HOUSE REPUBLICANS HOLD NEWS CONFERENCE ON LOBBYING REFORM

 

JANUARY 17, 2006

 

SPEAKERS: U.S. REPRESENTATIVE DENNIS HASTERT (R-IL), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE

 

U.S. REPRESENTATIVE DAVID DREIER (R-CA)

 

 

HASTERT: First of all, I want to thank you all for coming.

 

As you all know, we have been working hard on developing a plan for comprehensive lobbying reform.

 

Chairman David Dreier is here with me and has been leading this effort. You will hear from him shortly.

 

But I want to thank him now publicly for his willingness to step forward as we move aggressively to reform lobbying in the House of Representatives.

 

There's been a lot of discussion lately about the need for lobbying reform here in Washington. I have been deeply disturbed by those who have broken the rules of the House and in some instances have pleaded guilty to breaking the law.

 

As speaker of the House, I want to make sure one thing is clear: It's not acceptable for anyone to break the rules of the House or the law, and if they have, they should be held to account.

 

While the problems that we have been reading about stem from violations of existing rules, I believe that to regain the trust of the American people that this institution must go further than prosecuting the bad actors. We need to reform the rules so it's clear beyond a shadow of the doubt what is ethically acceptable for members of Congress, of the House of Representatives and their staff.

 

As I said recently, I want the House to move quickly and in a bipartisan fashion to get this done. We have a duty to do everything we can to keep the trust and confidence of our constituents.

 

In a moment, I will ask Chairman Dreier to walk through the outline of a proposal that we will introduce when the House returns. But let me highlight two parts of that plan that I believe will put us on the right track.

 

First, I feel we must ban privately sponsored travel in the House of Representatives. I know fact-finding trips are important. This body considers legislation that affects peoples across this country that cannot always travel to Washington to petition their government.

 

Private travel has been abused by some, and I believe we need to put an end to it.

 

HASTERT: Second, I think we need to tighten even further the gift rules. A member of Congress should be able to except a baseball cap or a T-shirt from the proud students of a local middle school. But he or she doesn't need to be taken to lunch or dinner by a Washington lobbyist.

 

And recent months have shown that we need a more transparent system. Our plan dramatically increases the reporting of lobbyist activities.

 

Comprehensive lobbying reform is the right thing to do. Chairman Dreier has been reaching out to Senator McCain and reform leaders, and we are incorporating much of their ideas into the proposal.

 

We have a full agenda immediately following the State of Union address, and it includes the Deficit Reduction Act, the Patriot Act, immigration reform and enacting lobbying reform. It's a full plate, but I'm confident that we'll get it done and then move on to other legislative priorities. We'll help the economy stay strong to keep our job base growing and our nation secure.

 

Now, let me ask Chairman Dreier to say a few words, and then we'll take questions.

 

Thank you.

 

DREIER: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

 

Let me say what I did earlier.

 

I made the mistake of calling the speaker to wish him a happy new year on, I think, the 3rd or 4th of January. And as I do at virtually the end of every conversation with him, I say, Well, what can I do for you, Mr. Speaker? And he asked me to do this.

 

And, my first response was, Oh, my gosh, is this something more than I want to take on?

 

And I will tell you with absolute confidence as I stand here today that I believe that this is a very, very, very exciting opportunity for us.

 

The Republican Party has been and continues to be the party of reform. Reform is a continuing process which is going on and on.

 

Back in 1993, I had the honor -- along with our former colleagues David Boren and Lee Hamilton and our still-colleague Pete Domenici -- to co-chair the Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress. We took many of those proposals -- and while they failed to be implemented under the Democratic leadership, we implemented many of them under Republican leadership.

 

We have continued down the road toward major reform for a long period of time. And I see this as a wonderful new opportunity for us.

 

We know that the process, as the speaker just said, of petitioning the government is an important one. In fact, in Federalist Number 10, James Madison wrote that, Faction is to governing like air is to fire. And I believe there needs to be a recognition that every single American should have the opportunity to do this.

 

But as the speaker said we clearly have seen very, very great problems. And the present laws have been violated, and we know that there needs to be a way to address the concerns that have been raised all the way across the spectrum.

 

Yesterday we marked the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King. I thought about one of his letters from a Birmingham jail, in which he wrote that, We should always be careful about the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. And that's why I believe we're in a position today where we have an opportunity to be bold and strong, and that's why this is a terrific opportunity for us.

 

I've been listening to, as the speaker said, a wide range of members of the House and Senate, people outside of the Congress, here in Washington and from people all across the country over the past few weeks. And I believe that we are in a position today where we can come forward with some bold things.

 

The speaker has just talked about the issue of a ban on privately funded travel. I believe that it's also very important for us to proceed with a significantly stronger gift ban, which would prevent members and staff from personally benefiting from gifts from lobbyists. One of the things that we're considering is the prospect of going to the provisions that have been set forth by the White House, which have existed under Democratic and Republican administrations.

