Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "55034310",
    "label": "Materials to Mondale",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/55034310"
}

{
    "id": "55034310",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/55034310",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Materials to Mondale",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/55034310",
    "collections": [
        "Records of the Office of Speechwriting (Clinton Administration)",
        "Laura Capps' Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/systematic/2016-0194-S/42-t-7431954-20160194S-005-016-2017.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/systematic/2016-0194-S/42-t-7431954-20160194S-005-016-2017.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/systematic/2016-0194-S/42-t-7431954-20160194S-005-016-2017.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/55034310",
    "naId": 55034310,
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "otherTitles": [
        "42-t-7431954-20160194F-005-016-2017"
    ],
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 1,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/systematic/2016-0194-S/42-t-7431954-20160194S-005-016-2017.pdf",
    "mediaId": "e71d2deb55492a40",
    "ocrText": "THE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nMarch 13, 1997\nMEMORANDUM FOR VICE PRESIDENT MONDALE\nFROM:\nMICHAEL WALDMAN\nMV\nDeputy Assistant to the President and\nDirector of Speechwriting\nSUBJECT:\nINFORMATION ON CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM\nAgain, we're delighted that you will be taking on this challenge I have worked on this\nissue for nearly 15 years, and I truly believe that your participation and that of Sen. Kassebaum\nwill help break the cynicism that surrounds this issue. We will do whatever we can to bring you\nup to speed.\nAttached is some initial information on current campaign finance reform proposals:\nA summary of the McCain-Feingold bill, from Sen. Feingold's' office. (This describes\nthe Senate bill. The House version, introduced by Reps. Chris Shays and Marty Meehan,\nis slightly different; in particular, it limits PAC contributions but does not ban them. We\nhave urged that the Senate version also give up the absolute PAC ban, which, among\nother things, is unconstitutional.)\nA transcript of the President's speech on political reform that he delivered to the Paul\nTaylor/Walter Cronkite \"free TV\" group.\nA summary of the \"free TV time\" proposal that the President made the other day.\nA brief history some recent political reform measures that have passed the Congress.\nAs Rahm Emanuel probably mentioned, we are working with the longstanding coalition\nthat is pushing for reform (Common Cause, Public Citizen, religious groups, AARP), as well as\nwith a new group founded by investor Jerry Kohlberg that seeks to involve businesspeople to\nsupport reform. They are mobilizing to call on Congress to meet the President's challenge,\nwhich he issued in the State-of-the-Union Address, to pass legislation by July 4. One of the main\nchallenges for this effort is to broaden the coalition beyond the \"usual suspects\" who have\nsupported reform but who have not succeeded in passing it.\nI'll send more material to you tomorrow, as well as some suggested remarks. I can be\nreached at the White House at (202)456-2272; at home, at (202)364-4283; or I can be paged\nthrough the White House operator (202)456-1414.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nMEMORANDUM FOR VICE PRESIDENT MONDALE\nFROM: LAURA CAPPS\nOffice of Speechwriting\nRE: Tomorrow's event\nPer your conversation with Michael Waldman, I have attached a series of questions and\nanswers about the campaign finance reform effort. Please contact Michael if you have further\nquestions.\nTomorrow's schedule is as follows:\nPlease arrive at the Northwest gate by 8:15 and proceed to the Blue Room. If you will be\naccompanied by staff, please have them contact me this evening (h: 202.332.0263).\nAt 8:30 there will be a briefing with the Senator Kassebaum Baker and White House\nstaff. At 8:45 you will meet briefly with the Vice President.\nAt 9:00 the announcement will be made in the foyer of the State Dinning Room. The\nVice President will speak first and introduce Senator Kassebaum Baker, who will introduce you.\nThe press will be there, but no questions will be taken. After the Vice-President departs, the\npress will be escorted out and you and Senator Kassebaum Baker are encouraged to meet\ninformally with the members of the audience. The audienc will consist of the co-sponsors of the\nlegislation, reform coalition members, and foundation representatives.\nAt 9:45 you and Senator Kassebaum Baker will meet with the President in the Residence\nfor 15 minutes or so. Afterwards, subsequent meetings (with the audience and other staff) may\nfollow, depending on your time and interest.