Ron Kind

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, over the past week many individuals, organizations and newspaper editorial boards have criticized the Bipartisan Campaign Integrity Act, H.R. 2183. They claim that the freshman crafted bill is not real reform. They argue that we must support a more comprehensive bill that has stronger provisions banning soft money, limiting independent expenditures and restricting candidate spending. While I support comprehensive reform I believe that H.R. 2183 is the only campaign finance reform legislation that can pass the House of Representatives and become law. Our bill was drafted in the spirit of compromise. We recognized that there are many issues that could be put in legislation that will unfairly impact one political party over the other. As a group our Freshman Task Force agreed to eliminate all poison pills that would doom our bill to failure. The success of our effort is reflected in the Speaker's agreement to allow our bill to be the base bill for consideration when the House debates campaign finance reform. Other reform advocates have argued that we need to challenge previous rulings by the Supreme Court on campaign finance reform. I disagree. Our bill will pass a Supreme Court challenge. Other bills directly contradict Supreme Court rulings. As a Supreme Court Justice recently said to me ``our rulings may not always be right, but we are still Supreme.'' To pass legislation that is clearly unconstitutional will only kill campaign reform. The Bipartisan Freshman Campaign Integrity Act will pass the House and will pass a constitutional challenge. It is time for the House of Representatives to pass H.R. 2183.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, over the next several weeks the House of Representatives will finally be given the opportunity to vote on campaign finance reform. Having delivered a daily statement on the floor of the House of Representatives advocating for an open and honest debate, I am pleased to hear that we will soon be given that opportunity. I hope that our colleagues in the Senate will be given the same opportunity. Earlier this year the Senate failed to pass campaign finance reform legislation in spite of the support of a majority of the members. Likewise, last month the House of Representatives attempted to push through sham legislation that they claimed was campaign finance reform. Luckily a majority of the members refused to fall for that trick. In fact, Mr. Speaker, the attempts by the leadership to kill campaign finance has backfired and forced this House to finally deal directly with this important issue. I hope that the leadership in the Senate will see that the will of the majority cannot be denied and they will allow a fair vote on campaign finance reform. Mr. Speaker this issue is too important to the people of this nation to deny the will of the majority. Now is the time for both houses of Congress to act to change our out of control campaign finance system. The people of my district will not accept ``no'' for an answer.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, over the past week the debate on campaign finance reform has shifted, from when we will get a vote to what kind of reform will we actually see. The leadership has chosen the Bipartisan Campaign Integrity Act, H.R. 2183, as the base bill that will be considered on the floor. I applaud that choice. This bill was drafted after a fifteen month process of bipartisan give and take among freshmen members of Congress. I am pleased to have been an original member of that task force. The Bipartisan Campaign Integrity Act is the only bill that was drafted as a truly bipartisan effort to take the big money out of the political system. H.R. 2183 does not contain any poison pills and does not unfairly impact one political party over the other. This legislation does not go as far in changing the system as most members of the task force wanted, however, we all recognized that this was the only way campaign finance legislation could pass this year. This bill takes the biggest influences of money in the system out of our campaigns. Passage of H.R. 2183 will be a significant step forward in returning our elections back to the people whom we are sworn to represent. Mr. Speaker, I commend you for giving in to the pressure of the public and allowing a vote on campaign finance reform. I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting H.R. 2183, the Bipartisan Campaign Integrity Act.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, the announcement by the House leadership to allow an open and honest debate on campaign finance reform has been cheered by editorials and reform activists throughout the country. I, however, am withholding my enthusiasm. We have been given false promises before and I will not celebrate until we actually take part in a truly open debate on this issue on the House floor. I am not yet convinced that our goal of passing meaningful reform will happen given the history of the Republican leadership in the House and the Senate on this issue. In spite of the support of a majority of the members of the Senate, reform was defeated by procedural maneuvers. In the House a majority of the members have been advocating for a year and a half in support of campaign reform, yet we haven't gotten a vote. I hope that the leadership has finally seen that the public wants Congress to do something about big money in politics. Mr. Speaker I will continue my effort to keep this issue at the forefront until I am assured that an open honest debate will happen on campaign finance reform. The people of western Wisconsin will accept nothing less.