Steny "K Street" Hoyer sides with R-John Boehner when questioned re public campaign financing on MTP

[flpoljunkie]

(Tim Russert read some excerpts from the NYT article linked below.)

This, sadly, is no surprise. Hoyer agrees with Boehner that all that's needed is disclosure, and that neither the American people or Congress would support taxpayers' money being used to fund Congressional campaigns.

These corrupted politicians like the system the way it is. They have the upper hand when lobbyists are legally allowed to fill their campaign coffers, making them less vulnerable to challengers. It is a rigged game, and the American people are the losers. A Congressman enthalled to a lobbyist who serve as his campaign fundraiser is one compromised legislator.

What is legal in our system of campaign fundraising is truly astounding. If the American people understood this, they would demand public financing of federal campaigns. Unfortunately, they do not.

Link to NYT article: "Congress Finds Ways To Avoid Lobbyist Limits"

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/11/us/politics/11trips.html?_r=1&ei=5094&en=e1bbc0cbbdc25f89&hp=&ex=1171170000&partner=homepage&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin

[sandnsea]

1. That's not what he said

I just watched it. He said public campaign finance is the best choice, but he doesn't see the public or Congress being willing to do that yet. That's what he said. Cheerist I don't know why people want to turn every single thing into a Dem bash.

[flpoljunkie]

2. Hoyer, who bragged of courting K Street last year, made very clear that he preferred disclosure.

And was only paying lip service to supporting public financing of campaigns. He seemed very defensive and did all he could to denigrate the very idea of public campaign financing--the public would never stand for it, etc. This is the same corrupted and lame argument the Republicans offer.

[Freddie Stubbs]

3. Rigged game? Tell that to Curt Weldon, Melissa Hart, JD Haywort,

Richard Pombo, Rob Simmons, Nancy Johnson, Clay Shaw, Chris Chocola, John Hostettler, Mike Fitzpatrick, or any of the other Congressmen who lost their seats last year.

[flpoljunkie]

4. Dems were well financed in 2006. What we are taking about here is lobbyists buying legislation.

The prescription drug bill and the bankruptcy bills are prime examples of our "bought and paid for" Congress.

[flpoljunkie]

5. Did you read this article in today's NYT? "Congress Finds Ways to Avoid Lobbyist Limits"

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/11/us/politics/11trips.html?ei=5094&en=e1bbc0cbbdc25f89&hp=&ex=1171170000&partner=homepage&pagewanted=all

February 11, 2007

Congress Finds Ways to Avoid Lobbyist Limits

By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

WASHINGTON, Feb. 10 — The 110th Congress opened with the passage of sweeping new rules intended to curb the influence of lobbyists by prohibiting them from treating lawmakers to meals, trips, stadium box seats or the discounted use of private jets.

But it did not take long for lawmakers to find ways to keep having lobbyist-financed fun.

In just the last two months, lawmakers invited lobbyists to help pay for a catalog of outings: lavish birthday parties in a lawmaker’s honor ($1,000 a lobbyist), martinis and margaritas at Washington restaurants (at least $1,000), a California wine-tasting tour (all donors welcome), hunting and fishing trips (typically $5,000), weekend golf tournaments ($2,500 and up), a Presidents’ Day weekend at Disney World ($5,000), parties in South Beach in Miami ($5,000), concerts by the Who or Bob Seger ($2,500 for two seats), and even Broadway shows like “Mary Poppins” and “The Drowsy Chaperone” (also $2,500 for two).

The lobbyists and their employers typically end up paying for the events, but within the new rules.

Instead of picking up the lawmaker’s tab, lobbyists pay a political fund-raising committee set up by the lawmaker. In turn, the committee pays the legislator’s way.Lobbyists and fund-raisers say such trips are becoming increasingly popular, partly as a quirky consequence of the new ethics rules. By barring lobbyists from mingling with a lawmaker or his staff for the cost of a steak dinner, the restrictions have stirred new demand for pricier tickets to social fund-raising events. Lobbyists say that the rules might even increase the volume of contributions flowing from K Street, where many lobbying firms have their offices, to Congress.

much more...

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/11/us/politics/11trips.h...<.div>

[kentuck]

6. We should not assume that our house is completely clean...

There are Democrats that are hooked on this special interest and lobbyist favors, just as there are Republicans. We must keep the heat on all of them.

[sendero]

7. Never mind the campaign finance debate..

.... Hoyer was totally useless in the Iraq war debate, Beohner walked all over him while he sat there like an abused puppy.

For god's sake, keep that loser off the effing television. Why are Dems so totally ineffectual at countering the ridiculous arguments from the right?

[flpoljunkie]

8. Hoyer did let Boehner dominate the conversation with same old crap-"Dems have no Iraq plan."

Plans for getting out of Iraq we got--and plenty of them--Feingold, Kerry and Obama all have plans and, in the House, Murtha has plenty of ideas about how to bring this war to an end.