\nWe're looking forward to it.\nThank you,\nfor Cupr\nLaura Capps\nOP- ED ON CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM\nWalter F. Mondale and Nancy Kassebaum Baker\nAfter a combined half century in public office, we thought we had retired from public\nservice. But we agreed wholeheartedly when President Clinton asked us to co-chair a campaign\nfinance reform education and awareness project. We accepted the challenge to make the case for\ncampaign reform because we adamantly believe there is no issue of greater importance for our\nnation's future.\nIt is easy to be cynical, to assume that this year, as before, ultimately nothing will happen.\nBut if people of goodwill in and out of public life speak up for reform now, with one voice, this\nyear can be the year we break the debilitating cycle of fundraising that continues to afflict our\npolitics.\nTwo decades since significant reform of the campaign finance laws passed through\nCongress, those laws have been overwhelmed by a flood of money -- $2 billion in the last election.\nWith every election, the problem has grown worse and worse. These laws are now riddled with\nloopholes and legal mumbo jumbo that average Americans rightly consider outrageous.\nThe cost to our democracy is real; it is found in many areas. Candidates and officeholders\nspend far too much time simply raising the funds needed to run for office. Far too many good\npeople decline to seek office altogether because of the high hurdle of fundraising. Most\nimportant, the rising rivers of money that flow into campaigns are an assault on public trust.\nLincoln said, \"with public trust everything is possible; without it, nothing is possible.\" We have\nno more important cause than the restoration of public confidence in the integrity and\nresponsiveness of their public officers.\nMuch attention is being focused on campaign contributions in the last election, and rightly\nso. Our plea for basic reform is not intended to silence the debate, and our effort should not be\nviewed as a diversion. Where legitimate questions exist, they should be investigated and\nresolved. We are not trying to change the subject, we are adding a subject, namely, how to\nreform campaign finance.\nThe continuing controversy cannot become an excuse for inaction. We must move\nforward on legislation to make constructive, vitally needed changes in the existing system.\nThe best chance for reform is the bipartisan legislation introduced in the Senate by John\nMcCain and Russell Feingold, and in the House by Christopher Shays and Martin Meehan.\nThis measure will achieve significant reforms. It will curb the role of money in elections\nand reduce the role of special interests. It will offer free television time to candidates who limit\ntheir spending. It will end bundling and all contributions from people who are not citizens. And it\nwill end the so called \"soft money\" loophole through which more than a quarter billion dollars\nescaped legal restrictions in the last campaign.\nCan we really expect reform to succeed? Perhaps the greatest obstacle is the loss of faith\namong voters that anything constructive can come from new laws and new standards. Two\ndecades ago, citizens expected that public action could be effective. These reforms worked for a\nwhile, but the aggressive chase for money opened new loopholes and dismantled the public\nprotections against the abuse of money in campaigns. In turn, this feeds the very cynicism which\nundermines the needed public urgency for action.\nThe existing campaign finance system dismays people from all walks of life, from all\npolitical perspectives. Citizens know that our government cannot work in their interest if it is\nconstantly in thrall to narrow interests. Our mission must be to connect the dots -- to show that\nreform is possible, and why it is needed, if we are to renew our democracy.\nThis critical window of opportunity will close unless the American people believe in the\nimportance and urgency of reform. It is better to light a candle than to curse the darkness. This\nyear we have an opportunity to light that candle.\nENDING BUSINESS AS USUAL\nIN WASHINGTON\n\"The fact is, organized interests have too much power in the halls of government. These\ninfluence groups too often promote their own interest at the expense of the public interest. Too\noften they operate in secret. Too often they have special privileges ordinary Americans don't\neven know exist We have an historic opportunity to renew our democracy and strengthen our\ncountry. If we truly believe in a government that puts ordinary Americans ahead of the powerful\nand privileged, then we must act and act now.\"\nPresident Bill Clinton\nFebruary 17, 1996\nA Record of Accomplishment:\nOver the past four years, working with both parties in Congress, President Clinton\nachieved a significant number of reforms to make our government respond to ordinary citizens.