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, today, we celebrate Earth Day. From its humble grass-roots beginning, Earth Day has grown to an international event. Events are planned in all 50 states and in the continents of Africa, Asia, Europe and North and South America. Proudly, my home state of Wisconsin can claim some credit for this worthwhile event. Former Governor, U.S. Senator and Earth Day founder Gaylord Nelson championed environmental issues during his 18 years in Washington. Of all Senator Nelson achievements, he will always be remembered for his progressive environmental record. In 1963, Senator Nelson urged then-President John F. Kennedy to give national visibility to the importance of protecting the environment by taking a nationwide conservation tour. At every stop he would spell out, in dramatic fashion, the serious and deteriorating condition of our environment and discuss a comprehensive agenda to begin to address the problem. No President had ever made such a tour. While Earth Day was still seven years off, President Kennedy's conservation tour awoke the nation's attention to this issue. After 28 years, Senator Nelson and other environmental advocates of his day may be proud of what Earth Day has grown to become. Since the first Earth Day celebration, this country has passed a number of important environmental measures--the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act, Conservation Reserve Program to name just a few. Thousands of acres of wetlands have also been restored and nearly extinct species have been saved. Wisconsin can clearly see the positive effect of these important laws every time we enjoy the beauty of the Mississippi River and its tributaries. As a nation and a world, we must not rest on our past achievements. In the next 35 years, America's population is expected to grow from approximately 266 million people to nearly 350 million. This growth brings development which may encroach upon many of the environmental accomplishments we have attained. With new found freedom and economic prosperity, many other nations of the world also project increased populations and environmental concerns as their industrial bases expand. As members of Congress, we have a responsibility to ensure the protection of our environmental resources. I urge all my colleagues, Democrats and Republicans alike, to remember the efforts of Senator Nelson and others of his generation by joining me in passing legislation that protects the nation's and world's natural resources.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, today is a great day for supporters of campaign finance reform. It appears that after long last the leadership of the House of Representatives has agreed to allow an open, honest debate on campaign finance reform. The will of the people has overtaken the reluctance of the leadership in this crucial debate. I began delivering a daily statement on campaign finance reform after the House failed to pass legislation by July 4th of 1997. That was the date the President challenged Congress to pass comprehensive reform. Since I began my daily statements I have received overwhelming encouragement from the people of western Wisconsin who have told me that Congress must do something about the big money in politics. I am pleased that the leadership has finally given in to the demands of a majority of the members of the House who have advocated for real campaign finance reform. This struggle is not over yet. We have received false promises before. I will continue to remind the leadership of their promise to allow an open and fair debate until that promise is kept. I am pleased that the base bill for debate will be H.R. 2183, the Bipartisan Campaign Integrity Act. This is a bipartisan bill, worked out among freshman members the House. The freshman bill is an honest effort to craft a bill that will take the big money out of politics and give our elections back to the people. I hope the House passes this bill. I thank the leadership for agreeing to end their stalling tactics and allow an open honest debate on campaign finance reform.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, the leadership of the House of Representatives have been proclaiming that campaign finance reform is not a priority issue to the people of this country. Well I am here to tell you that over the Easter break I hosted town hall meetings in almost every county in my district. At those meetings a wide variety of issues were discussed, including entitlement reform, tax simplification and health care coverage. At every meeting I attended the issue of campaign finance reform was addressed. When I asked the people in attendance if campaign finance reform should be a major priority of Congress, every hand in the room went up. The message from the public is clear, it is time to change the campaign finance system and take big money out of politics. I heard that message everywhere I went over the break. I find it hard to believe that my district is unique when it comes to this issue. I would challenge my colleagues, especially the House Republican Leadership who have refused to schedule a fair vote, to ask their constituents if this should be a major priority. I think they will see that the public is demanding change and it is our responsibility to act now. Mr. Speaker, we have avoided this issue for too long. It is time to take action. The people of my district will not accept ``no'' for an answer.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, today we will adjourn for the Easter recess without having had a debate on campaign finance reform. The leadership of this House may believe they made good on their promise to allow a vote, but they have not. The House leadership may think they have fooled the public into believing that they took action, they are wrong. Frankly Mr. Speaker, I am outraged that we have not taken action on this important issue. Over the next two weeks I will be holding a Town Hall meeting in each of the sixteen counties which I represent in western Wisconsin. Having traveled throughout my district no one has told me that we need more money in politics. They have asked me to pass meaningful reform, to take the big money out of the process and return campaigns to the people. At my Town Hall meetings I will tell my constituents that the leadership has denied me the right to vote on limiting the influence of big money in campaigns. When we return at the end of April I hope we will make a serious effort to fix our campaign finance system. The people of my district have told me not to take ``no'' for an answer.