[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 54 (Tuesday, May 5, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H2747-H2748]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM

  Mr. SNOWBARGER. Madam Speaker, during the last year, many Members of 
Congress, independent organizations, and other political groups have 
been in touch with Congress to urge immediate action on reform of our 
Nation's campaign finance system. Because the Nation's attention has 
been piqued by ambitious claims that we are going to clean up politics, 
we face the very real danger of passing a bill, calling it reform, and, 
as a result, destroying any remaining credibility enjoyed by the 
Congress of the United States.
  During the upcoming debate on campaign finance reform, we will 
undoubtedly see a great number of different competing plans for reform. 
Many will be dramatic changes, and some will be modest in scope. If 
this fair and open debate is to mean anything, we should at least agree 
on a set of principles with which to judge the various entries.
  To my colleagues listening back in their offices, if your plan is to 
sit on the sidelines during the debate and try to judge this 
combination dance contest and beauty pageant, I would like to offer you 
a kind of score card for this event.
  Madam Speaker, remember the dance contest and beauty pageants have 
standards that aid the judges in determining what an ideal candidate 
should look like. These principles should provide an excellent guide 
for scoring in the various proposals. The three cardinal principles 
that should be our guide are transparency, real accountability, and 
trusting the American people.
  First is transparency. Any real reform should make our campaign 
system easier to understand for the average person. It is hard for 
voters to know what is going on, to get outraged, or to judge our 
conduct if we are always playing hide the ball.
  Consider the recent Washington Post story about the Democratic 
National Committee's swapping hard dollars for soft money with their 
State affiliates. It is difficult for average citizens to be involved 
in the critique of that system if stunts like this are permitted.
  Secondly, we should punish the offenders. The citizens are tired of 
all this talk about reform. They tar all of us with the same broad 
brush of accusations, and we need to get serious about granting 
enforcement authority to the FEC, Federal Election Commission, and the 
Justice Department.
  If all we do is add five more new rules to the 10 that are already 
not enforced, what have we gained? We will only have succeeded in 
proving what the public already suspects; namely, that we were never 
really serious about reform.
  The only way for Congress to earn back the trust and the respect of 
the people is to impose real punishment for breaking the rules.
  Lastly, Madam Speaker, we should trust the good judgment of the 
American people. If we have learned nothing else about political reform 
since the first go-around in 1974, it is that we should not make 
Federal bureaucrats the sole watchdog of our electoral system.
  Our axiom should be absolutely open campaigns. New technology allows 
immediate disclosure. So why set arbitrary limits on donations? The 
public, if informed in a timely manner, will hold elected officials 
accountable.
  The present limits force candidates to spend all their time chasing 
dollars and far less time serving constituents. We should trust the 
people. The electorate may decide that $1 from tobacco companies and 
the Ku Klux Klan is unacceptable, while, at the same time, judging 
$50,000 from the candidate's parents is perfectly appropriate.
  Madam Speaker, I have never taken money from tobacco companies and 
never would, but my constituents may not believe that because our 
system hides the donations in this maze of regulations. Why should we 
continue to tell the people what to do when we so often get it wrong.
  It is for this reason I have introduced H.R. 3315, the Fair Elections 
and Political Accountability Act of 1998. This bill would honor all of 
the above principles and make progress towards destroying the 
confidence of the American people.
  I will not claim that my bill is the perfect answer to everyone's 
gripe about our political system. Many of you will find things about it 
that you

[[Page H2748]]

do not like. However, this bill represents a comprehensive and 
meaningful change away from the arcane and mystifying system that we 
have today. It holds politicians accountable, it eliminates soft money, 
and it empowers all American voters with the knowledge to discern for 
themselves who Members of Congress actually represent.
  I am confident that the American people will reward candidates that 
play by the rules. If they do not play by the rules, Madam Speaker, my 
bill does what no one else has proposed, it sends the crooked 
politicians to jail.

                          ____________________