[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 33 (Tuesday, March 1, 2016)]
[House]
[Pages H1081-H1083]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STOP ACT
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 6, 2015, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Jolly) for 30 minutes.
Mr. JOLLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise this afternoon to talk about an issue
that I started bringing up about 5 or 6 weeks ago and that I intend to
talk about every week until we finally force action in this Chamber.
For over 20 years, I have had the opportunity to study this
institution, an institution I believe very deeply in--in its ability to
rise to some of our greatest national challenges and to solve some of
the greatest problems we face. It was not until as a first-time
candidate then elected to office that I had the opportunity to
experience a few moments that are very unique to actually being in the
Member's chair.
We have had a great debate over the decades about campaign finance
reform, about the role of money in politics. It is a legitimate debate.
It is a legitimate conversation with strongly felt views on both sides
of the aisle, with solutions as diverse as the ideologies of our
country--from greater transparency to greater limits, to fewer limits.
Yet, as we have talked about the campaign finance construct in this
country and as we have talked about proposed solutions, we have
actually ignored one of the greatest blights on this body, itself. It
comes not in the form of our campaign finance laws, but it comes in the
form of the amount of time that Members of this body are expected or
are, in some cases, directed to spend in raising money.
You see, the first way we begin to address campaign finance reform is
by addressing a needed congressional reform, a reform that touches not
on the current laws of how campaigns are resourced, but on the current
rules by which this body governs.
As they were directed a few years back by my colleagues on the other
side of the aisle--by their leadership--the expectation as a new Member
of Congress for a day in D.C. is to spend 4 hours a day on the phone,
raising money. The number-one activity, as was suggested to new
incoming Members, was to fundraise, not to legislate.
It is a very uncomfortable truth. As I said last week, it is very
uncomfortable for me to talk about this amongst my colleagues, but we
represent, each of us, 700,000 people back home who trust us. They
trust us to serve, and in serving, we are to give voice to their
priorities.
Dear folks, the priorities of our constituents is not fundraising.
You see, there is a broad diversity of priorities--from border
security, to immigration reform, to transportation, to tax reform. I
listened to colleagues in the last hour talk about balancing the
budget. Others talked about programs that are critical to ending hunger
here in the United States, but we will never solve these problems on
behalf of the people who sent us here if we spend more time on the
phone, raising money, than we do in legislating, in tackling these very
problems that we have tried to give voice to.
Last week I did share with this body the orientation card that was
provided to some incoming Members a few years back. Today I have with
me some quotes from retiring Members of Congress, from those on the way
out the door or who have already left.
The first one, you will notice, is a confession from a colleague on
my side of the aisle, upon his retirement, who said that fundraising is
the main business of Congress.
The other one is from the retired Senate majority leader who said
that a Senator has to raise $10,000 a day every day he is in office,
every day for 6 years, simply to finance his reelection.
[[Page H1082]]
The last is from a colleague who, shortly after announcing his
intention to retire, wrote a piece called ``Confessions of a
Congressman,'' confessing to spending 4,200 hours on the phone, raising
money--4,200 hours that could have been spent doing his job.
What do all of these quotes have in common? What do all of these
individuals have in common?
They are either retired or they are retiring.
The cynic in me would suggest: Why do you wait until you have left
this institution to publicly lament the failings of having served while
you were here?
In fact, the cynic in me would suggest, in some cases, it is simply
to sell a book--to ask the American people for more money, but this
time for your own pocket, not for your campaign.
What do we do about it? Why don't we do something as sitting Members
of Congress that has never been done before?
Let's address this issue that creates such a quiet anger amongst
Members of Congress--this obligation to fundraise--but that resonates
as a very loud anger with the American people. You see, no Member on
this side of the aisle or the other needs a poll to know that the
American people are frustrated with the amount of time Members of
Congress spend in raising money instead of in doing their jobs.
Together, with six or eight colleagues here in this body--and I am
grateful for their support of the legislation I have introduced--we
have introduced something I call the STOP Act. It is very simple. It is
merely three or four pages. Every Member of this body can read it
before he votes on it.
The STOP Act, H.R. 4443, prohibits any Member of Congress from
directly soliciting a contribution to his own campaign, to a PAC, or to
his party. It leaves in place the campaign finance construct that has
been approved by the Supreme Court. Whether you agree with it or not,
it doesn't touch the current campaign finance system.
If an individual wishes to participate in an election, I believe that
is political speech, and he is still able to participate by making
phone calls, by waving signs, or by contributing. Campaign committees
can still exist. It is simply the job of staff to ensure that campaigns
have the resources necessary to run the campaign.
This law would only apply to sitting Members of Congress. It would
not apply to challengers. It would not apply to first-time candidates.
It would only apply to sitting Members of Congress. It would be a
direct prohibition on any Member of Congress who is directly soliciting
a contribution.
Why?
Because the message is very simple to Congress. You see, the STOP Act
says: Get back to work. Do your job. It is why we were elected, to
actually try to solve problems.
In State legislatures, including in the State legislature in the
State of Florida, members are prohibited from directly soliciting
contributions while they are in session. In Florida, where we elect
judges, we have a prohibition on the direct solicitation of
contributions, and 29 or 30 States across the country have that same
prohibition.
The message is very simple: you are elected to do a job. Spend your
hours working, not asking people for money.