\nThe President made voting easier for more than 11 million Americans by creating more\naccessible voter registration locations by enacting the National Voter Registration Act\n(\"Motor-Voter\"). The Motor-Voter law has already created the greatest expansion in the\nvoter registration rolls since the 19th century.\nThe President fought for and signed into law the Lobbying Disclosure Act. The Act is\nthe first overhaul of lobbying rules in 50 years and requires lobbyists to disclose whom\nthey work for and eliminates loopholes that allow lobbying organizations to avoid.\nIn the 1995 State of the Union Address, President Clinton challenged the Congress to ban\ngifts, meals, travel and entertainment from lobbyists. The Congress subsequently passed\nthe gift ban on November 16th, 1995.\nThe President supported and signed the Congressional Accountability Act to ensure that\nthe same laws apply to Congress as to the rest of America.\nIn 1993, President Clinton proposed, and Congress passed, legislation ending the tax-\ndeductibility of lobbying expenses, the \"lobbyist loophole\" which had allowed\ncorporations and others to deduct the cost of their lobbying.\nThe President imposed the strictest Administration ethics guidelines ever, including a\nfive-year ban on top officials lobbying their former agencies and a lifetime ban against\nlobbying for foreign governments.\nThe President pushed for and signed the line-item veto legislation, which significantly\nenhances the presidential authority to eliminate wasteful spending by allowing the\nPresident to cancel wasteful special interest projects that benefit narrow interests. The\nline-item veto can help the President close the door on business as usual in Washington\nby cutting pet projects that sneak into the budget year after year. With this line-item veto,\nthe President will have a valuable new tool to ensure that our public resources are being\nput to the best possible uses.\nThe President enacted the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act to restrict Congress from\npassing on new mandates to state and local governments without paying for them.\nPresident Clinton has stood up to special interests, such as the National Riffle Association\nand the tobacco industry, loosening their tight hold on our legislative process. The\nPresident broke six years of congressional gridlock on anti-crime legislation and defeated\nthe gun lobby by enacting a ban on assault weapons and the Brady Law.\nThe President signed the Presidential Executive Office Accountability Act (PEOAA),\nwhich ensures that the Executive Office of the President lives under the same laws as the\nrest of the country -- this is the White House analog to the Congressional Accountability\nAct.\nA History Of Fighting For Real Campaign Finance Reform\nThere is one major reform that still must be enacted: campaign finance reform.\n1992\nCampaign Finance Reform Proposal. In the 1992 campaign, Governor Clinton\nproposed spending limits, free TV time, PAC limits and a ban on soft money.\nThe current McCain-Feingold and Shays-Meehan legislation mirrors this\nproposal.\n1993-1994\nCampaign Finance Reform Plan. The President and the congressional\nDemocratic leadership proposed a reform plan that also included partial public\nfunding for congressional candidates.\n1995\nBipartisan CFR Commission. In June of 1995, the President agreed with\nSpeaker Gingrich to create a bipartisan political reform commission. The\nPresident named John Gardner and Doris Kearns Goodwin to launch the\ncommission, but the proposed commission was rebuffed by the Speaker.\n1996 - 1997 McCain-Feingold/Shays-Meehan. In his 1996 State of the Union Address, the\nPresident announced his support of the bipartisan campaign finance reform bill.\nHe repeated his support throughout 1996. In the 1997 State of the Union Address\nthe President challenged Congress to pass this legislation by July 4, 1997.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nOffice of the Press Secretary\nFor Immediate Release\nMarch 11, 1997\nREMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT\nIN ADDRESS TO THE CONFERENCE ON FREE TV AND POLITICAL REFORM\nThe National Press Club\n11:12 A.M. EST\nTHE PRESIDENT: Thank you. What a gift. (Laughter.) Thank you, Walter Cronkite.\nThank you, Paul Taylor, for your passion and your commitment. Thank you, Senator McCain,\nChairman Hundt, Ann McBride, Becky Cain. And thank you, Barry Diller, for what you have\nsaid about this important issue.\nI am delighted to have the chance to come here today, and I thank the sponsors of this\nevent.