Steny Hoyer

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I think it is 2\1/3\ minutes, frankly.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, in November 1991, with 259 Republicans and Democrats voting for it, we passed a campaign finance reform bill. It went to the Senate and 57 Senators some days later voted to send that bill to President Bush. That bill limited the amount of money in campaigns. It limited soft money. It provided for campaign finance reform. Unfortunately, that bill was vetoed. We are now here, some 7 years later, and we have another opportunity to do what the American public expects us to do, to make their elections as honest and open as we possibly can. Is it difficult? Yes. Is it impossible? No. The Shays-Meehan perfect? Obviously not. But it is our best opportunity in this Congress to speak out on behalf of the American public's desire for clean and fair campaigns. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote for Shays-Meehan, but if we are to pass Shays-Meehan, we must also reject those amendments that will divide us, divide the consensus for this campaign finance reform bill which received just last year 252 votes in favor of it. Reject those substitutes, some on merit, some because they are designed specifically to defeat Shays-Meehan without giving the opportunity of the 435 of us who were sent here by our neighbors to vote on their behalf, to ensure that democracy is pursued in an honest fashion in this, the last best hope on the face of the Earth. I urge my colleagues to vote for Shays-Meehan and against general amendments.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of the time. Mr. Chairman, so we come to this hour. There will be a subsequent vote on final passage of Shays-Meehan, but this is the critical vote. This vote will determine whether years of hard work and commitment will be realized through the effective passage of legislation to reform campaign finance. Yes, there is another day for the Thomas substitute. It is a noncontroversial piece of legislation. But it is not campaign finance reform, although it has some aspects of that. It is, in fact, reform of the process of the FEC. That process needs reforming. I would even ask perhaps for unanimous consent that we place this on the consent calendar tomorrow. I will not do that, but I suggest that it could happen. Now, at this late hour, before day's end, before the clock strikes 12, we can pass meaningful campaign finance reform. But in order to do that, we must reject the Thomas legislation, which, as the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Davis) clearly posited, was a device to defeat a bill that the Chairman does not like. I accept that. But no one ought to misunderstand what the Thomas substitute is, a device to defeat Shays- Meehan. It ought, therefore, to be rejected, so that we can honestly fulfill the Speaker's pledge, which was a pledge to vote on Shays-Meehan, not merely to bring it to the floor so that opponents could, by some procedural device, dispose of it before we had a chance to vote on it. But let us, as we were elected to do, make a decision. Let us vote on Shays-Meehan, and say to the American people ``This is where we stand on preventing soft money, on precluding sham ads, and on providing for a system that is more open and more fair to the American public,'' so that the cynicism that now abounds can, to some degree at least, be diminished, and the American public can have more faith in their political system and, yes, in us. I urge a ``no'' vote on the Thomas substitute and a ``yes'' vote on Shays-Meehan, which is meaningful, important, campaign finance reform.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays) who has worked so hard, so diligently, and so effectively on behalf of this legislation.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Maryland is very proud to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Meehan), who is back in the Chamber and who has done such an extraordinary job on this piece of legislation through the years.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah).

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle), the formor Governor and a Member of the House.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Davis).

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price), a distinguished political scientist who has probably studied elections as much as any of us on the floor.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind) to close on our side. (Mr. KIND asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Luther).

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Clement).

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I do not know that I am going to object, but my point of inquiry is, does the rule provide for designees?

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object, I just want to ask the gentleman from Nebraska, as I understand, this is simply a technical change and not a substantive change; am I correct?

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, as the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), the sponsor of the last amendment, indicated on this amendment, I think we all agree that the gentleman from American Samoa (Mr. Faleomavaega) has offered an amendment which all of us can and should support. Clearly we want to express in the strongest possible terms that the residents of American Samoa are in fact included as U.S. citizens. They are a full part of our country, and although they do not have every right of citizenship extended to them, Mr. Faleomavaega represents them extraordinarily well here on the floor of this House. And we share his view that we ought to make it very clear that his constituents can in fact contribute, exercise their speech rights by contributing to his campaign, and to such other campaigns as they choose, and I certainly know that I think on our side there is unanimous support for his amendment, and I thank him for his leadership on this very important point.

Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment, and I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), the distinguished ranking member of the Committee of Jurisdiction.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, still controlling the time in opposition to this bill, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Clay) the individual, I would say the chairman in exile. I referred to the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) as the ranking member, but actually the ranking member is my chairman in exile, as I said, one of the senior Members of this House, who has done such extraordinary service to the Congress. (Mr. CLAY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).