 

When we convene on the 31st, the next day when we come together, it is my intention to take on the issue that falls in the jurisdiction of the Rules Committee, and that is we plan on that day to immediately move to the floor legislation which will ban from the House floor former members of the House of Representatives who are lobbyists for anything other than ceremonial purposes or when the House is not in session, and also from the House gym, as well.

 

We do know that members have raised concern about this issue, and this will be an immediate action that we are able to take on the opening day of our reconvening.

 

DREIER: Also on that day it's my plan that we will introduce legislation that will address these issues that I have been discussing.

 

We also are proposing that we increase from one year to two years the post-employment lobbying ban that exists for members and senior staff.

 

It's also our intention to propose that we eliminate the congressional pensions for members who are convicted of felonies that relate to their official duties.

 

And the real key to this issue is, of course, enhanced disclosure, transparency and accountability. And as we do that, we are going to place much more of the onus on the lobbying community, which heretofore has not done a lot of this.

 

And as we look at the issue of transparency and disclosure, it is obvious that we need to deal with the issue of so-called 527s, where we are seeing millions and millions of dollars expended surreptitiously to impact congressional elections. And I think, in the name of transparency and disclosure, it's important for us to do that.

 

And I will add that one of the other issues that has come to the forefront that we do want to address in the issue of reform is that of earmarks. We know concerns have been raised about that from a number of our colleagues. And I've been working, talking with Chairman Jerry Lewis on this, and I believe that we do have a chance to do it.

 

As we do it, it's important for us to recognize that this is something that needs to be done in a bicameral way. Both the House and Senate need to be in sync when we come to the issue of earmark reform.

 

So with that, I thank you very much.

 

These are broad principles that we have.

 

And we also intend, I should say, as we introduce this legislation, to have a date certain for committees, the committees of jurisdiction, to report out their legislation.

 

And it's our hope to have this completed by the end of the month, that month being February. We do know there's a break that exists there, but we believe that committees can work on this. I've been in touch and attempting to contact all of the relevant committee chairmen.

 

And then it's our hope that within the first couple of weeks of March that we could have a legislative package on the floor.

 

But I will say again that it's our intention to take action on the opening day of our reconvening. On February 1st we are going to have legislation on floor which will be reported from the Rules Committee that will begin the process of addressing these concerns.

 

QUESTION: Mr. Speaker, in the wake of some of the legal and ethical problems that have led not only to your appearances today, but to the election that you have in your conference for majority leader, some have called, including those within your own party, for a full- slate election, including having yourself stand for election as speaker.

 

Will you stand for reelection as speaker?

 

HASTERT: It's up to the conference people to do that. It takes a vote of the full conference to be able to it. It would be a secret ballot. If they wish to do it, they can do that.

 

QUESTION: Are you willing to stand?

 

HASTERT: If that's the wishes of the conference, we could do that.

 

QUESTION: Mr. Speaker, tomorrow your Democrat opposite numbers are going to meet with us and say that you are responsible, you Republicans, for a culture of corruption based on your active recruitment of lobbyists to raise money for the Republican Party, one hand washing the other. Would you respond to that in advance?

 

HASTERT: Say that again.

 

QUESTION: The Democrats are going to stand before us tomorrow and say the Republicans are responsible for a culture of corruption because in part of your party's active recruitment of lobbyists who are also being campaign fund organizers for the Republicans.

 

HASTERT: I think certainly raising money by either party is certainly not foreign to this place.

 

But we want to make sure that any raising of money is -- first of all, there is transparency to it, that there's an accountability to it. And somebody has to be responsible for what they do. And to change the rules -- any changing we have to do to make sure that that is real.

 

QUESTION: What does earmark reform mean? Does that mean getting rid of earmarks?

 

HASTERT: That's something that we, first of all, want to do through regular order. But an earmark means that somebody, first of all, says that, I need have this project in my district. That's what members do. I mean, they represent their districts. They take cases to Congress and say that, We need this, or, I need help here, or, I believe that this issue should move forward.

 

In a lot of cases, the Senate plays appropriation games. And you who are familiar with it watch that all the time. They may move a lot of money in one area and we may put earmarks in for water projects -- I'm talking about energy and water, for instance, may put earmarks in for water projects or energy projects, and all of a sudden, you know, they don't have any earmarks in, and it gets a game back and forth, and things like NOAA become projects that end up being earmarks for senators.

 

HASTERT: We need to make sure that, whatever we do, we do this on an equal footing and there's a fairness across the board in both the House and Senate.

 

Quite frankly, we also have to observe the rights of members to represent their districts and to be active in favor of things that they think will help -- actually help maybe in health care issues or educational issues, that they have a role in playing out.

 

QUESTION: Will this address private charter travel, reimbursement rates?

 

HASTERT: Something we'll take a look at when we do the private travel issue.

