Official Truth Squad (Part 1)
OFFICIAL TRUTH SQUAD (Part 1)
House of Representatives
March 30, 2006
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 4, 2005, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the conference and leadership for allowing me to come before the House during this hour today and to present a number of different issues with my colleagues in the House of Representatives.
We are going to bring another edition of the Official Truth Squad today. And folks ask, what is the Official Truth Squad? And I guess the simplest way to explain it is that it is a group of individuals in the House of Representatives who are interested in making sure that the American people have the truth presented to them so that they can make appropriate decisions. And it grew out of the group of freshmen Members of Congress who were elected for the first time to Congress in 2004, and after a number of months here, we would meet on a regular basis, met about once a week, and when we would talk to each other, we would get the same kind of sense about what was happening on the floor of the House. We were, frankly, disgusted with all of the personal attacks, the lack of cooperation, the leveling of charges, and, frankly, so many times, comments that were made that simply were not true. And so we said, what on Earth can we do? So we created what we call the Official Truth Squad. And we try to come here as often as possible, almost every day that we are in session, and talk about issues that are of importance to the American people and present the facts.
We have got a quote that we are so fond of and it comes from Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Senator Moynihan said, ``Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but they are not entitled to their own facts.'' And here in Washington, we hear something repeated over and over and over again, so often that you think it is a fact, that you think it is the truth, but, in fact, it is not. And we have just been treated to an hour from some of our friends on the other side of the aisle with many, many issues that were remarkably distorted. Some of them outright untrue. And so our concern is that the American people, in order to make correct decisions about what direction this country ought to go, they need the facts. They need the truth.
I have told folks oftentimes, Mr. Speaker, I am a physician. Before I came to Congress, I was a medical doctor. And when I would see a patient, I could not get to the right diagnosis unless I was given the true information, either in a lab test or talking with the patient or whatever it was. And the same is true in public policy. Unless you get the truth, unless you get real honest information, you just cannot get to the right solution because you do not have all of the information that you need. So everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and there are a lot of opinions here in Washington, Mr. Speaker, but they are not entitled to their own facts.
And just by way of clarification of a number of things that folks have heard today and oftentimes, but most recently within the last hour, I was sitting here in the House, and I had to write down one of the comments that was made because it was just so outrageous, and it was, ``Everything that is supposed to be up is down and everything that is supposed to be down is up.'' And I guess I am supposed to take the gentleman at his word, and if that is the case, then I would like to point to a few things that are either up or down and are moving in the right direction, frankly, Mr. Speaker. And one of them is the number of jobs that have been created in this Nation over the last 3 or 4 years.
A chart says it so much better than I can, but this is a chart that shows the number of new jobs, these are new jobs in America, since January of 2002 until January of this year. And what you see for the first 2 years is a significant decrease in jobs and then on about the end of 2003 or the beginning of 2004, it began to tick up, and now we have, month after month after month, over 30 months of new job creation in the hundreds of thousands, almost 5 million new jobs created in the last 2 to 3 years. So that is something that is up that I guess the gentleman wants to go down; is that right, Mr. Speaker? This chart does not even include the month of February, which was 243,000 new jobs across this Nation.
Here is another chart that shows the direction of job growth. And again, the axis down here is January of 2002 through January of 2006, and you see what happens to job growth is that on or about the first part of 2003, it begins to tick up, and it is ticking up month after month after month after month and the unemployment rate ticking down. The unemployment rate last month, Mr. Speaker, 4.8 percent across this Nation. That is lower than the average for the 1970s and the 1980s and the 1990s. I guess that is something that the gentleman wants to go up instead of down; is that right, Mr. Speaker? These are good numbers. This is good news, economic news, across this Nation. And saying that it is something different, confusing people, distorting things, telling things that are, frankly, not true does a complete disservice to everybody in our Nation because if you are given misinformation, you cannot make correct decisions. So what the Official Truth Squad is interested in is real information, honest information, the real numbers, and then we are confident that people will make the right decision.