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, today I want to put the leadership on notice that the need for campaign finance reform did not end last night. Our campaign finance system is broken and something must be done to take the influence of big money out of the process. The incremental bills we passed last night did nothing to address the fundamental problems in the system. Until we do more, campaigns will continue to be dominated by soft money, independent expenditures and pressure on candidates to raise more money to combat these groups. There are a number of bipartisan campaign reform bills that begin to address these problems, the Shays- Meehan bill, and the Bipartisan Campaign Integrity Act both would reduce the influence of big money in politics. The House must be given the opportunity to vote on these bills. The partisan tricks that the leadership used last night were are sham and a fraud on the people of this nation. The leadership should in no way assume that they made good on their promise to allow a vote on campaign finance reform. Until we have an open, honest vote on campaign finance reform I will not end my efforts to force that vote. The people of my district did not send me here to accept ``no'' as an answer.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, I want to speak for a second about the process of the multiple bills we have facing us today. The debate we are having tonight is long overdue. The political process is in need of reform, yet for almost a year and a half we in Congress have never been given the chance to debate campaign finance reform. Now, here we are, with a very divisive, partisan bill which is, to quote the New York Times, ``Sham legislation dressed up to look like reform, with no chance for Members to vote on the real thing.'' This process could have been done a lot better and a lot differently. I have been a member of a bipartisan freshman group who, for the past year and a half, have been crafting a bipartisan form of finance reform. The bill we drafted represented an honest effort to seek middle ground that eliminates the poison pills that we are facing here tonight. It was a real effort at reform, not a sham bill designed to offer cover to those who oppose real reform. But, ultimately, this debate is about whether we believe there is too much money in the political process or not enough money in the political process. Those who believe in the need for more campaign spending and more special interest influence on the process will support many of these bills we face tonight. But those who want to put elections back into the hands of the people will see through this charade, will see through this sham and will support real campaign finance reform.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker the campaign finance reform legislation we are considering today, and the process by which we reached this point is a complete sham and a fraud. The Republican leadership of the House of Representatives is engaged in a purely partisan attempt to kill campaign finance reform. As was illustrated by the debate last Friday, the scheduling of this bill took place without any consultation with the Democrats or even with moderate Republicans who are committed to reform. With the scheduling of reform under ``Suspension of the Rules'', which requires the support of 2/3 of Congress to pass, it is guaranteed that campaign reform will fail. It is clear that a bipartisan majority of this House supports campaign finance reform. The delay of the vote from last week, and now the parliamentary tricks the leadership is using today, show the lengths the Republican leadership will go to kill campaign finance reform. For the past year I have worked with my fellow freshman members on the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform task force. Our group came up with a strong, bipartisan bill that had no poison pills. No one from our group was consulted in scheduling this vote. Representatives Chris Shays and Marty Meehan have been working in a bipartisan manner for more than three years to craft a campaign finance reform bill. They were not consulted in scheduling this vote. The members who are committed to changing the status quo have been shut out by the leadership in favor of those who want to increase the amount of money in the campaign system. For the second time this year, the will of the majority to pass meaningful campaign finance reform has been denied. In the U.S. Senate, a majority of Senators supported the McCain-Feingold reform bill, but because of a Senate rule, 60 votes were needed to pass the bill. Now in the House, through the creative use of legislative tactics, the leadership is on its way to defeating reform legislation. Mr. Speaker, it is time to end this deception and allow an honest vote on campaign finance reform. The House Republican leadership's attempts to deny the will of the majority and kill campaign finance reform is a black mark on this House. The only way to restore the faith of the public in their elected officials is by reforming our broken system. This is a sad day for our democratic process.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, ``Emergency'' supplemental bills should contain funding for just that--emergencies. They should not be golden opportunities to attach funding for pet projects or legislative riders. That is why I have introduced this legislation to ``prohibit nonemergency spending or legislative provisions in emergency appropriation laws.'' This bill will not effect nonemergency spending bills, supplemental or otherwise. It is my belief that emergency bills are larger magnets for nonessential spending and inappropriate legislative provisions because they have the greatest likelihood of passing. Our government should spend money on many worthwhile projects and programs. But a responsible government should make those spending decisions during the course of considering annual appropriations bills and other nonemergency supplemental bills. We shouldn't slow down much needed emergency money, or bank on its urgency, to pass all sorts of extraneous measures. This legislation is a way to assure the people I represent that nothing will be stuck into these emergency bills ``in the middle of the night.'' I want people to start trusting Congress again!

