[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 96 (Thursday, June 19, 2014)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3825-S3826]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM

  Mr. REID. Last weekend there was something strange and unusual 
happening out in Southern California near a place called Dana Point, 
which is north of San Diego. The previous night's guests were being 
ushered off the premises by hotel security. A private security team 
moved onto the property, setting up checkpoints. The hotel employees 
could be seen sweeping the rooms for electronic listening devices, and 
dozens of wealthy men and women were led into the resort, registering 
to attend an event deceptively entitled ``T&R Annual Sales Meeting.''
  This meeting, once started, turned into a multiple-day event. It was 
closed to all spectators, journalists, and all those not explicitly 
invited. No official itinerary was available and details have not been 
forthcoming.
  There were at least two Senators slated to attend and they did 
attend, but their offices have refused to comment on their 
participation. After all, attendees were sworn to secrecy--high levels 
of security, concealment, deception, and oaths of silence. That doesn't 
sound anything like a typical conference. It sounds more like a cult. 
But instead of being a religious movement or a secret sect, this is a 
cult of money, influence, and self-serving politics. This is the cult 
of Koch, and I am referring to the Koch brothers.
  At their twice-yearly secret donor retreat, Charles and David Koch 
raise millions--millions and hundreds of millions--of dollars they then 
use to pursue their radical agenda--and it is radical. This year's 
conference was especially important to the Koch brothers as they 
coordinate efforts to spend hundreds of millions of dollars dictating 
this year's elections.
  But why cloak their message in secrecy?
  In his op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, Charles Koch invited his 
critics to ``try to understand my vision for a free society.'' It is 
easy to understand. Look at the Libertarian run he had for Vice 
President in 1982. They laid out what they wanted to do: privatize 
Social Security, basically do away with government. So to his critics 
he said, ``Try to understand my vision of a free society.''
  That is pretty easy to do. How could we possibly understand the 
Kochs' vision, though, when they and their loyal followers try to do 
everything in secrecy? They hide from America. The truth is the Koch 
brothers are concealing their massive fundraising because Americans 
overwhelmingly oppose the purchase of our country. Our country 
shouldn't be for sale, and it isn't for sale, and I think in a little 
less than 5 minutes that can be proven.

[[Page S3826]]

  Instead of making the case directly to the American people, the Koch 
brothers funnel unseemly amounts of money into elections, trying to 
elect representatives who will do their bidding. Again in the paper 
today, they have all these phony organizations they fund. It is just a 
way to hide the agenda of the Koch brothers. They don't want their name 
to appear. They want to do everything they can to mislead the American 
people.
  The influence of unlimited spending on a political system is not 
right. It allows individuals to dictate their will on the American 
electoral process, and in this instance in secret. This unlimited 
campaign spending disenfranchises Americans who don't have the 
resources to go tit-for-tat with two of the richest men in the world.
  When the minority leader was a freshman Senator, he also took 
exception to the limitless spending of special interests. He said:

       If the American public thinks that special interests are 
     having undue influence on the process, then get rid of the 
     PACs. I will be more than happy to eliminate PACs altogether.

  But I guess times have changed. Now the Republican leader rails 
against campaign finance reform when in the past he was in favor. There 
should be no surprise that he attended the Kochs' planning session this 
past weekend. Evidently Senator McConnell no longer believes that 
special interests have an undue influence on our government.

  But he wasn't the only member to attend the Koch extravaganza. The 
junior Senator from Florida found the time to fly across the country 
and kiss the ring of the Republican Party's billionaire benefactors 
and, among other things, told them how outrageous it is that people are 
talking about the climate changing, that the Earth is warming. I am 
sure the junior Senator got a lot of applause there, even though we 
were not able to hear the applause because it is all very secret.
  What else should we expect? The decisions by the Supreme Court have 
left the American people with the status quo in which one side's 
billionaires are pitted against the other side's billionaires--except 
one side doesn't have any billionaires.
  We must undo the damage done by the Supreme Court's recent campaign 
finance decisions, and we need to do it now. That is why I support the 
constitutional amendment sponsored by Senators Tom Udall of New Mexico 
and Michael Bennet of Colorado. This constitutional amendment grants 
Congress the authority to regulate and eliminate the raising and 
spending of money for Federal elections. Senators Udall and Bennet's 
amendment will rein in the massive spending of super PACs which have 
grown so much since the Citizens United decision in January of 2010. 
This constitutional amendment also provides States with the authority 
to institute campaign spending limits at the State level.
  Simply put, a constitutional amendment is what this Nation needs to 
bring sanity back to political campaigns and to restore Americans' 
confidence in their elected leaders.
  Let's put an end to the cult of darkness which is corrupting our 
elections. It is time we revive our constituents' faith in the 
electoral system and let them know their voices are being heard.
  Mr. DURBIN. Will the majority leader yield to a question through the 
Chair?
  Mr. REID. Be happy to.
  Mr. DURBIN. I ask the majority leader through the Chair, yesterday 
afternoon the subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary on the Constitution 
held a hearing and a vote on Senate Joint Resolution 19, which the 
majority leader has referenced, offered by Senator Udall of New Mexico 
and Senator Bennet of Colorado.
  The resolution would basically restore us to the moment in time 
before the Citizens United decision and before the McCutcheon Supreme 
Court decision which would allow the Federal Government and the States 
to regulate campaign spending. It is content neutral in terms of the 
efforts to be made by the government but reestablishes new standards in 
terms of contributions in spending across America.
  I ask the Senate majority leader, who has followed this closely, as 
he has followed the amount of money being spent on elections in this 
country, what he can foresee as the ultimate result if we fail to undo 
the Citizens United decision?
  Mr. REID. We are already seeing it, I am sad to say. In one State the 
Koch brothers have spent almost $20 million against one Senator, and 
they say that is just the beginning.
  America should not be for sale. I agree with the Republican leader 
when he said there should be limits put on this. I agreed, as I read 
the quote from his earlier remarks, it is not right.
  Now we have two of the richest men in the world trying to buy 
America, and they are not only trying to buy Senate seats and House 
seats, there are votes on secretaries of state around the country, 
State legislatures. They have far more money than virtually every 
government and they want to have their view of government be the law: 
Privatize Social Security, do away with the Internal Revenue Service, 
and on and on with their money-buying program to convince the American 
people that the Koch brothers are right.
  Mr. President, I would also say this through the Chair to my friend. 
They not only have all these entities I have talked to you about, they 
give money to the Chamber of Commerce. I am sure they were their 
largest contributor. Why? Because the Chamber of Commerce runs ads 
against us.
  I appreciate the question and I would like to go on a little longer 
but the Republican leader is here.
  I will close, but I deeply appreciate my friend who has been such an 
advocate on the Judiciary Committee and I hope very soon that the full 
committee reports on that resolution so we can move it on the floor.

                          ____________________