Here is another number that I guess the gentleman wants to see go in a different direction. This is Federal revenues. This is tax revenue. And up until 2003, it was ticking down. And then what happened in 2003 is that there was a tax cut. There was a tax decrease, and what happened was that Federal revenue increased after that and continues to increase. In fact, we are now at a rate of Federal revenue increase over where it was at the beginning of 2000. And it is kind of counterintuitive, but what happens when you decrease taxes is that you give people more of their money back, and they are able to spend more or save more or invest more, and it spurs the economy. So, Mr. Speaker, those are numbers that are moving in the right direction, not the wrong direction.
A couple other items that are very specific that were mentioned within the last hour, and the record just has to be corrected because, again, truthfulness is imperative if we are to make correct decisions here. This is the issue of port security funding, and what you heard recently was, frankly, a remarkable distortion of the truth. Port security funding in 2001, it was about $30 million. Port security funding last year, over $3 billion. Port security funding request for this year, nearly $4 billion.
Mr. Speaker, you can argue about whether or not there ought to be that amount of money or more or less, but what you ought not do is distort the truth to people and tell them that that is not what is occurring, that there are not resources going into port security. It is just wrong. It is not fair to the American people. It is not fair to the discourse here. And, frankly, it creates a greater cynicism for politics than there ought to be. We need to be working together here.
The challenge of port security is not a Republican challenge. It is not a Democrat challenge. It is an American challenge. And an American challenge requires that Americans work together. We solve problems best when we work together. So I encourage my friends on the other side who oftentimes fondly distort things to work with us.
You hear them talk about their national security agenda. Well, I think it is important that we look at the truth. It is important to look at the record. What they have said is that one of their recommendations is to follow the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. But on a roll call vote here in the United States House of Representatives, they voted ``no'' on establishing the Department of Homeland Security, rollcall 367, July, 2002.
On a rollcall vote in July 2004, they voted ``no'' on $21 billion in funding to strengthen border protections.
Now, that is the truth, Mr. Speaker. That is the truth. And it is important that people all across this Nation know that.
One more item as it relates to national security and then we will move on to a different topic that I think is important for the American people to know the truth about as well. And this is what they have said in their national security plan, the folks on the other side, and they talk about the need to increase human intelligence capabilities, eliminate terrorist breeding grounds, secure loose nuclear materials, stop nuclear weapons from development in Iran and North Korea. It all sounds wonderful. But what do they do? Rollcall vote 393, Democrats voted repeatedly to slash funding for intelligence activities.
One of the ones that astounds me so, is that recently, June of 2004, rollcall vote 293 on the floor of the United States House of Representatives, there was a resolution that said we support the work of the intelligence community. We support the men and women who are working so hard to make certain that you and I are safe, Mr. Speaker. And what happened? They vote ``no.'' They cannot even stand up here in the House of Representatives and say, we support the men and women who are trying to keep us safe.
So I think it is imperative, it is imperative that we talk about truthfulness here on the floor of the House. And, again, if we do not talk about the truth, if we did not present all the information accurately and appropriately, then the American people really cannot make an appropriate decision.
Now, today we are going to talk about 527s, and I have been joined by a number of folks who are members of our Republican conference, and I am pleased to have them join us today. I want to put up a poster about 527s.
And you say, Mr. Speaker, what is a 527? Well, a 527 is something that folks across this Nation may not have heard about but they probably heard from them. And it is called a 527 organization because it is a political organization whose taxation is defined in the section 527 of the Federal tax code. And we are here to talk today about 527s because we believe fundamentally that they were formed because of a loophole in the law and that they are fundamentally unfair and that they do not result in any transparency or accountability as it comes to elections.
I want to just highlight a couple of things and then look forward to comments from my colleagues.
Five hundred twenty-seven groups really result in no transparency and no accountability. And it is not unfair to Republicans or Democrats; it is unfair to the American people. Information that is not filed for a 527 or posted with Federal Elections Commission, so there is no way to get accountability. You do not know who is donating to these groups. There is a lack of proper disclosure requirements for filing and donors and disbursements. Where do they spend their money? There is no way to tell. Filled out forms are often incomplete and disclosure is imperfect, again making it so that it is unfair to the American people because they will not know, they cannot know because the information is not available, who is funding certain ads or activities.
They fall under the guidelines of the IRS. And as such, as you and I know, Mr. Speaker, the IRS is a huge, giant entity that, frankly, cannot figure out who is coming or going, and they certainly cannot with these organizations. And funding is dominated by a few wealthy donors, and I know that we will talk specifically about that. Unlimited giving, remarkable unlimited giving, is alive and well in the political environment. We believe that that ought to change.