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, today is a sad day for our democracy. This was the week that the House of Representatives was to debate and vote on campaign finance reform. Yet, here we are on Friday with the news from the leadership that a vote has been delayed. What is most upsetting is the reason for the delay, a majority of the House supports campaign reform. The leadership, out of fear of actually doing something, first tried to push a bill that contained so many poison pill provisions that it was destined to fail. Now that this strategy appears doomed, the leadership simply pulled the bill and refuses to even consider a vote. The will of the majority in the House has now been denied, just as a majority in the Senate was denied passage of a reform bill. The reason a majority of members support real reform is because they have heard from their constituents, just as I have, that the citizens are tired of the influence of big money in the political process and they want reform. If we fail to change the current system, we will continue to erode the confidence of the public in our democratic system. I hope that next week brings, at last, the chance for this body to make a difference in our campaign finance system. The people of my district want action now!

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, today was to be the day that the House of Representatives finally debated campaign finance reform. After over a year of lobbying by a majority of the members of the House to consider some form of campaign finance reform legislation, the leadership had finally relented and were to allow this day to be dedicated to this very important issue. Unfortunately the leadership of this House designed a bill that was destined to fail, and the majority of the House rejected that approach. So here we stand, with no bill to debate and no assurances of when we will finally have our chance. The solution is simple: allow an open rule on campaign finance reform. It is time we end the political games and give members an opportunity to clearly state, on the record, where they stand on cleaning up our campaign finance system. We have waited too long. It is time to stop the delay and allow a vote on campaign finance reform. The people of my district will not accept ``no'' for an answer.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to congratulate the La Crosse- based Trane Company's Applied Global Systems Group for being recognized by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as a recipient of the 1998 Energy Star Buildings Ally of the Year Award. This award is given to businesses that promote the use of energy-efficient products and contribute to air pollution prevention. The E.P.A's Energy Star Buildings Ally Program proves that business and government can not only coexist, but can actually achieve mutually beneficial goals, energy efficient cost-savings and lower emissions. This award symbolizes a great success for Trane Company and demonstrates how far the company has come since the late 1980's and early 1990's when they faced a steadily declining sales and workforce reductions. It was feared this employer, a cornerstone of employment in the region, would leave the community. Fortunately, a commitment was made by both management and the employees of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Union Locals 21 and 1115 to cultivate a team concept and to foster a partnership for a friendly work environment that promotes pride, encourages a new level of trust and embraces new negotiation tactics in labor relations. Today, the employees and management view each other as allies rather than adversaries, and they work to achieve goals that are fair and productive to the employees and the company. That is part of the reason why the La Crosse Business Unit of Trane Co., responsible for the design, marketing and manufacture of centrifugal water chillers, absorption cold generators and scroll compressors for commercial air conditioning products, was named the 1996 Wisconsin Manufacturer of the Year. Currently, Trane Company employs more than 3,000 employees in La Crosse. They offer industry leading products to an international market. The drive to succeed and dominate in the heating, ventilating, air conditioning and building management industries has enabled them to successfully identify the need for energy efficient and environmentally friendly products. The confidence Trane Co. has in their employees' ability to offer bold, new products to their customers ensures that the company will continue to dominate the market for years to come. I take this opportunity to congratulate Trane Company and its employees on a well-deserved award and wish them continued success in what promises to be a bright and prosperous future as they enter the 21st Century.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, there is one more day left before this House debates campaign finance reform. This is our opportunity to reform the broken political process. Unfortunately, this opportunity is being wasted because the leadership of the House has chosen to submit a bill, H.R. 3485, that stands no chance of passing. There are a wide variety of good bills pending in this body that provide real options for fixing our broken system, the leadership should allow the members an opportunity to consider those bills. Regardless of where each member of Congress stands on the issue of campaign finance reform we all share one goal, promoting citizen involvement in the electoral process. The bill we will vote on tomorrow actually restricts citizen involvement by amending the Motor Voter Act and adding burdensome rules to verify citizenship among voters. These provisions will result in a chilling effect on voting. We need to do more to encourage voter participation, rather than discouraging it. Mr. Speaker, the solution to this dilemma is simple, allow an open rule that gives every campaign finance proposal, including the Bipartisan Freshman Integrity Act, a vote on the floor of the House of Representatives.