[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 127 (Monday, September 8, 2014)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5349-S5351]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES
RELATING TO CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENDITURES INTENDED TO AFFECT
ELECTIONS--MOTION TO PROCEED
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 471.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report the motion.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
Motion to proceed to calendar No. 471, S.J. Res. 19, a
joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution
of the United States relating to contributions and
expenditures intended to affect elections.
Schedule
Mr. REID. Mr. President, following my remarks and those of the
Republican leader, the Senate will be in a period of morning business
until 5:30 p.m. this evening. During that period of time until 5:30
p.m. Senators will be permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each,
with the time equally divided and controlled by the two leaders or
their designees.
At 5:30 p.m. the Senate will proceed to a rollcall vote and
confirmation of a nomination to fill the vacancy in the Eleventh
Circuit--Jill Pryor. Following the disposition of the Pryor nomination,
there will be a rollcall vote on the nomination of Henry J. Aaron to be
a member of the Social Security Advisory Board, followed by three voice
votes in relation to Aaron, Cohen, and Chen.
Following disposition of these nominations, the Senate will proceed
to a rollcall vote on cloture on the motion to proceed to the
constitutional amendment.
Therefore, Senators should expect up to three rollcall votes after
5:30 p.m.
Senator Hollings
The President pro tempore and I served for a long time with the
distinguished Senator from South Carolina, Fritz Hollings, who retired.
Dealing with the constitutional amendment was his issue, and I can
remember seeing this dignified, handsome, very articulate Senator
talking about its importance. Before he left he spoke on this on many
occasions. So it brings back memories--all very positive--about the
good work that this man did before he left. By the way, he is still
strong and vibrant, 90 years old or thereabouts, still playing tennis
and as strong as we knew him when he was here.
Measures Placed on the Calendar--H.R. 5230 and H.R. 5272
Mr. REID. Mr. President, there are two bills at the desk due for a
second reading.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will read the bills by title for the
second time.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 5230) making supplemental appropriations for
the fiscal year ending September 30, 2014, and for other
purposes.
A bill (H.R. 5272) to prohibit certain actions with respect
to deferred action for aliens not lawfully present in the
United States, and for other purposes.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I object to any further proceedings as to
both of these bills.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Kaine). The bills will be placed on the
calendar.
Must Pass Legislation
Mr. REID. Mr. President, as the Senate returns from the State work
period, we have a number of vitally important matters that require our
attention. I only mention a few of them. There is a lot more than this.
The matters coming out of the Judiciary Committee alone would fill this
whole page and more, but we have been stopped from doing virtually
everything for the last two Congresses, and so we are not getting much
done. But I will mention a few of them.
We need to pass appropriations legislation to keep the government
from shutting down as it has in the past because of the obstruction of
the Republicans. We need to pass the extension of the Internet Tax
Freedom Act; we need
[[Page S5350]]
to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank; we need to pass the Travel
Promotion, Enhancement, and Modernization Act, which was overwhelmingly
passed by the House a short time ago; and we need to reconsider the
issues of college affordability and equal pay for women.
But the bill before us today is Senator Udall's and Senator Bennet's
constitutional amendment. The good Senators from New Mexico and
Colorado have joined together on a very important issue and we are
going to consider that. The first vote will be tonight.
We have had in this country a flood of very dark money coming into
this Nation's political system which is threatening to tear apart the
fabric of American democracy. During the 2012 Presidential campaign,
outside groups spent about $1 billion. That is about as much spending
as took place in the previous 10 elections combined.
Last year was a Presidential election, so the money this year is
focused on the Senate and House races. They will again break all
records. This spike in the amount of money being pumped into elections
is not surprising, as alarming as it is. Recent decisions rendered by
the U.S. Supreme Court in the Citizens United and McCutcheon cases have
destroyed our campaign finance laws and have left the American people
with the status quo in which radical billionaires are attempting to buy
our democracy.
Meanwhile, hard-working families who don't have endless funds to dump
into political campaigns are expected to sit on the sidelines and watch
as two brothers try to fix every election in America to their liking.
And when I say every election--they are involved in elections in the
State of Virginia--not for the Senate, but they are involved in that, I
am sure, too--but for secretaries of State, and State legislative races
in Vermont. All over the country they are spending money as if there is
no end to it, and I guess with them there is no end to it.
Hard-working families, though, don't have those endless funds to dump
into political campaigns. So they just sit on the sidelines and watch.
When I say that Americans are watching the Koch brothers trying to
influence November elections, I mean that literally.
Last week it was reported that Charles and David Koch and their
political empire have funded 44,000 political ads for television so far
during this election cycle--44,000. But that doesn't count money they
hide in other organizations such as the Chamber of Commerce and other
organizations' ads they helped fund. But we can identify directly
Charles and David Koch with 44,000 separate 30-second TV spots.
Putting that in perspective, if for 16 days there was nothing else on
television except their 44,000 ads, the 30-second ads would run for 16
consecutive days, 24 hours a day. That is 16 consecutive days, around-
the-clock, 30-second political ads, and that is just from them.
Imagine--16 consecutive days of nonstop political ads, no 24-hour news
coverage, no ESPN, no football games, no baseball games, no
SportsCenter, no reality television, no anything--just the Koch
brothers' paid ads and deceitful messaging all day, everyday for more
than 2 weeks. This is the political environment that the Citizens
United decision has hatched. It is a society inundated by the wrath of
political misgivings and I guess some of the musings of the two
billionaire brothers. They are multibillionaires.