And I am so pleased to be joined by some of my colleagues, initially Congressman Patrick McHenry, who is an official member of the Official Truth Squad, a member of the freshmen class, from North Carolina. He has just great experience with political activity and also great experience with the importance of truthfulness and fairness in the public arena.
And I am pleased to yield to my friend from North Carolina.
Mr. McHENRY. Thank you, Congressman Price, and thank you for your leadership in the Official Truth Squad. I think it is important that we come to the House floor and articulate our views and our agenda for the American people as Republicans, as conservatives, and as Members of Congress. Today I think it is important that we bring up a pressing issue dealing with 527 groups. My colleague from Georgia has done a very good job of outlining what 527 groups are, what they do, how they operate.
The one thing he points out in his chart there is that funding is dominated by a few wealthy donors, unlimited giving is alive and well. Let's just go back a few years. Our colleagues on the left, the Democrat Party, said that big money is a corrupting influence in politics. And so you had men like George Soros, one of the richest men in the world, a multibillionaire, George Soros, who I like to call the Daddy Warbucks of the Democrat Party, he spent $18 million to root out big money in politics. Think about that. That is liberal lunacy at its worst, or I guess I should say at its best.
He wanted to root out the corrupting influence of very large donors. That is what he was quoted as saying, to root out issue advocacy phone calls, TV ads, radio ads. This last election cycle, he spent $27 million, wrote a check for $27 million to different 527 groups to do exactly what he wanted to ban through campaign finance reform. Liberal lunacy, hypocrisy. It is a culture of hypocrisy that we are fighting on the left.
Let's look at the facts and figures. $370 million flowed through 527 groups. $370 million. That is more than President Bush and Senator Kerry spent on the presidential election. This flowed through unregulated, undisclosed means. So voters didn't have the opportunity to know who these 527 groups are, who their donors are, what their true agenda is. And so it is important that we bring out and bring to light the need for 527 reform so that we can have accountability and transparency, two things that my colleague from Georgia has been talking about extensively.
We are going to point out the culture of hypocrisy on the left. Really at the heart of it is their reliance on a few billionaires to spend money through unregulated means to go out and influence elections. It is very deceptive to the voters. I think it is very unbecoming of who we are as a democracy. But I also want to say, Congressman Price, that I think our philosophy is similar. We believe that freedom works and that free and full disclosure is important to the nature of campaign financing. That is what we are trying to push with 527 reform.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. You mentioned one person, George Soros. I just happen to have prepared a poster here, because you talk about big money in politics, and the stated goal by some was to get big money out of politics. In fact, that is exactly what has not occurred. The problem with what we have right now, as you well know, is that there is no way for folks to get this information easily or to know what this money is being spent on. George Soros spent $27 million, as you have said. And then there are others here as well that I would love to have you highlight. I know that you have got information about that.
Mr. McHENRY. Absolutely. I appreciate you putting up something visible for people to see. George Soros. What is his agenda? He is one of the greatest leftists this side of Havana and he is trying to influence elections for his left-wing agenda. I think it is important for the American people to be engaged in elections. But you should not allow billionaires to go in and buy elections. You shouldn't allow billionaires to go in, through undisclosed means, and influence elections. You see Peter Lewis. You see Herbert and Marian Sandler. You see Stephen Bing, a huge Hollywood producer. You have Hollywood money flowing through undisclosed means to influence elections.
My agenda, Congressman Price, just like yours, is full disclosure. I think that is important. My version of campaign finance reform is maybe akin to what yours would be, Congressman Price, and that is to allow full, open, public transparency of campaigns and allow them to be financed so that the American people can see who is financing them. We shouldn't limit that financing. Until we have that in America, through honesty in Federal elections law, we must level the playing field until we get to that point.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I appreciate those comments, because they are right on where we need to get to. The problem is that politics is the art of the possible so what we have got working here in this Chamber is the possibility of appropriate reform right now. The accountability and disclosure that you mentioned, I think it is important to mention these numbers, Mr. Speaker, because they are staggering. The American people need to know that. George Soros, we have talked about, $27 million. Peter Lewis, $23.9 million. This is personal money coming into campaigns that the American people don't know anything about. There is no way for them to get that information. Herbert and Marian Sandler, $14 million. Stephen Bing you mentioned, but you didn't mention the number. The number is $13.9 million. That is money, Mr. Speaker, that is being used to influence elections and nobody knows about it.
