Gephardt on Campaign Finance Reform and Other Issues (2/2)

2/7/2002

From: Erik Smith or Kori Bernards, 202-225-0100 both for House Democratic Leader Richard A. Gephardt Web: http://democraticleader.house.gov

WASHINGTON, Feb. 7 -- The following are remarks by House Democratic Leader Richard A. Gephardt on campaign finance reform and other issues (part 2 of 2):

So we have to get a bill out of here that we can then get 60 votes for in the Senate. I have been meeting with Senator Daschle, I have been meeting with John McCain, who have been stalwart supporters of this. We will continue to work with them to try to get something out.

Q How do you assess your chances at this point, the proponents' chances at this point of getting it through the House and through the Senate.

Mr. Gephardt. I am optimistic but realistic. There is a good reason this bill has been so hard to get through. The reason is you have a committed Republican leadership in the House to beating this bill. They are implacable foes of this bill.

And then you add to that all of the interests that do not want this bill to pass, and you have an impressive array of forces that you are trying to get through and defeat to get this bill done. It is no accident that it has taken us 10 years to get to this point.

Q But why do you think the Republican leadership is so dedicated to killing the bill? You say their fears are unfounded. Are they just misguided.

Mr. Gephardt. They don't see it that way. Read the article in the papers today. The Speaker believes that the way they hold the House is through money.

What he is really saying is "we can't get all the people to vote because then we would lose, so let's make sure we have enough money to overcome the real sentiment of the people, and that we can do all the things that they do in campaigns."

I think he is wrong. I think he overstates completely what this bill would do with anybody's political chances. I think the bill is healthy, I think it is good, I think it puts everybody on a level playing field.

But there is nothing in this bill that disadvantages Republicans. They can go out and campaign and do the things that they know how to do. I just think people are afraid of change. I really believe in the end that is what is largely going on.

Q How does this bill -- how would it affect the DCCC and your efforts to win the House in 2002? It would have, obviously, some consequences for the way that you run campaigns and raise money.

How are you planning to adjust if this goes through.

Mr. Gephardt. Well, what has happened in the DCCC and the RCCC in the last three or four cycles is that we have raised a lot more money, a lot of it soft money. A lot of that has wound up on television ads, and that has had a particular impact one way or the other.

I don't really know that it has helped one side that much more than the other. But it is required -- if you just sit down and look at the numbers, if you do the research and look at the numbers of what the DCCC and the RCCC raised in soft money, and the Senate would be the same, in 1994, 1996, 1998, and 2000, as opposed to 1988, 1990, and 1992, you would see a dramatic increase in soft money in all organizations. And I believe that those large contributions are creating problems in our political system that we do not need and need to get rid of. You have people seeking contributions of not just $10,000 and $15,000, but $50,000, $100,000, $500,000, a million. Enron gave $1.5 million to the RNC during the 2000 cycle. Now, how anybody can say that is healthy and that is good and that is necessary is beyond me. And that is what we are talking about.

So again, I think everybody is afraid of change. I think everybody sees that they are succeeding, to some extent, in the system we have, and they are afraid of what the new system is. I just think the new system is so important for the country and our democracy. The cynicism is up to your knees all over the country, and in part, it is there because of these huge contributions. People think everything is determined by money.

Q You delivered 190 votes the last couple of times. Is there a target for how much Democrats will need to deliver this time and how much you are expecting out of the Republicans.

Mr. Gephardt. Well, I suspect that we are going to be in the neighborhood that we have been in, and I hope the Republicans will be in the neighborhood they have been in. I'm sure the effort here is -- on the part of the Republican leadership, is to grind that number down so that we can't win. This is not complicated. If we are in the neighborhood of 195 and they are in the neighborhood of 20 or 25, you are right on the margin. So all they have to do is what they have often been able to do, and that is, grind down their numbers and defeat campaign reform one more time.

I hope that doesn't happen. I hope against hope that the Republican members will stay in this bipartisan coalition and do what is right for the country.