 

QUESTION: Mr. Speaker, you say you're moving quickly. Why didn't you support Marty Meehan's other reform act in May?

 

HASTERT: Well, I think some of those things are relevant. Some of those things aren't relevant. Some of the things, we're going farther.

 

DREIER: Let me just to that point say that I have been talking with Congressman Meehan. I had a good conversation with him last week. As I said, I've been talking to Democrats and Republicans.

 

In his opening statement, the speaker talked about the importance of working in a bipartisan way, and Mr. Meehan was very enthused about our prospect to move ahead with this, because this is an issue that should not be partisan.

 

HASTERT: I believe that Mr. Meehan's legislation in May didn't have 527 reform in there. I think that's an important part of it.

 

QUESTION: Mr. Speaker, do you believe that accepting travel from a lobbyist or a meal is unethical?

 

HASTERT: Look, one of the things that we have to do is be able to make sure that our members are above question. And I think members can probably function very well in this town without having to go out lunch with a lobbyist or to dinner with a lobbyist. They can pay for it for themselves, they have means to be able to do that, if that's what we have to do.

 

Travel is an issue that it's a broad expanse. But if members are going someplace to find out how nuclear energy works or how other important issues that are before the Congress works, there's ways that we can get members there to get educated.

 

QUESTION: Mr. Speaker, on that point, how much political muscle are you going to put forth to make sure that these things actually get passed given -- to follow up on the prior question -- that some of these (inaudible) have been on the table for a few months?

 

HASTERT: Well, I can tell you one thing for a fact: We've listened to our membership for the last hour and a half and there is not unanimity across all these issues. It's going to take some leadership and some pushing and pulling.

 

But we're also going to do it through regular order so people do have a role to play in this process and everybody will have their word.

 

QUESTION: Mr. Speaker, if I could ask you a question, the Abramoff scandal is what has forced you into this position. A year ago, the things that you're proposing would not have been politically possible for you to talk about.

 

Why is the Congress reacting and why didn't it act initially if all these are good ideas?

 

HASTERT: Well, you know, a year ago most people around Congress couldn't tell you who Jack Abramoff was and didn't know who his associates were or what connections there are.

 

As this thing unrolls, people understand that we need to learn from what happened in the past and try to rectify that if we can.

 

QUESTION: One of the things that a lot of people have included in their proposals is specifically addressing these private jets that people used for their campaigns, not congressional travel. I notice that's not on your list.

 

I mean, generally the proposal has been to make people reimburse these lobbying companies at the rate of charters instead of at a first-class ticket. That's in Senator McCain's proposal, some other ones. Why isn't this in yours?

 

HASTERT: I think it's in the larger issue of private travel. Part of it's campaign travel. Part of it's private travel. It doesn't cover campaigns.

 

QUESTION: Would you be seeking to do this?

 

HASTERT: It's one of the things we'll address, yes.

 

QUESTION: Speaker Hastert, yesterday Senator Clinton said that the House was being run like a plantation. How do you respond to the charge?

 

HASTERT: I think that's probably a little bit over the top. I've never run a plantation before. I'm not even sure what kind of association she's trying to make. If she's trying to be racist, I think that's unfortunate. But I'm not going to comment any further on that.

 

QUESTION: Is the 527 issue one that's kind of a dealbreaker for...

 

HASTERT: I beg your pardon.

 

QUESTION: 527 issue, is that a dealbreaker for Republicans, because Democrats generally are more behind use of 527s so...

 

HASTERT: What 527s have done, basically, is taken the whole issue of campaign reform so people are accountable, they're accessible. We know where the money comes from, we know how much money comes into campaigns and where it's coming from, and that's all obfuscated by 527s.

 

And if we want to be fair about it then we need to put 527s under the same responsibility and same accountability that everybody else is under.

 

Thank you...

 

DREIER: And there are Democrats who are willing to address the issue of 527s, as well.

 

QUESTION: Mr. Speaker, do you have any regrets about the way this has been handled having to do with ethics over the last year, how you've handled the situation?

 

HASTERT: On ethics?

 

QUESTION: Yes, on ethics.

 

HASTERT: First, I regret on ethics that the ability to organize the Ethics Committee has been stalled. And every time that I've urged the Ethics Committee -- as well, we haven't hired a chief of staff and we can't get bipartisan agreement to do it.

And, you know, when you don't have at the Ethics Committee up and running, it gives our friends on the other side complete cover because there are people on the other side that should be before the Ethics Committee and were cued up to go before the Ethics Committee.

 

HASTERT: But when you actually stall the Ethics Committee from being able to come into reality, you give yourself cover if you happen to be a Democratic leader and you can have free will to try to attack the other side.

 

That's exactly what's happened. We need to have the Ethics Committee up and running. I've written several letters and urged them to do that. It's been stalled and stalled and stalled. It's just time we get up and going and get it done.

 

Thank you.

 

END