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, the New York Times continues to clearly spell out the problem facing those of us who support campaign finance reform. In an editorial in yesterday's paper the Times described the campaign finance reform bill which will be considered this week as ``. . . sham legislation dressed up to look like reform, with no chance for members to vote on the real thing.'' Mr. Speaker, the hard work of many members of this House is being destroyed by the highly partisan legislation being offered by the majority. The bill being considered contains poison pills designed to insure the failure of campaign reform. There are better alternatives. If the majority would allow an open rule on the floor these alternatives could be considered. Failure to allow a free, open debate on campaign finance reform would be a terrible disservice to the public and to our democratic process. I open over the next several days the leadership of the House will reconsider their decision and allow an open rule on campaign finance reform. We need real campaign finance reform. The people of my district will not accept ``no'' for an answer.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, next week this body will consider campaign finance reform. After a year and a half of work on this issue, by myself and many other members of Congress, I am hopeful that the result of our work is a meaningful bill that gets the big money out of the electoral process. I am afraid, however, that we may not see true reform. An editorial in Saturday's New York Times may have foreshadowed the result of next week. ``In order to quell a rebellion by Democrats and reform-minded Republicans, House Speaker Newt Gingrich promised that there would be a vote by the end of March on campaign finance reform. Now that the deadline is approaching, Mr. Gingrich is working hard to make sure the vote is rigged to come out the way he wants.'' Mr. Speaker, I hope the New York Times is wrong. I hope that next week you will respond to the call of the public to fix our broken campaign finance system. I hope that next week we will finally have a chance to deliver true reform of our system and restore the public's faith in our democracy. Mr. Speaker, please don't let the people of my district down.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time; and I rise in opposition to this resolution, which I feel sends the wrong signal about our mission in Bosnia today. It sends the wrong signal to the hard-liners in that country, the wrong signals to the people in Bosnia, who are facing crucial national elections this September. A few weeks ago I, along with the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich) and four of my colleagues, had a chance to go over and visit Bosnia on a fact-finding mission. What I saw there, the mission being pursued and the men and women in American uniform performing that mission, made me proud. Except for the day when my younger brother returned home from the Gulf War, I have never felt more proud to be an American. By all accounts, this peacekeeping policy in Bosnia has been an unqualified success. The Dayton Peace Accord is working; NATO is working; the killing has stopped; the genocide, stopped; ethnic cleansing and rapes, stopped; economic development is taking root; democratic institutions are being created; and the children of Bosnia are laughing and playing outside again, all because of our involvement. This, in essence, is the best of America. Our bipartisan delegation drafted a statement of our findings which I would like to insert into the Record at the appropriate time. Now is not the time to turn Bosnia over to the hard-liners again; and I, for one, do not intend to surrender the children on the streets of Sarajevo to the snipers again. I urge my colleagues to support the mission and the people of Bosnia. Support our troops in Bosnia. Oppose this resolution. Mr. Speaker, the document referred to earlier is submitted, as follows: Observations and Conclusions (By Representative Roger Wicker, Representative Saxby Chambliss, Lindsey Graham, Representative Gil Gutknecht, Representative Ron Kind, Representative Dennis Kucinich) 1. The delegation wishes to acknowledge the impressive professionalism and dedication of U.S. service personnel serving on the ground in Bosnia and supporting Operation Joint Guard from deployment sites in Hungary and Italy. It was clear that U.S. military forces are performing their mission in an exemplary fashion. They are being asked to do more with less and are responding admirably. The American people can be proud of the way their armed forces--active duty, reserve, and national guard components--have risen to the challenge of ensuring a peaceful, secure, and stable environment in Bosnia. All Americans owe these soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines a debt of gratitude. 