\nAgain, let me say that I participated in the last election in the free television offered by\nthe networks, thanks to the efforts of Paul Taylor and Walter Cronkite and the members of the\nStraight Talk Coalition. Senator Dole and I were given a unique opportunity to talk directly to\nthe voters -- no gimmicks, no flashy graphics, a full minute or two at a time. And I really\nenjoyed it. I put a lot of effort into those opportunities, and I'm sure that Senator Dole did as\nwell. I felt that they were a great gift.\nAnd Walter and I had a talk backstage before we came out about how it might even be\ndone better in the next round of elections. Maybe my opinions will carry more weight on such\nmatters since I never expect to run again for anything. And I do believe that the free television\nwas a very important thing. I think if it could be done, as we were discussing, at the same time\nevery evening on a given network, and back to back so that the candidates can be seen in a\ncomparative context, I think it would be even more valuable.\nWe have to do some things to improve the way our political system works at election\ntime and the way it communicates, or its leaders communicate, to people all year round. This\nshould not be surprising to anyone. The Founding Fathers understood that we were an\nexperiment. We're still around after all of these years because we have relished the idea that we\nare an experiment, that America is a work in progress, that we're constantly in the making. We\nalways have to change.\nA lot of good things have happened to expand participation in the political system from\nthe time we were a new nation, when only white male property owners could vote, and we have\nto make some more changes now. But if you look at the changes which have been made in the\nlast 200 years, we should be hopeful.\nTelevision has the power to expand the franchise or to shrink the franchise. Indeed, that\nis true of all means of communications and all media. We know that television is a profound\nand powerful force; we know that we don't fully understand all of its implications -- even what\nyou said, Walter, we don't really know what the connection is between television and a\ndiminished voter turnout. It could be because there is a poll on television every night that tells\npeople about the election, so some people think that there's no point in their voting, because the\nperson they're for is going to win anyway, or the person they're for can't win anyway.\nWe need to think about that, and that's not the subject of this meeting, but we need to --\nwe really need -- all of us need more information, more research, about why people vote and why\nthey don't vote. There was a very -- I've only seen one survey, done I believe for the Democratic\nLeadership Council, of the nonvoters. It's a poll that doesn't pay off. You know, it was done,\nafter the election, of the nonvoters. But it was very interesting, and some of the findings were\nquite counterintuitive about why people did or didn't vote. But I would urge those of you who\nare interested in it to get that, look at it, and think about what new work could be done\nto look into that.\nToday, we want to talk about whether the medium of free television could be used to\ndiminish the impact of excessive money in politics and about whether it could still be used,\ntherefore, to reform our system in a way that makes it better, and ultimately that leads to better\ndecisions for the American people. It is now commonplace -- everybody will tell you -- that\ncampaigns cost too much and it takes too much time to raise the money, and the more money you\nraise from a larger number of people, the more questions will be raised about that.\nMajor party committees spent over three times as much in this last election cycle as four\nyears before. And that doesn't count the third party expenditures, both the genuinely independent\nthird party committees and those that weren't really independent although they claim to be.\nSpending in Congressional campaigns has risen six-fold in the last two decades. That's over\nthree times the rate of inflation.\nThe biggest reason for this is the rise in the cost of television. But, of course, there is\nalso now more money being spent on mail, on telephoning, on radio and other print advertising\nas well.\nIn 1972, candidates spent $25 million for political ads; in 1996, $400 million.\nPresidential campaigns now routinely spend two-thirds or more of their money on paid ads;\nSenate candidates, 42 percent of their money on television; House races, about a third.\n2\nInterestingly enough, that's often because there is no single television market which just overlaps\na House district and often the cost is prohibitive, particularly in the urban districts. But you\nget the drift, it's the same everywhere.\nWe are the only major democracy in the world where candidates have to raise larger and\nlarger sums of money simply to communicate with voters through the medium that matters most.