John Doolittle: “I find it fascinating to hear these same canned speeches given again and again identifying the so-called problem as a…”

“I find it fascinating to hear these same canned speeches given again and again identifying the so-called problem as a lack of adequate regulation. These people that are bringing to us today Shays-Meehan, it is these very same people and their philosophy which created this very problem. But for their regulation, we would never have heard of soft money. Does anyone remember a few years ago? I certainly do because it was an issue in my campaign in 1990 and in 1992. Then the focus of their attack was hard money and the form of PACs, the political action committees, another spawn of the regulation that they gave us. This does not work, and it will never work, and Shays-Meehan is trying to tighten the screws a little further and put more limitations over here and box people in over there, and it will not work. The Supreme Court recognized that years ago in the Buckley case. I will just quote from it. It said it 'would naively underestimate the ingenuity and resourcefulness of persons and groups desiring to buy influence to believe that they would have much difficulty devising expenditures that skirted the restriction on express advocacy of election or defeat but nevertheless benefited the candidates' campaign.' The Supreme Court anticipated this very clearly, and obviously the profusion of soft money has fulfilled what they anticipated. But they did not write the statute, the Congress did.”