While the Kochs and other special interests are using their vast
resources to make their voices heard, Americans are being
systematically disenfranchised from our democracy. To say that is wrong
is a gross understatement. I don't know how else to say it. Our
involvement with the government should not be dependent on somebody's
checkbook. The American people reject the notion that money gives
billionaires, corporations or special interests a greater voice in the
government than our own voice, the voice of the voters. The American
voter believes, as I do, that the Constitution doesn't give
corporations a vote, and it doesn't give them--because of the dollars
they have--extra votes.
The only people who don't see it that way are the Republicans here in
Congress. They see money as speech. In fact, the Republican leader has
said: ``In our society spending is speech.''
If spending is speech, where does that leave the rest of the American
people? Should their role in democracy be diminished because they are
paying a mortgage and sending kids to college? Should a family hard hit
by a recession--let's say they are out of work--does that mean they
shouldn't have any say at the ballot box? Should families hard hit by
the recession take a back seat in our government to a couple of
billionaires? Right now the answer is yes.
How could everyday American families afford to have their voices
heard if spending money is speech? Families cannot compete with
billionaires. Rich families can't, poor families can't, working
families can't. The only people that would have a vote are these
megabillionaires who are trying to buy our country.
They are trying to buy America at every level of government. Why?
Because they want to make more money. They control vast amounts of tar
sands, oil, gas, coal, chemicals, and on and on. They want to make more
money. What they have now is not enough.
So we are faced with a choice: We can keep the status quo or we can
change the system and restore the fundamental principle of one
American, one vote.
When I was in law school one of the classes I had sent us over to the
Supreme Court to listen to an argument--Baker v. Carr. The decision was
on one man, one vote; one woman, one vote. I didn't realize that when I
was there listening. Frankly, I didn't really understand a lot of the
talk that went on before the Supreme Court, but I came to learn later.
I have been in public office now for a few years, and I can remember
the first time I ran for the State legislature in Nevada. Clark County,
where Las Vegas is, was really growing at the time, but they had not
totally reapportioned the State. They had done a little. Clark County
is only 1 of 17 counties. They had 9 incumbent assemblymen. So I ran
against those 9 incumbent assemblymen. Now the assemblymen run in
single districts because reapportionment has taken place because of
Baker v. Carr. When I was elected in the legislature one person, one
vote did not apply. They hadn't completed that work yet. So I do
believe that we should be a society where one vote equals one person.
Corporations should not have a vote and dollar bills should not have
a vote. But that is where we are now. We are faced with a choice: Keep
the status quo or change it. Senators Udall of New Mexico and Bennet of
Colorado want to change this system. Their constitutional amendment is
about restoring freedom of speech for everyone in America. Whether you
are a billionaire, a millionaire, upper middle class, middle class,
lower middle class, poor, homeless--that is for whom we are fighting.
It grants Congress the authority to regulate and limit the raising and
spending of money for Federal political campaigns.
Senators Udall and Bennet's amendment will rein in the massive
spending of super PACs, which has grown exponentially since the Supreme
Court's misguided decision in Citizens United. It also provides States
with the authority to institute campaign spending limits at the State
level, which they should have a right to do. This is common sense. It
is a solution to an issue that is plaguing our political system. Yet,
instead of joining with us to expel the undue influence of special
interests from our government, Senate Republicans are doing their best
to keep the status quo. What they are going to do, Mr. President--we
are going to have a cloture vote tonight to stop debate on this, and
they say: Well, great. We will go ahead and support that because we can
stall.
They want us to not be able to do anything here. Remember, their
whole political mantra is this: We have a Democratic President; we have
a Democratic Senate. And they have done their best for the 6 years of
the Obama administration to stop everything. That is what they agreed
to do--stop everything. They have two goals: not allow the President to
be reelected--they failed there miserably. During the first Congress of
his Presidency, we had a lot of Democratic Senators so we were able to
get a lot done during that time, but in the last two
[[Page S5351]]
they have been experts at stalling everything. That is what they are
going to do again today.
But we are going to go ahead and vote on this tonight, and we are
going to vote on it again Wednesday. There will be no amendments. It is
not a difficult issue. You are either for campaign spending reform or
not. So my Republican colleagues can stall for time. We are going to be
very patient. We are going to see if there is a single Republican who
believes an election in America today should be determined by how much
money you have. That is what this vote is all about.
I am going to move this legislation forward regardless of any
Republican obstruction because this issue is important. Simply put,
this constitutional amendment is what we need to bring back sanity to
elections and restore Americans' confidence in our democracy. We must
overturn the status quo created by the Supreme Court and instead put in
place a system that works for all Americans, not just the richest of
the rich.
It is such a shame what this Republican-driven tea party has done in
Congress to try to stop everything. Virtually everything is a
filibuster. I do not know how much longer the American people are going
to put up with it. These are artificial numbers anyway. Should not we
be a democracy? We are not because everything in this Senate requires
60 votes. That is not the way of the Founding Fathers. And, of course,
a number of the Founding Fathers were from the Presiding Officer's
State. None from Nevada; we were not a State. But the Founding Fathers
must be turning over in their graves. They must be looking down at this
and saying: What in the world are they doing to our country?
We must overturn the status quo. This is what the entire issue boils
down to: whether our democracy, as President Lincoln said, is a
``government of the people, by the people and for the people.'' That is
what Lincoln said, and we know that is what he meant--or as we have it
today: a government of the rich, by the rich, and exclusively for the
rich.
Is America for sale? The American people want change. They want their
place in government to be protected. The constitutional amendment
before the Senate protects working families. It protects Americans. It
protects their voice and participation in government because our
voice--not the wealth of a few--is the very essence of American
democracy.
Reservation of Leader Time
Mr. President, would the Chair announce the business of this
afternoon.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the leadership time
is reserved.
____________________