Time to deliver - campaign promises for campaign finance and lobby reform - Column

"The work of change, frankly, will never get any, easier until we limit the influence of well-financed interests who profit from this current system. So I also must now call on you to finish the job both houses began last year, by passing tough and meaningful campaign finance reform and lobby reform legislation this year."

President Bill Clinton State of the Union Speech

January 25, 1994

President Clinton's first year in office taught him firsthand the clout of special interests. In 1992 congressional candidates across the country promised to make big changes in the way business is done in Washington. In 1993 not one of the critical reforms reached the president's desk.

In 1994 Congress again has the opportunity to act. It is time to deliver.

The campaign finance bills passed by the House and Senate last year contain significant reforms and have problem provisions. But the strongest elements of the two bills could be combined into legislation that would make a major change in the campaign money chase (see page 35).

Several factors are working in favor of change in 1994. Public disgust at the mingling of money and politics is growing. And some committed representatives and senators have risked their colleagues' wrath by pushing reforms forward.

In addition to the real importance of separating legislative decisions from the money that seeks to influence them, there is another critical reason for the House and Senate to pass a strong and credible campaign finance reform bill -- the need to reestablish public trust in our democratic institutions.

Representatives and senators return to Washington from their home states bewildered by the anger and hostility directed at Congress. A recent poll put the approval rating for Congress at just 29 percent. Other polls indicate that Americans believe lobbyists and big campaign contributors exert too much influence over elected officials.

Public attitudes are reaching the dangerous point where concern about the integrity of Congress is creating cynicism about Congress's ability to address any problem effectively.

Common Cause was founded on the principle that an individual can make a difference. Central to the history and mission of this organization has been encouraging citizens to take responsibility for making government work better, because what the government does is important.

As a nation, we face challenges that require creative policy approaches and difficult decisions regarding limited resources and conflicting public priorities. Reaching the best possible outcome of tho choices requires a citizenry that is actively engaged in the policy process, not one that throws up its hands and turns away altogether.

Unfortunately, Congress sometimes plays into the hands of its most cynical critics. "When it comes to changing its ways, Congress sometimes gives the impression it is a foot-dragging, dysfunctional family unit," said the Washington Post recently.

Congressional action on campaign finance reform last year was one example as the New York Times noted in a January 31, 1994, editorial, "A strong campaign finance overhaul might already be law had the President insisted that Congress act a year ago, when the momentum for reform coming out of the election was still at its peak." Congress could have quickly sent President Clinton legislation similar to the bill vetoed by President Bush in 1992. When House leaders balked, the press asked if the House passage of reform in 1992 was a purely cynical act, with members relying on a presidential veto to protect them from reforms they publicly supported but privately opposed.

Congressional action on lobbying reform is another area that could lead to positive change or to greater cynicism among American citizens.

Lobbyists provide members of Congress with a wide array of financial benefits, including vacation trips, meals, and tickets to sporting events. The Senate, prodded by Sen. Paul Wellstone (D-Minn.), passed a strong disclosure bill last year. But when a bill banning some gifts and requiring disclosure of others was about to come up in the House, a bipartisan group of senior representatives knocked it off track. The bill, sponsored by Rep. John Bryant (D-Texas) has a framework of disclosure and gift ban language, but contains major loopholes. Regarding an exemption for gifts motivated by a "personal friendship," one lobbyist bragged to Congressional Quarterly, "I've got lots of friends that are senators and congressmen." In addition, the bill would not ban the kind of lobbyist-financed vacation trips that have been featured on recent television news programs.

On campaign finance reform and lobbying reform, members of Congress must make a fundamental choice. Will they say one thing and do another, fueling the public alienation that ultimately threatens our representative government? Or will they pass the "tough and meaningful" legislation that President Clinton has vowed to sign? In January the Washington Post called on Congress to make the right choice: "This Congress has a chance to cut through the frustration, pass campaign reform and thus contribute significantly to the state of the Union."

COPYRIGHT 1994 Common Cause Magazine
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group