Legislative Branch Appropriations Act of 2013
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. FLAKE. This amendment would simply prohibit Members, Committees, and leadership offices from using taxpayer-funded MRAs to purchase online advertisements. These ads are little more than a tool to boost name identification. They blur the lines between official duties and campaign activities. I believe, and I think most of us would concede, it's an inappropriate use of taxpayer money.
I know that some will stand up and say we've got to advertise town halls and whatever else that we're doing.
Let me tell you, all the online advertising that is being paid for by the taxpayers from Members' offices right now, town halls and those other notices represent a tiny fraction of that. Most of it are things like this, ads reading: Congressman X is fighting the madness. Click on this, and then it sends them to their official page, just boosting their name ID.
Representative X is working to lower gas prices by increasing American energy production. Find out more and like my page today.
Another one: Congressman X is committed to creating jobs, driving down spending, and shrinking the size of the Federal Government. That's pure electioneering or campaigning. The taxpayers have no reason to fund that kind of purchase in online advertising.
We already see the abuse that takes place with regard to franking. When you receive in the mail a four-color glossy that you can't even tell the difference between that these days and a campaign mailer, unless you look and see the very, very fine print that is there on the bottom of the mailer: paid for at taxpayer expense.
Enter the Internet world and the potential for abuse is that much greater when Members can target ads. Say if I wanted to run for Governor next, I could say that I want an ad to pop up or my name to pop up when somebody types in a Google search for Arizona Governor. I would submit to you that kind of thing is happening right now, and we've got to stop it before it brings a dark cloud over this body.
We all know what happened with earmarks in years past. It got so rampant and the corruption set in that we had to get rid of it completely. Let's stop this before it really balloons. There is abuse going on right now, but let's stop it before it gets big.
I urge adoption of the amendment and reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. FLAKE. In response, the gentleman mentioned people want to announce town halls and whatnot. That is a tiny, tiny fraction of what occurs in the money being spent, taxpayer money, through franking on the Internet. It's things like this, and I'll just read a few.
This is from a Member:
``Like'' my Facebook page to find out what I'm doing to create jobs, to reduce spending, and to put our economy back on track.
How is that necessary for the taxpayer to fund? Come on. Let's get real here.
Another one:
I want to know, do you support a balanced budget amendment to the United States Constitution?
I don't really want to know that. Members just want to get traffic, name IDs to their Web pages.
Now, I'm not a Luddite here. I have my own Web page. I have a Facebook account. I do all of that, but I do it where it's appropriate--with campaign funds, not with official funds to campaign.
The gentleman mentioned that we ought to just kind of trust the Member--there is a Franking Commission--and let everybody do it. I should mention that, in 1997, when this bill came to the floor, Members thought there was some abuse going on with the franking of mail, so a requirement was put in to add the ``printed at taxpayer expense.'' That was done by amendment on this bill on this floor in 1997. Also, there was abuse with franking too close to an election. So, with an amendment in this bill on this floor in 1997, there was put in a requirement that there is a 90-day blackout period in which you can't do it.
So there is a recognition that sometimes you go too far here. I can tell you that Members are going too far. I would invite anyone to go down to the Franking Commission and take a look at what's going on, to take a look at what Members are sending.
We're going to be voting on this quickly. So I would submit, if you're coming to the floor or watching this debate, you don't want to be on the other side of this issue, because we will be here, sooner or later, banning this practice. I hope it's sooner rather than later.
I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. FLAKE. In closing, I would just say we have a Franking Commission. They are making determinations like this, and we're still getting this stuff. We're still getting people saying, Congressman X--fighting the madness. ``Like'' my Facebook page now.
I would suggest that the bipartisanship of this Franking Commission is part of the problem. Both parties say, They're doing it, so we'll do it, too, and we'll both turn the other way.
That's why we get into problems with this. I'm just saying, please, get ahead of the curve here, and get ahead of where the taxpayers are going to be on this issue. I urge the support of the amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source