2. We have been informed that U.S. force levels in Bosnia are likely to be reduced from the current 8,500 to 6,900. We are concerned that a lower troop level may lead to increased risk, given the potential for violence directed against or involving U.S. troops as they execute their missions. We believe that an appropriate level of forces in Bosnia must be based on a sound military assessment of the risks and not on any political considerations. Force protection must be a top priority. Increasing the risk to U.S. forces is not an acceptable policy option. At a minimum, we recommend that U.S. force levels not be reduced until after the September 1998 elections are held and a review of the security situation is conducted. We feel that progress in Bosnia should be judged by the achievement of specific milestones and that any troop reduction should be tied to the achievement of these milestones. 3. Prior to the elections in December 1997, which brought to power more moderate leadership within the Republika Srpska, hard-line Bosnian Serbs in power demonstrated an unwillingness to comply with the terms of the Dayton Agreement. As a result, the overwhelming bulk of Western economic aid has flowed to the Muslim-Croat dominated Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The recently elected moderate government within the Republika Srpska lacks the financial resources to function effectively, raising concerns about the government's political viability. We were advised by our military and diplomatic leadership that $5 million in U.S. assistance to the new Republika Srpska government is essential, as part of a $20 to 30 million dollar international assistance package, to demonstrate our commitment to the long-term viability of the new government until it begins generating sufficient revenues on its own. We strongly support appropriation of this $5 million in assistance. Compared to the $2 to 3 billion dollars invested annually in support of the military operation, $5 million is a relatively small price to pay to ensure the stability of the new, reform-minded Republika Srpska government. However, we also believe that any U.S. assistance of this nature should not be funded from Department of Defense accounts. 4. Among the more pressing needs within Bosnia is the establishment of an economic infrastructure that will give the Bosnian people sense of hope and the prospect of a brighter economic future. Without a productive economy, we believe there is little chance for a lasting peace. 5. The need for a continued American troop presence on the ground in Bosnia was stressed by U.S. military commanders, political officials, diplomats, and the Bosnian people with whom we met. There is a widespread conviction that U.S. troops are essential to preventing a resumption of war. Having seen the situation in Bosnia first hand, it is clear to us that the presence of American forces is necessary. 6. The September 1998 Bosnian elections will be a watershed in determining whether Bosnia moves forward or backward. Until then, we believe that the United States should actively continue to support the process of Dayton implementation. Given the effort already expended, it would be foolish to change our political, diplomatic, or military policy in Bosnia before the September elections have taken place. However, we do not believe that the U.S. commitment can be open-ended. SFOR will provide important support to the Office of the High Representative in its efforts to create the climate for a fair election. Notwithstanding our observations of the role in peace being played by U.S. troops, we are concerned about the annual exercise of funding our peacekeeping operations in Bosnia by means of supplemental appropriations. We encourage the Administration to pursue means by which such contingencies can, at least to some degree, be funded other than at the cost of other important national priorities. 7. We are convinced the United States has a vital interest in the stability of Central Europe. The United States is the undisputed leader of the Free World. This role carries with it responsibilities, and among these is participating in efforts to ensure Europe's stability. However, it is our desire that the future of Bosnia ultimately be determined by the Bosnian people themselves.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, yesterday this body welcomed Lois Capps as the newest member of Congress. In her acceptance speech Representative Capps complimented the people of her district for raising their voice above the avalanche of special interest money to tell her what was important in their lives. I also rise to complement the people of the 22nd district of California. In the special election to replace my friend Walter Capps, an unprecedented amount of special interest money poured into this district. The outside interest groups tried to push issues like abortion and term limits, important issues to be sure, but not the issues the people of California were concerned about. Lois Capps, and her opponent, should be credited for standing up to the special interests and remembering that the most important issues are the ones advanced by the people. The race for the 22nd district in California is just one more example of why we need campaign finance reform. The people of the 22nd district wanted to talk about education, taxes and transportation. The special interests spent thousands of dollars trying to convince the people that they had other interests. We must act now to take the special interest money out of the political system. The people of my district, and the people of the 22nd district of California refuse to accept this.