\nEvery other major democracy offers candidates or parties free air time to speak to voters, and we\ncan plainly do better, building on the big first step urged by this group in 1996. We have an\nobligation to restore our campaign finance system to a system that has the broad confidence of\nthe American people but also of the American press that comments on it. In order to do that,\ntelevision has to be part of the solution. I have said before and I will say again, everybody who\nhas been involved in this system has to take responsibility for it and for changing it.\nThose of us in public life know better than anybody else what the demands of prevailing\nin the present system are, and those who control the airwaves understand it well also. First and\nmost fundamentally, I came here to support Senator McCain. We have to take advantage of this\nyear to pass campaign finance reform. The campaign finance laws are two decades out of date.\nThey have been overtaken by events, by dramatic changes in the nature and cost of campaigns\nand the flood of money that has followed them. The money has been raised and spent in ways\nthat simply could not have been imagined when the people who fashioned the last campaign\nfinance law in Congress did it.\nThey did the best they could, and I will say again, I believe that they did a good thing\nand that that law did improve the financing of our campaigns and restored a level of confidence\nto our politics and made things better. It is simply that time has changed and we need new\nchanges to reflect the things that have happened in the last 20 years.\nIt will not be easy to do this, but the situation is far from hopeless. After all, the first\nthing I want to say is, the American people do care about this, and our politics, I think, in terms\nof traditional honesty, is getting better, not worse. I have asked over a dozen people just in the\nlast two years who have been living in Washington for the last 30 years, who have been in\npolitics -- the most recent person I asked was Senator Dole -- whether politics was more or less\nhonest today than it was 30 years ago, and all 12 or 15 -- however many I asked -- all gave the\nsame answer. They said it's more honest today than it was 30 years ago. I think that's where we\nhave to start.\nIt is important to put this in the proper perspective if you want people in Congress to\nvote to change it. They cannot be asked to admit that they are doing something that they're not,\nor that they are participating in dragging the country down the drain, because anybody who\nknows what went on 30 years ago and what goes on today would have to say that the system is\nstill better than it was then.\nOn the other hand, anybody who denied that, at an exponential pace, changes are\n3\noccurring which imperil the integrity of the electoral process and the financing of campaigns\nwould also be badly amiss.\nThe second thing I'd like to say is, we should be hopeful because we have seen over the\nlast four years in other contexts real bipartisan processes to improve the way politics works -- not\nin campaign finance reform, but there was bipartisan support for the motor voter law, for the\nlobby disclosure overhaul that was the first one in 50 years, in which Congress banned meals and\ngifts from lobbyists to lawmakers but also required much more disclosure. And that's the most\nimportant thing. When you get 100 percent disclosure of an area where there hasn't been any\nbefore, then that offers all of you in the press the opportunity to communicate to the American\npeople what the activities of lobbyists are and to let them and you draw your own conclusions in\nterms of the results produced by decision-makers. We've required Congress to live under the\nsame that they impose upon the private sector.\nEvery single one of these things has happened in the last four years with broad,\nbipartisan support. So I think it is very, very important that we recognize this will not happen\nunless there is bipartisan support. But there is evidence that if the environment is right, if the\nsupport is deep enough, if the calls are strong enough and positive enough, we can get this kind\nof change.\nNow, let me also say that I think it's important to make this point, because I see all these\nsurveys that say that campaign finance reform is important to people, but if you rank it on a list\nof 10 things, it will always rank 10th behind balancing the budget, education and all this. That\ncan be used by politicians as an excuse, if you will, not to deal with it. They say, well, look at\nall these surveys. Campaign finance reform -- sure, people like it -- but it's not as important to\nthem as whether we'll have national standards for reading and math, for example -- one of my\npassions.\nWhat we have to do is to make a connection between the two for the American people.