[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 184 (Friday, December 2, 2011)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E2176-E2177]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




TERMINATING PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN FUND AND ELECTION ASSISTANCE 
                               COMMISSION

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                       HON. JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY

                              of illinois

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, December 1, 2011

  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my opposition to 
H.R. 3463, which would strip funding from the public financing of 
presidential campaigns and the Election Assistance Commission. I 
wholeheartedly believe that we should be looking closely at faults in 
our electoral system, but this bill is a step in the entirely wrong 
direction.
  Make no mistake--our election system is in crisis. Money has a 
corrupting influence at every level in the process. Candidates must 
constantly raise more and more money to remain competitive, and large 
corporations such as insurance, oil or other special interest groups 
are able to exert a substantial influence. It is increasingly hard for 
middle class or low income individuals to have their voices heard.
  This bill would only worsen the problem. Matching funds are intended 
to give small donors a more effective voice by doubling the impact of 
dollars given by those who can only afford to contribute small amounts 
of money. It gives presidential candidates a substantial reason to 
focus on small donations, instead of merely courting big donors. 
Eliminating matching funds will all but guarantee that candidates focus 
even more on donors who are able to contribute large amounts of money 
each cycle.
  Instead we should be looking at how to make money play less of a role 
in the system--not more. That is why I am a proud cosponsor of H.R. 
1404, the Fair Elections Now Act. This bill would shift a candidate's 
focus to receiving a large number of small donations from constituents 
in their states or districts. This would level the playing field and 
give small donors--working families, seniors, and others--as much 
influence as the 1% and mega corporations. If H.R. 1404 were passed, it 
would go a long way towards righting what is so wrong about our process 
today.
  Rather than considering H.R. 3463 today, we should be discussing how 
to stop the avalanche of state laws that will have the effect of 
suppressing voter turnout--laws promoted under the guise of eliminating 
voter fraud--a virtually non-existent problem. According to the Brennan 
Center for Justice, recent changes to voting requirements could result 
in disenfranchising more than five million legitimate, eligible voters 
this cycle. That number is more than the margin of victory in two of 
the last three presidential elections.
  The various initiatives proposed--whether they are photo 
identification requirements, the reduction or elimination of same-day, 
early or absentee voting opportunities, or placing onerous hurdles on 
voter registration--all disproportionately impact vulnerable voting 
populations that we should actively be encouraging to vote. Instead, 
over and over we see state legislatures doing whatever they can to stop 
these groups from turning out at the polls.
  It is our duty as members of Congress to investigate those practices 
and ensure that

[[Page E2177]]

American citizens are encouraged and able to participate in the 
electoral process. What agency is similarly tasked with making sure 
that Americans are given every opportunity to exercise this right? The 
Election Assistance Commission. I believe its role is fundamental. 
Disbanding the entire agency is the worst possible solution, given 
recent changes in voting requirements across the country. Rather, the 
Commission must be given the tools necessary to ensure that 
disadvantaged, low-participation and other groups are not 
disenfranchised by recent changes in state law.
  It is by addressing these two key issues--the role of money and how 
to boost voter participation, that we will meaningfully address some of 
the most serious problems with the electoral system today. I would 
encourage my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this resolution, and instead 
pursue positive election reform.

                          ____________________