Unanimous Consent Request--H.R. 1

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, last year, I was proud to stand with my colleagues as we introduced the For the People Act in the Senate just weeks after it passed the House of Representatives. This measure has already passed the House of Representatives.

If you took civics 101, they explain that after the House took action on a measure, it came here. So the obvious question is, What happened to it? It has been a year. It must be here somewhere. Well, we know exactly where it is. It is in Senator McConnell's office. He is the Republican Leader of the U.S. Senate, and he has made a conscious decision that hundreds of bills just like this one will not even be considered on the floor of the Senate. It isn't that he doesn't have a majority; he does. But he doesn't want us to even debate or discuss these bills before the American people.

This U.S. Senate once enjoyed its reputation as the world's most deliberative body, which means we came here, debated, argued, and voted on things like amendments and bills like this one. Last year in the U.S. Senate, the calendar year 2019, we considered exactly 22 amendments in the entire year--22 amendments in 1 year in this Senate. Six of them were offered by Senator Paul, who, with a gun to our heads, said: If you don't give me a vote on my amendment, you can't go home. All six of his amendments were defeated, but that just gives you an example of why there is so little activity and why this floor is so empty so many times.

In fact, this floor has become a museum piece where bystanders, witnesses, and spectators can come in, sit in the Galleries, and look down on the desks that used to be occupied by Senators who debated and voted. We don't do that anymore. Instead, we consider one after the other after the other of judicial nominations. I am not going to get into that issue because it has been touched on already.

My contribution to this For the People Act goes to the heart of political campaigns. If you don't think American political campaigns are long enough, if you would like us to be on television a few more months each year, hang on tight because it is coming. If you don't think enough money is being spent on American political campaigns, hang on tight because more is coming. If you want to reach the point where we have no idea where most of the money is coming from that funds these campaigns, hang on. The Citizens United decision by the Supreme Court across the street has set the stage for that, and that is where we are headed in America today.

My proposal for fair elections now moves in exactly the opposite directions--shorter campaigns, smaller contributions, more confrontation between candidates over issues than to have this battle of television ads that goes on now.

My act would create a voluntary, small-donor, public financing system for Senate candidates who agree to raise only small-dollar contributions. I know it is a dream, but think about what it would do to change American politics. Here is how it would work: Qualified Senate candidates would receive grants based on their State's population, 6-to-1 matching grants for contributions they get of $200 or less--smaller contributors--and vouchers for purchasing television advertising other than social media. Once candidates reach the maximum amount of matching funds they receive, they continue to raise an unlimited amount of contributions of $200 or less--a $200 cap on contributions. They can also raise money from small-donor political action committees, known as People PACs, which allow citizens to make their voices heard by aggregating just small contributions--no big hitters.

The fair elections public financing system would elevate the views and interests of a diverse group of Americans, rather than the traditional wealthy class, and we would pay for it without spending a dime in taxpayer dollars. Our system would be financed with assessments on wealthy bad actors and industry law breakers. In the 2018 midterm elections, the price of victory for a successful House congressional candidate averaged about $2 million, and 35 Senate candidates who won in 2018 spent an average of $15.7 million apiece.

If we don't rein in the cost and length of campaigns, shame on us. We have to reclaim the reputation of this great Congress and the U.S. Senate, and it starts with the way we finance our campaigns.

In addition to the Fair Elections Now Act, this bill has measures to increase access to the ballot box, to strengthen election security, to improve oversight in our campaign finances, and to remove corruption from office.

I think it is outrageous that we live in an America in which people are dreaming up ways to restrict and restrain people's right to vote. If there is anything fundamental to a democracy, it is the vote of those who are legally entitled in America. I have been in this business for a while. I started off by losing a few elections. I didn't enjoy a moment of that, but there was a notion that at least the American people had spoken in those elections, and I accepted the verdicts of those people. They have come back and given me a few chances since to be in public service.

Let's make sure the American people have the voice--the most important voice in this process--through their right to vote. Keep foreigners out of the process, and put Americans into them. Don't make it hard to vote. Make it easy for those who are legally entitled to vote.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source