\nWhat we have to argue is, yes, we really need to be up here doing the public's business. We need\nto be balancing the budget, improving education, reforming welfare, expanding health care\ncoverage to children who don't have it, passing a juvenile justice reform -- the kinds of things\nthat I'm passionately interested in.\nBut having the right kind of campaign finance reform system and having the right kind\nof straight talk on television and having issues be more -- elections be more issue-oriented and\nhaving the debates of both sides heard clearly by all people and increasing voter interest and\nvoter turnout -- all these things will increase the likelihood that this laundry list of good things\nwill be done and will be done in better fashion than would otherwise be the case. I think it is\nvery important that those of you who care about this make this connection because that's how to\nbuild broad and deep support for this endeavor.\nIt seems to me that we do have an historic opportunity to pass campaign finance reform.\n4\nAnd I think the public owes a lot of gratitude to Senator McCain and Senator Feingold and\nCongressman Shays and Congressman Meehan and all of their supporters for the legislation they\nhave offered. It is real and tough. It would level the playing field and reduce the role of big\nmoney in politics. It would set voluntary limits on campaign spending and ban soft money, all\ncorporate contributions, and the very large individual ones. It would restrict the role of political\naction committees and lobbyists and make needed reforms within the confines of the constitution\nas defined by existing Supreme Court case law.\nIn all these ways, it would set ceilings on money in politics and, just as important, it\nwould also provide a floor. And I think that is very important -- it would also provide a floor.\nYou actually have some members in Congress who come from districts where there's a very low\nper capita income, for example, who are very afraid of campaign finance reform because they're\nafraid, among their own constituents, they'll never be able to raise enough money in their district\nto compete the first time a multi-millionaire runs against them.\nSo the law has to give a floor. And McCain-Feingold does that by giving candidates free\nair time to talk directly to the voters if they observe the spending limits of the law. And we need\nto emphasize that any ceiling law should have a floor to guarantee that people have their say and\nare heard. It gives candidates deeply discounted rates for the purchase of time if they observe the\nlimits of the law.\nIn all these ways, it will level the playing field, giving new voices a chance to be heard\nand being fair to both parties.\nI have supported the idea of free TV time for many years. When the Vice President was\nin Congress, he actually introduced legislation to require it. It was first proposed by President\nKennedy in 1962. It has been around long enough. We now tried it in the last election more than\never before, and we know that it advances the public interest.\nIn my State of the Union address, I asked Congress to pass the McCain-Feingold bill by\nJuly the 4th, the day we celebrate the birth of our democracy. I pledge to you that I will continue\nto work with members of both parties to do this. I will be mustering more support out in the\ncountry, and that will be announced over the next few weeks, for this endeavor.\nWe have to use the present intense interest in this, as well as the controversy over\nfundraising in the last election and all the publicity on it, as a spur to action. We cannot let it\nbecome what it is in danger of becoming, which is an excuse for inaction.\nAnd that again is something that I challenge all of you on. Do not let the controversies\nbecome an excuse to do nothing and to wallow around in it. Use it as a spur to changing the\nsystem, because until you change the system, you will continue to have controversies over the\namount -- the sheer amount of money that is raised in these elections.\n5\nThe second thing I'd like to discuss is what Walter talked about in some detail, and that\nis how broadcasters can meet their public interest obligations in this era. Ever since the FCC\nwas created, broadcasters have had a compact with the public: in return for the public airwaves,\nthey must meet public interest obligations. The bargain has been good for the industry and good\nfor the public.\nNow, startling new technologies are shaking and remaking the world of\ntelecommunications. They've opened wider opportunities for broadcasters than ever before, but\nthey also offer us the chance to open wider vistas for our democracy as well.