When you and I, Congressman McHenry, have our elections, what do we do? We put on everything that we have got, Paid for by Price for Congress, or Paid for by McHenry for Congress. We have to disclose that. And that is appropriate. What happens when they spend nearly $80 million? Nobody knows.
I would like to yield now to a good friend and colleague who is not a freshman, who has been around here for a little while, but he is a good friend and he has excellent insight into this and so many other issues and is truly interested, Mr. Speaker, in making certain that the American people have the information that they need in order to make appropriate decisions. Chief Deputy Whip ERIC CANTOR from the great State of Virginia, I welcome you and look forward to your comments.
Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman and I commend him on really a tremendous job in heading up the Official Truth Squad of House Republicans, because it is about transparency. You have done a great job at laying out the record here in the House of who votes for what and sort of comparing that to the rhetoric that often swirls around this place, certainly in the press and in other corners. I would also like to commend the gentleman from North Carolina for his leadership on this and many other issues. But I would like to, as the gentleman from Georgia indicated, talk just a minute about the issue of transparency in elections. See, I come from the Commonwealth of Virginia. In Virginia, we have an election law that allows for open and often disclosure. We have a campaign finance regime that allows for pretty much anyone to step up and exercise his or her first amendment right without any restriction so far as there is full and quick disclosure. That is really what we are all about, I think, here in this country, is we are about ventilating what goes on in this body, what goes on in elections. And so when this body passed the McCain-Feingold legislation, when it passed what we otherwise now call BCRA, somehow the Federal Election Commission in its promulgation of regulations created a loophole that was unintended, because again I think the primary goal of any campaign finance reform should be transparency. We should trust the voters and trust the citizens of this country to be able to make decisions for themselves as long as they have full disclosure of the information. Well, McCain-Feingold produced this loophole and the loophole was the 527 entities that were created, or really that flourished, after the passage of the McCain-Feingold legislation. As both gentlemen have pointed out, this loophole allows the super-rich to impact elections and it allows them to impact elections with very little to no accountability to the voters.
As was said earlier, when any Federal candidate runs for office, they are required to disclose their contributions, their expenditures to the FEC, all of it done now electronically and online for their constituents and for the entire country to see. That is the difference here with 527s. They simply are not disclosing who their donors are in a timely fashion and are not disclosing what type of expenditures they are making. In fact, the Center For Public Integrity reported that section 527 political organizations raised approximately $535 million during the last Federal election cycle in 2004. That was up from the prior cycle of $268 million that was raised then. Reports that were released by public interest groups and various media sources during 2004 indicated that these 527 groups were not reporting all their contributions and expenditures to the IRS. In fact, the IRS did a study. In that study, it was estimated that 527 political organizations received nearly $27 million in contributions prior to filing the necessary disclosure forms, and consequently may be subject to over $17 million in unpaid taxes and penalties. So it almost seems as if 527s may be averting the law to get away with hidden contributions, hidden activities, shady activities.
We all know and we have read the reports about the type of activities that these organizations have engaged in. For instance, one of these 527s hired dozens of felons as voter canvassers in Missouri, Ohio and Florida, including people convicted of crimes such as burglary, forgery, drug dealing, assault and sex offenses. Again, if there were not this loophole that instead would require 527s to abide by the same kind of disclosure laws that any Federal office or any Federal campaign committee was required to comply with, we would have known about that. In fact, these organizations, my contention would be, would not have hired felons and would have been much more careful in their activities.
But the list goes on about the type of activities that these entities are engaged in across the country. That is what we are here today to talk about and that the Truth Squad has come to deliberate upon because frankly the American people expect better. The American people do expect that those who engage in political activity do so in the sunshine, do so with the ability for voters to access information and for the political process frankly not be commandeered by these groups that operate in the dark.
I appreciate the manner in which the gentlemen from Georgia and North Carolina approach this subject and look forward to continuing to debate and discuss these important issues that face Americans frankly this election cycle.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT (see Part 2)
http://thomas.loc.gov/