[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 36 (Tuesday, March 28, 2006)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2434-S2435]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                            LOBBYING REFORM

  Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I come to the Chamber today to address the 
ethics bill that has been pending before

[[Page S2435]]

the Senate for the past three weeks. It has now been exactly four 
months since Duke Cunningham resigned from the House after pleading 
guilty to bribery, tax evasion, and mail fraud charges. It has now been 
almost three months since Jack Abramoff pled guilty to defrauding 
Indian tribes.
  In the aftermath of both guilty pleas, Members on both sides of the 
aisles in both Houses of Congress brought forward good proposals to 
change the culture that led to these scandals, and yet here we are on 
March 28th with a half-finished ethics bill in the Senate and even less 
in the House.
  I know there are many important issues facing our country--health 
care, education, the war in Iraq, and, as I just mentioned, 
immigration--but it is equally important that we as Members of Congress 
consider how we are going to deal with the cloud of corruption that 
hangs over the Capitol and how that affects the issues which are 
important to the American people. For that reason, I sincerely hope the 
leadership of both parties will be able to reach an agreement to bring 
this bill back to the floor before our next recess.
  The American people are tired of a Washington that is only open to 
those with the most cash and the right connections. They are tired of a 
political process where the vote you cast isn't as important as the 
favors you do. And they are tired of trusting us with their tax dollars 
when they see them spent on frivolous pet projects and corporate 
giveaways.
  It is not a game that is new in this town. It is not particularly 
surprising to the public. People are not naive about the existence of 
corruption. They know it has worn the face of both Republicans and 
Democrats over the years. So the hope is that we could find a 
bipartisan solution to the problem.
  Before the recess, we made some progress on the ethics bill. I was 
pleased to join with Senator Dodd on an amendment to ban Members and 
staff from accepting meals from lobbyists. And when we get back to the 
bill, I will be joining Senators Santorum, McCain, Lieberman, and 
Feingold in offering an amendment to define the way we reimburse 
corporate jet travel. I would like to spend a few minutes talking about 
this amendment.
  During the past 5 years, Members of Congress, Presidential 
candidates, and political parties have used the corporate jets of 286 
companies a total of more than 2,100 times. Despite the fact that a 
single flight of these jets can cost tens of thousands of dollars, the 
average reimbursement rate has only been about $1,700 per trip. So far, 
politicians have gotten away with this because current law only 
requires us to reimburse the cost of a first-class ticket on these 
charter flights, not the actual cost of operating the plane. But since 
we are usually the only passengers on the plane who don't work for the 
company, this rule is effectively giving us thousands of dollars in 
unwarranted discounts. This has to change.
  Let me say this to my colleagues: Although I discontinued the 
practice earlier this year, I have used corporate jets in the past. I 
know some of the other proponents of this amendment have done the same. 
I know how convenient these charters can be. I know that a lot of my 
colleagues, particularly those from large States, will oppose this rule 
change because it makes it significantly more difficult and costly to 
interact with their constituents who live in less populated parts of 
their States. So I am not unsympathetic to these concerns. There are 
many parts of Illinois in which there is no commercial air service.
  But this isn't about our convenience. It is about our reputation as 
public servants who are here to work for the common voter, not the 
highest bidder. We all know that corporations are not allowing us to 
use their jets out of the kindness of their hearts. It is yet another 
way that lobbyists try to curry influence with lawmakers.
  One lobbyist told USA Today about the advantages of allowing Members 
of Congress to use his jet. He said:

       You can sit down and have a cocktail and talk casually 
     about a matter, rather than rushing in between meetings on 
     Capitol Hill.

  A lobbyist for a telecommunications company is quoted as saying that 
providing a jet to a lawmaker ``gives us an opportunity to form 
relationships, to have a long stretch of time to explain issues that 
are technical and complicated. If it wasn't useful, we wouldn't do 
it.'' The vast majority of the people we represent don't have the money 
to buy that access and form those relationships. They don't have the 
ability to fly us around on their private planes. In fact, they are 
having enough trouble paying the mortgage and their medical bills and 
their kids' college tuition. And they expect us to listen to their 
issues with the same concern we would any lobbyist or corporation with 
a jet.

  I know that some say that legislation isn't really being discussed on 
these flights. But appearances matter. If we want to be serious about 
showing our constituents that we are fighting for them--and not just 
for the wealthy and powerful--we can't allow a small number of special 
interests to be subsidizing our travel.
  If there isn't enough commercial air service in a state and there is 
a need to take a charter flight, then we should pay the full cost of 
the charter. If there is not enough money in our Senate travel accounts 
to cover these costs, then we should increase our travel budgets. What 
we shouldn't do is allow lobbyists to pick up the tab.
  I know this may not be a popular amendment. I know many of my 
colleagues will be inconvenienced if it is adopted; I will be as well. 
But if we are serious about cleaning up the way we do business in 
Washington, it is an important step for us to take. I hope my 
colleagues will do the right thing and support this amendment.
  In closing, let me say it is obvious we are not going to be able to 
finish ethics reform today. I know Senator Lott and Senator Dodd are 
working diligently to try to get this bill back on the floor. I also am 
aware of the importance of the immigration bill that we are going to be 
considering for the next two weeks. But I have to insist that we bring 
this ethics and lobbying bill back to the floor as soon as practicable 
and that we get to work on getting a bill passed and sent over to the 
House. The American people expect us to take strong action to clean up 
the way we do business in this city. They have been waiting for a long 
time. It is time we got to work.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________