\nThe move from analog signals to digital ones will give each broadcaster much more\nsignal capacity than they have today. The broadcasters asked Congress to be given this new\naccess to the public airwaves without charge. I believe, therefore, it is time to update the\nbroadcasters' public interest obligations to meet the demands of the new times and the new\ntechnological realities. I believe broadcasters who receive digital licenses should provide free air\ntime for candidates, and I believe the FCC should act to require free air time for candidates.\nThe telecommunications revolution can help to transform our system so that once again\nvoters have the loudest voice in our democracy. Free time for candidates can help free our\ndemocracy from the grip of big money. I hope all of you will support that. There are many ways\nthat this could be done. Many of you here have put forward innovative plans. I believe the free\ntime should be available to all qualified federal candidates. I believe it should give candidates a\nchance to talk directly to the voters without gimmicks or intermediaries. Because campaign\nfinance reform is so important, I believe it should be available especially to candidates who limit\ntheir own spending. It is clear under the Supreme Court decision that this can be done, and I\nbelieve that is how it should be done.\nCandidates should be able to talk to voters based on the strength of their ideas, not the\nsize of their pocketbooks, and all voters should know that no candidate is kept from running\nsimply because he or she cannot raise enormous amounts of funds.\nLast month, the Vice President announced that we would create an independent advisory\ncommittee of experts, industry representatives, public interest advocates, and others to\nrecommend what steps to take. Before I came over here today, I signed an executive order\ncreating that committee. The balanced panel I will appoint will advise me on ways we can move\nforward and make a judgment as to what the new public interest obligations of broadcasters\nmight be. But today, let us simply agree on the basic premise. In 1997, for broadcasters, serving\nthe public should mean enhancing our democracy.\nFinally, let me challenge the broadcasters as well. Broadcasters are not the problem, but\nbroadcasting must be the solution. The step the broadcasters took in this last election, as I have\nsaid over and over again in other forums, with the encouragement of Straight Talk for TV, was a\nreal breakthrough. Now I ask broadcasters to follow up on this experiment in democracy, and\n6\nI'm especially pleased that a leader in the industry, Barry Diller, has challenged his colleagues to\nopen up the airwaves to candidates. He has made clear -- forcefully and very publicly -- that he\nand all of his colleagues have an obligation to society. And his presence here today makes it\nclear that he is willing to assume the mantle of leadership. But surely there are others -- I know\nthere are -- who will gladly join in and take up this cause as well.\nThere are many questions about political reform. Many skeptics will look at all\nproposed reform measures and ask whether they'll work and whether there will be unintended\nconsequences. The truth is that they will work and there will be unintended consequences.\nBut if we use that for an excuse not to change, no good change in this country would\never have come about. There will always be something we cannot foresee -- that's what makes\nlife interesting and keeps us all humble -- but that must not be an excuse for our refusing to act in\nthis area. We know -- we know when we work to expand our democracy, when you give\npeople a greater voice and advocates of all political views a firm platform upon which to stand,\nwe are moving forward as a nation. By passing campaign finance reform, by renewing the\ncompact between broadcasters and the public to better serve in this new era, we can do that\nagain.\nAnd I will say again, I will do all I can on both these fronts -- on campaign finance\nreform legislation and on requiring free availability of the airwaves to public candidates. We\nneed your support for both, and we need broader and more intense public support. And again I\nsay, that has to be built by demonstrating to the public that this is not an inside-the-beltway\nexercise and both parties trying to find ways to undermine each other, but a necessary way of\nopening our democracy so that we can better, more quickly, and more profoundly address the\nreal challenges facing the American people in their everyday lives.\nThese two steps will help, and together I hope we can make them this year. Thank you\nvery much. (Applause.)\nQ\nMr. President.\nTHE PRESIDENT: Hello, Sarah.