[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 2]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 2885]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




   INTRODUCTION OF THE CITIZENS INVOLVEMENT IN CAMPAIGNS (CIVIC) ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. THOMAS E. PETRI

                              of wisconsin

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, February 17, 2005

  Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, today, Rep. Paul Kanjorski and I are 
introducing bipartisan legislation to establish a program of limited 
tax credits and tax deductions to get average Americans more involved 
in the political process. This bill, the Citizens Involvement in 
Campaigns (CIVIC) Act, will broaden the base of political contributors 
and limit the influence of big money donors in federal elections.
  We need to take a fresh look at innovative approaches to campaign 
finance reform, with special attention paid to ideas that encourage, 
and not restrict, greater participation in our campaigns. Toward this 
end, I have been advocating tax credits and deductions for small 
political contributions for many years. An updated tax credit system 
would be a simple and effective means of balancing the influence of big 
money donors and bringing individual contributors back to our 
campaigns. The impact of this counterweight will reduce the burden of 
raising money, as well as the appearance of impropriety that 
accompanies the money chase.
  Most would agree that the ideal way to finance political campaigns is 
through a broad base of donors. But, as we are all painfully aware, the 
economic realities of modern-day campaigning lead many candidates to 
focus most of their efforts on collecting funds from a few large 
donors. This reality alienates many Americans from the political 
process.
  The concept of empowering small donors is not a new idea. For 
example, from 1972 to 1986, the federal government offered a tax credit 
for small political contributions. This provided an incentive for 
average Americans to contribute to campaigns in small amounts while 
simultaneously encouraging politicians to solicit donations from a 
larger pool of contributors. Currently, six geographically and 
politically diverse states (Oregon, Minnesota, Ohio, Virginia, 
Arkansas, and Arizona) offer their own tax credits for political 
contributions. These state-level credits vary in many respects, but all 
share the same goal of encouraging average Americans to become more 
involved.
  The CIVIC Act can begin the process of building this counterweight 
for federal elections. This bill is designed to encourage Americans who 
ordinarily do not get involved in politics beyond casting a vote every 
two or four years (that is, if they bother to vote at all) to become 
more active participants in our political process.
  The CIVIC Act will reestablish and update the discontinued federal 
tax credit. Taxpayers can choose between a 100% tax credit for 
political contributions to federal candidates or national political 
parties (limited to $200 per taxable year), or a 100% tax deduction 
(limited to $600 per taxable year). Both limits, of course, are doubled 
for joint returns. As long as political parties and candidates promote 
the existence of these credits, the program can have a real impact and 
aid in making elections more grassroots affairs than they are now.
  A limited tax credit for political contributions can be a bipartisan, 
cost-efficient method for helping balance the influence of large money 
donors in the American electoral process. Instead of driving away most 
Americans from participation in political life, we can invite them in. 
It seems to me that this will be a fruitful way to clean up our system, 
while at the same time convincing Americans that they actually have a 
meaningful stake in elections.

                          ____________________