However, I do think fixing our corrupt "pay to play" system in Washington is crucial to our democracy.

[Morgana LaFey]

9. Disgusting, wasn't it?

As I've said many times before, he's also been not much help (if not downright obstructionist) with the voting machine issue. Chris Dodd too.

Btw, I thought it particularly odious he blamed it on the voters, saying they weren't ready for this.

[flpoljunkie]

10. Thanks. Here's the transcript from MTP for those who would defend Steny "K Street" Hoyer.

Notice how very quickly, Hoyer pivots from saying public financing is the ultimate way to go, to the public will not support public financing, "so you're going to have fund-raising" and then he immediately agrees with Boehner that the answer is "public disclosure." The man won't even say "full disclosure"--which, although commendable, is not going to change the way business is done in Washington.

"But, very frankly, the answer ultimately is if you’re going to stop that, it’s public financing. Neither the public nor the Congress is going to support public financing, so you’re going to have fund-raising. So whatever way you do that is going to be subject to scrutiny. And I agree with John, public disclosure so the public knows what’s going on is—until you get the public financing—the only way the public can check that. - Steny Hoyer

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17065119/page/2/

MR. RUSSERT: Let me turn to a domestic issue. In the front page of The New York Times today, talking about ethics and—dealing with lobbyists. Congress passed legislation, people said, “We’re going to take money out of this system.” And yet, look at this article. And I’ll read it for you and our viewers: “Congress Finds Ways to Avoid Lobbyist Limits. The 110th Congress opened with the passage of new rules intended to curb the influence of lobbyists by prohibiting them from treating lawmakers to meals, trips, stadium box seats or the discounted use of private jets. But it did not take long for lawmakers to find ways to keep having lobbyist-financed fun. In just the last two months, lawmakers invited lobbyists to help pay for a catalog of outings: lavish birthday parties in a lawmaker’s honor ($1,000 a lobbyist), martinis and margaritas at Washington restaurants (at least $1,000), a California wine-tasting tour (all donors welcome), hunting and fishing trips (typically $5,000), weekend golf tournaments ($2,500 and up), a Presidents’ Day weekend at Disney World ($5,000). ... The lobbyists and their employers typically end up paying for the events, but within the new rules. Instead of picking up the lawmaker’s tab, lobbyists pay a political fund-raising committee set up by the lawmaker. In turn, the committee pays the legislator’s way.”

So rather than have the lobbyist fund the trip, you create a campaign committee. That campaign committee has this event, the lobbyist gives money to the campaign committee, and the campaign committee pays for the congressman’s trip. It’s just a way to circumvent a law you just passed.

REP. BOEHNER: Tim, we, we raise political money to run campaigns. Democrats do it, and Republicans do it. When, when we put in the campaign finance laws, the Shays-Meehan bill a number of years ago, I voted against it because I thought it was nonsense. I think what we ought to do is we ought to have full disclosure, full disclosure of all of the money that we raise and how it is spent. And I think that sunlight is the best disinfectant. But there, there are a number of different ways that we go about raising those funds. Some of these are golf events, some of them are, are receptions, some of them are dinners.

REP. HOYER: Tim, let...

MR. RUSSERT: Will you—will you try to close this loophole?

REP. HOYER: Tim, let me say that, in terms of this loophole, what we did when we came to the Congress, we adopted some ethics rules which are going to make sure that, first of all, you can’t get meals, you can’t live off lobbyists in Washington, D.C. Some members did that; some members are now out of Congress and in jail. You cannot have lobbyists or organizations pay for your travel on their private jets. We said that’s not going to happen. You can’t do it even with your own money. Now, as John pointed out, there is fund-raising. Fund-raisings usually have a reception, a dinner or an event of some type. That was not dealt with in those rules, and that’ll be dealt with in the campaign finance rules. But, very frankly, the answer ultimately is if you’re going to stop that, it’s public financing. Neither the public nor the Congress is going to support public financing, so you’re going to have fund-raising. So whatever way you do that is going to be subject to scrutiny. And I agree with John, public disclosure so the public knows what’s going on is—until you get the public financing—the only way the public can check that.

REP. BOEHNER: There aren’t any of my taxpayers who’ll want their hard-earned tax money that they’re paying to the government to be given to politicians so they can throw mud at each other.

REP. HOYER: I tend to agree with John that the public doesn’t support that...

MR. RUSSERT: So this, this will...

REP. HOYER: ...for just those reasons.

MR. RUSSERT: This will go on?

REP. HOYER: Fund-raising’s going to go on. So however it’s—if you have a reception, Tim, as you know, you’ve been to some. If you have a...

MR. RUSSERT: Not—not political fund-raisers.

REP. HOYER: No, no...

MR. RUSSERT: I don’t do political fund-raisers.

REP. HOYER: OK, fine, but you’ve been to receptions. And hardly anybody has just a fund-raiser, say send me money. They have an event. And they have, usually, food and drink at the event. That’s the way the fund-raisers are carried out, as you know.