the fundraising scandals of the 1996 Presidential election have moved campaign finance reform to the front burner of the agenda for the 105th Congress. Things like the ever-expanding influence of special and large contributions from non-U.S. citizens have eroded the public's confidence in our democratic process and left far too many Americans demoralized and in fact disenfranchised. At the same time, while the level of attention has increased significantly in just the last few months, most observers agree that the chances of passing a comprehensive overhaul of our campaign finance system in this Congress remain very, very slim. I happen to agree with that assessment. Currently, we have a Democrat in the White House, we have the Republicans in control of both Houses. Asking us to pass a comprehensive bill now would be like asking two football teams to overhaul the rules of the game while it is being played. Instead, I believe that we should take a series of incremental steps toward reform and correcting the most glaring and immediate problems of the current system, while leaving the larger issues to a time when the chances of passing a comprehensive bill are more realistic. I rise today to introduce what I believe should be the first step: the Common Sense Campaign Finance Reform Act of 1997.
Joseph Knollenberg: “the fundraising scandals of the 1996 Presidential election have moved campaign finance reform to the front burner of the…”
Editor's note · Context
Addressing campaign finance reform in light of the 1996 Presidential election fundraising scandals.
Share
More from Joseph Knollenberg
I have made my comments pretty clearly. I oppose the amendment. I believe that Mr. Wicker spoke eloquently. I also think that Mr. Olver made it pretty clear that this is not the resolution that we would look for on this particular…
again I would like to inquire about the time remaining for our side. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Michigan has 4\1/2\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from Ohio has 2 minutes remaining. The gentleman from Minnesota has 3 minutes…
I insist on my point of order, and I would like to respond in this fashion. I raise a point of order against the amendment. The amendment proposes to increase an appropriation not authorized by law and, therefore, is in violation of clause…
Madam Speaker, as we consider the rule for H.R. 3074, that's the bill, of course, that makes the appropriations for the Department of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, crafting the underlying bill before us has not been easy…





