to Washington special 
interests. But I believe the old saying, ``Do not place the cart in 
front of the horse.'' It applies to this situation.
  The American people have elected us to do their business in a 
deliberative and a thoughtful manner. They understand the way we 
finance elections is flawed, but they are not looking for knee-jerk 
solutions or reactions that may have the unintended consequence of 
making the system worse. At this point, we do not know enough about 
what went wrong in 1996 to offer a solution.
  Just consider, for example, the scandal involving the 1996 Teamsters 
presidential election. On September 18, three political consultants for 
Teamsters president Ron Carey pled guilty to criminal conspiracy 
charges related to a money laundering scheme that may involve the 
Democratic National Committee, Clinton campaign aides, and senior White 
House officials.
  For background purposes, a 1989 settlement between the Teamsters and 
the Justice Department over racketeering charges called for the Federal 
Government to finance and oversee the 1996 Teamsters presidential 
election. Ron Carey won the election by a narrow margin, but on August 
22 a court-appointed Federal overseer threw out the election, the 
results, and called for a new election because of fundraising abuses.
  Mr. Speaker, under current law it is illegal for Teamsters funds to 
be spent on a candidate in a union election. The money laundering 
scheme that Carey's political aides pled guilty to involved using 
Teamsters funds to make political contributions to outside groups which 
then sent the money back to the Carey campaign, a clear violation of 
the law.

[[Page H8058]]

  A memo has emerged that indicates Teamster money may have been 
contributed to State and local Democratic parties in exchange for DNC 
officials funneling money into Carey's campaign. Senior Clinton 
advisers have been implicated in this scandal, and while we do not know 
the extent of their involvement at this time, the possibility of the 
President's men being involved in a conspiracy of this magnitude is 
certainly troubling. After all, the Clinton Justice Department was 
supposed to ensure that the Teamsters election was conducted in a fair 
and honest manner. To carry out this responsibility, Congress provided 
some $22 million.
  As a member of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, I 
am pleased that the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Hoekstra] and the 
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Fawell] have scheduled hearings on this 
troubling matter, and I look forward to working with them to get to the 
bottom of this scandal.
  Mr. Speaker, we must reform our system to make political candidates 
more accountable to the people they represent and less beholden to the 
big money and interests that provide it, but we must first examine what 
is wrong with the system before we can offer a workable solution. After 
all, a doctor would not prescribe a patient or a treatment for a 
patient that he has not examined.
  By allowing the inquiries by the relevant congressional committees, 
the Justice Department, and, hopefully, a special counsel to move 
forward, we will gain a better understanding of what needs to be done 
to improve this system.
  The scandals from the Clinton reelection campaign have tainted the 
process by which Americans choose their leaders, and no matter how hard 
the President and his allies try to change the subject, this troubling 
fact must not be swept under the rug.
  As elected officials, we have an obligation to investigate the matter 
fully and hold those responsible for this sleazy money chase of 1996 
accountable. Mr. Speaker, to do anything less would be scandalous in 
its own right.

                          ____________________