Providing for Consideration of H.R. 513, 527 Reform Act of 2005

PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 513, 527 REFORM ACT OF 2005 -- (House of Representatives - April 05, 2006)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Apparently my good friend, and he is my good friend, from Connecticut was not mindful that there were 100 Members of the House of Representatives who wrote to the FEC asking that the McConnell v. FEC decision be upheld.

But I don't want to get bogged down in all of these legal mores. The simple fact of the matter is that if we intend to do something that would make a difference, we could all support public financing. I challenge any of you to tell me that that would not cure the problems that we continue to talk about.

I also would urge my friend from Connecticut, who argues about loopholes, to ask the chairman what I say about laws that we pass here. You show me a law and I will show you a loophole. I have been involved in politics as long as anybody in this room, and for the 41 years that I have been involved, we have continued to reform campaign finance by calling it campaign finance reform. Every time we reform it, the Republicans or the Democrats, the majority or the minority, somebody comes up with a way to get around the law.

So make this one, if you will, Mr. Chairman, and be mindful of all of the people that have spoken with reference to the myth that I think that you perpetuate. One of the biggest myths, the National Review says, is that this bill would level the playing field. That is language you used earlier, Mr. Chairman, ending the ability of the wealthy to fund propaganda. This is completely false, according to the National Review. Wealthy individuals would still be free to say whatever they want, whenever they want. The proposal would end only the ability of individuals of lesser means to pool their money to independently speak out on issues.

The simple fact is when you cite to the law, my recollection is you didn't say anything at all about Buckley v. Valeo, which simply said in its holding that money is speech, and that is ultimately what winds up happening here.

Mr. Speaker, I will be asking Members to vote ``no'' on the previous question, so I can amend the rule to provide that immediately after the House adopts this rule, if it does, it will bring H.R. 4682, the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2006 to the House floor for consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment and extraneous materials immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Florida?

There was no objection.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, before we go reforming campaign finance laws and telling those on the outside what they can and cannot do, I think we need to fix up our own house. H.R. 4682 is a comprehensive reform package introduced by Leader Pelosi that is designed to clean up this Congress and show the American people we are serious about our roles as legislators and that we put the people we represent first.

This bill does many things. It curbs the abuses of power by stopping the practice of keeping votes open to twist arms and lobbying Members on the floor of the House. It shuts down the K Street Project by making it a criminal offense and violation of the House rules to take or withhold official action or threaten to do so with the intent to influence private employment decisions. It ends the practice of adding special interest provisions to conference reports in the dead of night and behind closed doors. It imposes strict and enforceable new disclosure requirements on lobbyists. It curbs abuses of power and it blocks cronyism and corrupt contracting practices that endanger our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and around the world.

It is important for Members to know that defeating the previous question will not, I repeat, will not, block the underlying bill. H.R. 513 will still be considered by the House. But by voting ``no'' on the previous question, we will be able to consider the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act under a completely open rule that gives all Members of this body the opportunity to be heard on this matter.

I urge all Members of this body to vote ``no'' on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

http://thomas.loc.gov/