I have heard a lot of responses since I introduced this bill. The
contrast between comments from the American people is stark compared to
comments from many elected officials, many in this town. See, the
American people get it and they say ``thank you.''
Of course, Congress should be spending time doing its job, not
spending time across the street, raising money. The American people get
it. Folks in this town say, ``You are crazy.'' Some say, ``I like
fundraising.'' One of the better comments--more intriguing--was that
old habits are hard to break.
Let's break those habits. Let's have a Congress that gets to work
because, you see, this is not the best we can do.
Do you want to know why we have not solved border security, gotten
operational control of the border, why we have not solved immigration
reform, why we have not reached consensus, finally, once and for all,
on how to balance the budget and put us on a pathway to prosperity, why
we have not had a healthy debate on issues like an authorization to use
military force?
Where are we in terms of agreement or disagreement with the
President's foreign policy? Why have we not been able to consider a
national right to carry reciprocity, protecting the Second Amendment
rights of any individual who travels between States? Why have we not
solved the VA healthcare problem in giving every veteran the complete
choice of where he receives his health care? Why have we not moved
legislation on behalf of law enforcement officers to enhance penalties
for those who do harm to law enforcement officers?
It is because we have a part-time Congress and a full-time world.
There is no way to suggest to voters that it is somehow okay to have a
political culture that prioritizes fundraising over legislating.
Tone is very important here. While this is a hard issue to talk
about, this is not intended to judge or to criticize my colleagues.
{time} 1645
In fact, colleagues in this body are operating lawfully under the
system that has been set before us. But I am simply trying to change
the system because the American people will never understand, as they
work 40, 50, 60 hours a week, why, according to some estimations, we
have a legislature that spends 15 hours a week legislating and 25 hours
a week raising money. It does not make a bit of sense.
Now, I mentioned some of the comments that I have heard from others
after I introduced this. There are two things you will hear from people
who don't want to talk about this--actually, there are three.
The first response is silence and the hope that you don't make eye
contact so you can avoid the question because there is no way to oppose
the STOP Act.
The second is this issue of, well, it is First Amendment. I should be
able to ask somebody for money. The United States Supreme Court
recently considered that question in a case that dealt with a
prohibition on judges directly soliciting contributions, and the
Supreme Court of the United States ruled that it was a reasonable
restriction on elected officials to protect the integrity of the bench.
Now, there was discussion about whether or not that could apply also
to legislators, and there were questions about that. I would point you
back to the fact that legislatures at the State level currently
prohibit direct solicitation while they are in session.
So my STOP Act, I believe, meets constitutional muster based on
Supreme Court rulings. But should there be any question, then we can
simply make it apply to days that we are in session, hours that we are
in session. Frankly, we could solve it most easily by simply passing a
House rule, because, you see, a rule that this body imposes upon itself
survives any constitutional scrutiny.
So I start by asking my colleagues to cosponsor the STOP Act, H.R.
4443. If we fail to move the STOP Act, let's have an honest
conversation within this body about the current blight that fundraising
imposes on our ability to do work, because this is not the best we can
do.
Where are our solutions to the issues I mentioned of border security,
of national security, of balanced budget, of tax reforms, of VA health
care, of protecting law enforcement? Where are our solutions? They are
not found at fundraisers. They are not found on the other end of a cold
call that you make to ask for a contribution.
The answers are found among the community of stakeholders that sent
us here, those on the front lines every day of these issues,
communities like mine in Pinellas County who gave me the public trust.
Every day my first responsibility and the responsibility of every
Member of this Congress is to honor that public trust.
You see, the answers are not in fundraisers or on the other end of a
fundraising phone call. The answers are in our community and in the
voices of our community as represented by elected officials here in
this well. But we are not here. It is 4:45, and we are done for the day
but for fundraising and but for making phone calls.
Let's get off the phone with donors. Let's leave that to campaign
organizations, and let's get on the phone with the constituents who
have asked us to give voice to their concerns. Let's find
[[Page H1083]]
the answers where they lie, not across the street in call suites, not
at fundraisers. We can do so much better, and we are fooling ourselves
if we don't realize that.
If we take anything from the political landscape this year, it is
that the American people are calling the bluff of folks who continue to
mislead and misrepresent. It is misleading and it is misrepresenting
when we promise that we are working on critical issues of the country
when, in fact, we are not even in the office but we are across the
street raising money.
I would love to take on broader campaign finance reform. We all have
strong opinions. Mine start first with protecting the First Amendment
rights of anyone to participate in an election.
We will never get to the bigger reforms if we ignore this very basic
truth that many in this body, as a result of the pressure of campaigns,
spend more time asking you for money than asking you for solutions,
more time fundraising than legislating.
I didn't run to become a professional fundraiser. I ran to hopefully
contribute to solutions that are desperately wanted by the American
people, solutions that require consensus across the aisle, but
solutions that first and foremost require a commitment to serve, a
commitment to tackle the hardest issues among us.
I started by saying I believe deeply in this institution, and I do.
This is the greatest legislative body the world has ever seen, but
let's honor that history. Just as when we took the oath of office to
well and faithfully execute the duties of this office, let's honor
that, because we are not faithfully executing the duties of this office
when the Chamber is empty at 4:45 but the call suites across the street
are full.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________