As it concerns the wealthy individuals, the Republican bill and the Democratic bill are almost identical. The Republicans limit individual contributions to $1,000. On PAC's, we say that wealthy individuals or any individual can only give $2,500 to a PAC. The Democratic side says we will be cheaper than that. We will only give $5,000. I think it is kind of like the Democratic math again. They let wealthy candidates give more money to PAC's than Republicans do. On the aggregate amount, Republican and Democratic bills have the same amount. So I think the previous speaker misrepresented what is in the Republican bill. But let us take a look at what this bill does. It is genuine movement forward: Fifty percent in-district; provisions for wealthy candidates; provisions for carryover funds; reduced PAC funding; bans leadership PAC's; and goes after compulsory dues. The bottom line: This is genuine reform in the Republican bill. It is progress. It is not perfect but it is a significant step forward. I urge support of the Thomas bill.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing campaign finance reform during a House floor debate.
Share
More from Pete Hoekstra
Not taking the president of the United States serious — do that at your own risk.
Next year, hopefully we can all take a toast of American bourbon legally in the province of Ontario," Hoekstra said. "And toast the friendship and the relationship between the United States and Canada."
The bridge is obviously going to open," Hoekstra told CBC News and the New York Times at the July 4 party. "We all want it open. There are some things that we're working through and we'll get those resolved I think relatively quickly."
If the pollution is so bad that it’s dangerous to the players or it’s dangerous to the fans, the first person to say don’t hold the game will be the President of the United States.





