[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 132 (Monday, September 29, 1997)]
[House]
[Page H8117]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




              TIME FOR MEANINGFUL CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Snyder) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SNYDER. Madam Speaker, once again, I want to thank the staff for 
being here this evening to let us talk about the issues of campaign 
finance reform.
  Madam Speaker, we call these special orders. The reason we have to 
talk about these during this time of special orders is because the 
Republican leadership will not let the matter of campaign finance 
reform be brought to the floor of the House for a meaningful 
discussion. It is something that I do not understand and want to talk 
about more, but I appreciate the staff being here.
  Madam Speaker, on June 11, 1995, this was the famous photo between 
the President and the Speaker of the House, I believe it was in New 
Hampshire, in which they shook hands and committed themselves to 
working on campaign finance reform. This weekend I was shocked to hear 
the Speaker once again reiterate what he thinks campaign finance reform 
is, which is unlimited donations, that is right, absolutely no cap 
whatsoever on the ability of an individual to give money to a campaign.
  Would $1,000 be good? Yes. Would $10,000 be good? Yes. Would $20,000 
be a legal donation? Yes. Would a Ted Turner $1 billion donation be 
legal under the Speaker's definition of meaningful campaign finance 
reform? That is what he said this weekend, and that is the position 
that he is advocating. That is contrary to the position of the American 
people.
  Madam Speaker, this weekend I was in Arkansas and the President was 
there. He has had a good week. It has been a great week for Arkansas, 
talking about the Rock 9. But the President has confirmed his support 
for campaign finance reform. It was interesting to me that in Arkansas 
in 1990 when the legislature thwarted the effort to have some 
meaningful campaign finance reform, President, then Governor Clinton, 
called a special session. When that was unsuccessful he led the effort 
to get an initiated act with signatures on the ballot that is now the 
current law of Arkansas.
  The President is committed, the American people are committed. It is 
the Republican leadership in this House that needs to let this body 
bring the issue of campaign finance reform, meaningful campaign finance 
reform, to the American people.
  Mr. TIERNEY. Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SNYDER. I am glad to yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. TIERNEY. Madam Speaker, just in line with what the gentleman is 
saying, I note that what the Speaker is talking about in terms of 
unlimited campaign contributions is, in essence, as one editorial says, 
trying to paste on the label of reform without the content.
  I think that finally the majority party and the Speaker in particular 
are starting to hear the voices of America coming forward and saying 
they will not tolerate inaction on campaign finance reform, and 
clearly, that majority party, led by its Speaker, do not want to have 
any real meaningful campaign finance reform, so they are doing just 
that, trying to paste on the label of reform without the content by 
saying that they want to reform it by lifting all the rules, and have 
people have unlimited individual contributions, and then in the next 
step, they go on to ban so-called soft money.
  Madam Speaker, soft money was there just to beat the limits. So if we 
remove the limits on contributions, we do not need the soft money. In 
effect, we just open it right up and you can buy any vote you want. It 
is just unlimited money coming in and basically, again, trying to 
disarm one party, leaving a party that traditionally gets enormous 
amounts of money from very wealthy interests to have their day. 
Editorials have already started to see through this ploy. I think the 
American people have seen through it long before.
  Mr. SNYDER. If I might reclaim my time for a moment, what is 
discouraging about the Speaker's position is that there are Republicans 
who are advocating for meaningful campaign finance reform, and we are 
going to hear from at least one this evening on this issue. So I do not 
understand the motivation, trying to block meaningful campaign finance 
reform from coming to the floor of the House.
  Mr. MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SNYDER. I am glad to yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. MILLER of California. I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.
  I think the picture reminds me that most of us in politics are well 
aware that the basic currency of politics is your word. You give your 
word to your constituents. You give your word to your colleague. You 
give your word to the voters.
  The Speaker here and the President gave their word that they would 
pursue campaign finance reform. Yet, the Speaker refuses to test a date 
for campaign finance reform, to make it part of the agenda for the 
House of Representatives, and we are getting very close to the end of 
this session. The word, the promise that he made over 2 years ago, 
should be kept with the American people. It should be kept with the 
Members of this House.
  That is what our efforts have been trying to do, is to make sure that 
in fact campaign finance reform, and I appreciate the gentleman's 
involvement in helping us, becomes a fact; that we get a chance to 
debate it in a full and open and fair manner, and to live up to the 
promise that the gentleman reminds us the Speaker made over 2 years 
ago.
  I thank the gentleman for taking the well on behalf of campaign 
finance reform.
  Mr. SNYDER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman very much.
  I now yield to the other gentleman from California, who has been a 
leader on campaign finance reform for several years.
  Mr. FARR of California. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman very 
much for yielding.
  I would like to point out that that handshake is reflective of 
something that Congress has been able to do. We have been able to pass 
campaign reform. In 1976 was the first effort to try to set the limits 
that are now in law, much of the law in this country.

                          ____________________