Mr. President, it is said that hard cases make bad law. That is a legal expression for the fact that when you have some tough circumstances, sometimes it leads to a rule of law, or a case, or precedent, which does a tremendous amount of damage. I believe that is the situation we are facing here on the floor today. What we have, Mr. President, is a couple of TV programs that caught some Senators having a good time at a golf or tennis tournament, which held the institution up to ridicule. And as a result of those television programs, we would put a straitjacket around the activities of Senators, which I believe does more harm to the institution than the correction of whatever problem it is. In the first place, I believe that the problem of purely recreational charity events that are not real charities is a thing of the past anyway.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of media portrayals of Senators on their activities and fundraising.
Share
More from John Johnston
I am about to wind this up. But my friend, I think what he illustrates is that each and every event is going to require a special ruling from the Ethics Committee. Because, if what is in my head when I think about this event, whether it is…
It is my understanding of S. 1935 that it will be practically impossible for Members to make an effort, either directly or indirectly, to assist worthwhile causes--that is, tax-exempt, charitable entities.
I understand the Senator's answer to be yes, that he does agree with me that this would enhance the bargaining power of Catellus if the amendment of the Senator from Utah passes.
The Senator just mentioned our bill allows for unlimited and undisclosed meals, et cetera, and listed four things dealing with meals, tickets and gifts.