Q If the House were to pass an amendment raising the hard money limit, does that pose problems in terms of getting the bill through the Senate, that particular --

Mr. Gephardt. No. Understand that in both the amendment and in the bill, I think the Senate will be cut loose on their own limits, which is $2,000. So the amendment in the House will only apply to the House.

Q There is an amendment on the Senate bill known as the Torricelli amendment that deals with television and attempts to reduce the cost of television time. Do you support that provision of the bill? I understand there may be an amendment offered to try to strip it.

Mr. Gephardt. We are looking at that now. I don't have the answer to it. Again, we are trying to hold together a coalition both in the House and in the Senate. We have to get 60 votes in the Senate. So we are trying to look at that one through that eyeglass, and we are trying to figure out the best way to pilot this through to a victory.

Q Mr. Gephardt, other than UI, will House Democrats introduce any parts of the Daschle stimulus bill such as accelerated appreciation?

Mr. Gephardt. We are, I am, totally committed to getting both an increase in the eligibility for unemployment, extended unemployment benefits, and COBRA benefits for unemployed people. And we have been for that for the last 4 months, 5 months. We will continue to be for that. We are trying to figure out now how to assert that position here in the House. Whether it is a discharge petition or however we have to do it, that is the bill that we think has to be done as a bare minimum.

We don't want to load it up with a whole bunch more tax bills that will complicate the ability to get this through. Again, I met with Enron employees. A lot of these folks don't even qualify for unemployment, much less keep their health insurance. And they are devastated. They have nothing. These are people that have kids in college and they cannot pay anything. They are busted.

We have got to figure out how to help them with health insurance and unemployment.

Q Would you be willing to consider any additional tax breaks, such as just depreciation or rebates to people?

Mr. Gephardt. It didn't get through the Senate. I don't know why we think it would get through now. We just went through that exercise. My thought is maybe we can at least deal with the unemployed people, which is what we ought to do.

Q So you are not . Willing to support just a simple 13-week extension to take care of that before trying to do these --

Mr. Gephardt. I think it is a vast mistake to leave this without dealing with health insurance. These people cannot afford their health insurance. If they get unemployment at $600 or $700 a month, in most States that is not enough to pay your rent, much less food and health insurance. So the health insurance component of this, at least in some form, is vitally important.

Q If the Republicans try to attach other tax measures to what the Senate did on UI, do you think that is a sign that they are really not interested in helping the unemployed.

Mr. Gephardt. Well, we will look at anything they come up with. I just -- I think if it gets loaded up again you are right back to where you started from. And we cannot break the Gordian knot, here. We have to figure out something that can get through and actually make a difference in people's lives.

Q Mr. Gephardt, in talking with Mr. DeLay, back again with campaign finance reform, talking to him yesterday, he suggested that even if Shays-Meehan goes through, it is not really reform because of the State and local party organizations. There will be ways to figure out how to get tens of millions of dollars back into the system.

You said people are afraid of change. Help enlighten us as to how this will absolutely change the system and not just open up other opportunities for creative, smart politicians to get money into the system.

Mr. Gephardt. Well, first of all, that Levin amendment is capped at a $10,000 contribution to State and local party, again, for get-out-the-vote and grassroots efforts. That is very different than unlimited contributions, which now exist, to State and Federal parties for any purpose.

So I think his argument is specious. I think he is making an argument that is not true in fact, and I think, you know, that often happens in debate. I just think he is wrong. I think this would make a huge difference and a positive difference in the way we do politics. It would get politics back in the streets and on the front porches of America and out of the TV studios and off the television sets.

That does not mean you are not going to have television. Campaigns will still raise lots of money and run TV ads, and you will still have hard money going into parties that they can use on television and get-out-the-vote.

I just think it returns politics to a system that is better for people. It is more person-to-person and less over the TV, over the radio, over the newspaper ad.

Thank you.

(Whereupon, at 11:01 a.m., the press conference was concluded.)