On the recordSeptember 14, 1999
in many ways, the debate on this substitute is a debate that I think crystallizes the differences of opinion of what we are doing. Many of the substitutes and many of the amendments are really designed to cloud the issue, are really designed to fool the public. That is not the case with this substitute. This is a case of a difference of opinion. The gentleman from California (Mr. Doolittle), and I respect his honesty, would like to repeal all contribution limits. He wants to end the presidential system of public financing, which is an incentive to get the presidential candidates to limit how much money they spend. Yes, in fact, I think this amendment crystallizes the difference between those who think we should have more money in the election process in this country and those of us who believe we should try to lessen the influence of money in American politics. I have to say, I think the American people are with those of us who want to lessen the influence. Two out of three Americans think that money has an excessive influence on elections and government policy. According to the Committee of Economic Development, a group of CEOs, two-thirds of the public think that their own representative in Congress would listen to the views of outsiders who made large political contributions before a constituent's views, and 92 percent of the people think that too much money is being spent on political campaigns in our country. So this is a clear choice.…
Source
govinfo.gov