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, this week it was publicly disclosed that former Wisconsin Senator William Proxmire has Alzheimer Disease. Senator Proxmire, who had a long and distinguished career in the U.S. Senate, is a friend and mentor to me and many other Wisconsin citizens. Yet, he will probably be best remembered not for what he did in the Senate but by how he got here. Senator Proxmire was famous for his efforts to shake the hands of as many citizens of Wisconsin as possible, standing hours on end at the State Fair and outside the Green Bay Packers games. One year Senator Proxmire spent a total of $184 on his reelection campaign! Can you imagine a Senator spending only $184 on his reelection in today's political climate? Next week, I hope we will remember my friend and mentor, Senator William Proxmire, as we debate campaign finance reform. His example should make our decision easy.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, last week Senator Fred Thompson's committee which is investigating campaign finance abuses in the 1966 elections issued its final report. The news from the report was not new, or startling. The committee concluded that our political system has been undermined by the influence of big money, specifically soft money. The current soft money loophole allows wealthy donors to donate unlimited amounts of money to influence federal elections. The threat of massive spending in a Congressional campaign forces special interest groups to weigh in with their own money, and candidates to raise increasingly large personal war chests. This cycle has to end. We need to bring the out-of-control spending in federal elections to an end. In two weeks we will finally have our chance to do something about campaign finance reform. I hope we don't miss this golden opportunity to restore the public's faith in our democratic system. The people of my district will not accept ``no'' for an answer.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, we are now less than two weeks away from your promised date for a vote on campaign finance reform, yet we have no direction from you about what will or will not be considered. There are plenty of bills that have been drafted that begin to address the overwhelming amount of money being spent on our elections. I have been active with my freshman colleagues in drafting the Bipartisan Campaign Integrity Act, I think it is a good bill, but there are others. The question Mr. Speaker is, what kind of vote will we be allowed to take. Will the vote be a clean vote which clearly shows who supports campaign finance reform and who doesn't or will the vote contain poison pills that will cloud the issue. It is incumbent upon us as Members of Congress to make clear our position on this important issue. We are counting on you, Mr. Speaker, to allow a fair, clean vote on campaign finance reform so the people of this nation know where we stand, once and for all. The people of my district will not accept ``no'' for an answer.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, today is the date for the special election in California's 22nd Congressional seat, the race to replace my friend Walter Capps. The winner of today's race will be decided by the voters of Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties. The loser in this race has already been decided, and it is the current campaign system. The race for this seat has seen an unprecedented level of outside spending by special interest groups trying to influence the election. While the citizens of California's 22nd district have repeatedly said that education and taxes are their top priorities, outside groups have overwhelmed the district with television commercials that only impact their own narrow agenda's. I am afraid that the spending in this race is only a sign of things to come. If we don't pass meaningful campaign finance reform the outside interest groups are going to spend unlimited amounts of money in each Congressional campaign, and each candidate will be forced to raise more money to combat that spending. We need campaign finance reform to stop this vicious cycle. Mr. Speaker the people of my district refuse to accept ``no'' for an answer.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, today I read that there may be a vote on a pure soft money ban on the floor of the House of Representatives. While I strongly support a ban on soft money, it is not enough. Any campaign finance legislation that will make a difference must include increased disclosure rules on independent expenditures. The independent groups have come to dominate our campaigns, you just need to look at the race in California to succeed our colleague Walter Capps to see the effect outside interest groups have had on campaigns. Fortunately, there is a bill that achieves that goal. The Bipartisan Campaign Integrity Act of 1997, H.R. 2183, bans soft money and places simple disclosure requirements on expenditures by independent groups. This bill does not violate free speech and is a practical way to start to get the big money out of the political system. The six Democrats and six Republicans who worked on this bill have taken the poison pills out of this legislation and have crafted a bill that can be supported by both parties. Our legislation has the most bipartisan co-sponsors of any bill in the House. The time is now to pass a meaningful campaign finance reform bill. The Bipartisan Campaign Integrity Act of 1997 is the best bill available. The people of my district refuse to take ``no'' for an answer.