\nQ\nI want to know you said that you would not have been reelected\nTHE PRESIDENT: -- I think -- probably I might have been, because I'm the President\nand a President has unusual access to the public. And you have the presidential debates, which\nare unique in terms of their viewership and their potential impact. But I believe that if you just\nlook at the races for Congress and the number of votes that changed just in the last five days, and\nhow the votes were counted when the votes changed and the movement changed, there is no\nquestion that the amount of money deployed in an intelligent way can have a profound impact on\nthe outcome of these elections. And what you want to do is to make sure that everybody has the\n7\n(\nsame fair chance at the voters and nobody has an excessive chance. And given the Supreme\nCourt cases, the way the McCain-Feingold bill is drawn up, plus the effort to get more free air\ntime, are the best responses to overcome the undue influence of excessive money.\nThank you very much. (Applause.)\nEND\n11:35 A.M.\n8\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nOFFICE OF\nSPEECHWRITING\nPhone number (202) 456-2777\nFax number (202) 456-5709\nTO:\nVice President mondale\nFROM: Michael Waldman\nRECEIVER FAX AND PHONE NUMBER: 612 340 2644\nNUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER SHEET): 19\nCOMMENTS:\n***WARNING***\nUNAUTHORIZED USE OF THESE MATERIALS IS SUBJECT TO FEDERAL\nPROSECUTION\nTo: Jan Volevich\nFrom: Laura Capps\nre: Concord Event\nAttached is information regarding a Concord Campaign Finance Reform event being planned by\nRepresentative Martin Meehan. It is intended to be a launching of the \"Scholars for Campaign\nReform\" committee.\nThe scholars would like to be affiliated with the effort that Senator Kassebaum Baker and\nAmbassador Mondale are leading.\nI know the term affiliation is loose and would have to be defined more specifically. However,\nwould Senator Kassebaum Baker agree to this affiliation in principle?\nPlease let me know. I can put you in touch with Dan Manatt of Congressman Meehan's office if\nyou would like to be.\nThanks,\nLaura Capps\n456-2554\nTo: Ross Corson\nFrom: Laura Capps\nre: Concord Event\nAttached is information regarding a Concord Campaign Finance Reform event being planned by\nRepresentative Martin Meehan. It is intended to be a launching of the \"Scholars for Campaign\nReform\" committee.\nThe scholars would like to be affiliated with the effort that Senator Kassebaum Baker and Vice\nPresident Mondale are leading.\nI know the term affiliation is loose and would have to be defined more specifically. However,\nwould Vice President Mondale agree to this affiliation in principle?\nPlease let me know. I can put you in touch with Dan Manatt of Congressman Meehan's office if\nyou would like to be.\nThanks,\nLaura Capps\n456-2554\nJan: 508-3402\nROSS 612-340 2644\nFax#\nI\n03/19/97\n15:59\n2022260771\nCong. Meehan\n4\n002/004\nAPRIL 18 CAMPAIGN REFORM EVENT\nCONCORD, MASSACHUSETTS\nPROPOSAL OUTLINE\nEvent:\nConcord Town Meeting\nProfessors for Campaign Reform Committee Rollout\n(Subcommittee of Kassebaum/Mondale Committee)\nLocation:\nConcord, Massachusetts\nDate:\nPatriots Day, April 18, 1997 (Anniversary of Battle of Lexington and\nConcord)\nOrganizers:\nOffice of Rep. Marty Meehan\nProject Independence\nKennedy School of Government/Derek Bok/Archibald Cox (???)\nTheme:\n\"Campaign Reform and the Reform Tradition in American History\"\nPROGRAM\nTown Meeting:\nModerated by Rep. Marty Meehan, Chris Shays\nAnnouncement:\nProfessors for Campaign Reform Committee Formation\n(Subcommittee of Kassebaum/Mondale Committee)\nBrief Remarks by Committee Members (Possible Members listed below):\nDoris Kearns Goodwin, Historian\nDavid McCullough, Historian\nArthur Schlesinger, Professor of History, Harvard University\nDerek Bok, fmr. President, Harvard University\nProfessor, Kennedy School of Government\nSen. Alan Simpson (R-WY), adjunct Professor, Kennedy School of Government\nRep. Mickey Edwards (R-OK), adjunct Professor, Kennedy School of Government\nAddress:\nPresident Clinton, Vice President Gore ?\nSpecial Event:\nReenactment of the Battle of Lexington and Concord\nMessage:\nThe Concord Town Meeting will bring together citizens to participate in the\ngreat tradition of New England town meetings to discuss the state of American\ndemocracy and the need for campaign reform.\nThe Scholars for Reform Kickoff will add a historical perspective, and tap the\ncredibility and good will these professors bring to the subject. They might\nalso recall episodes from U.S. History - including the Revolutionary War, the\nDeclaration of Independence, the Constitutional Convention, the Progressive\nEra, and the Voting Rights movement and draw lessons for reformers from\nthose episodes.\n(Note: Attendees have not yet been invited or confirmed)\n03/19/97\n15:59\n2022260771\nCong. Meehan\n003/004\nMEMORANDUM\nTO:\nPeter Jacoby, Special Assistant to the President\nFROM:\nDaniel Manatt, Legislative Counsel, Rep. Marty Meehan\nRE:\nConcord Campaign Reform Event\nDATE:\nMarch 19, 1997\nPer our discussions, Rep. Meehan and Rep. Shays are\nconsidering a campaign reform event in Concord, MA (which is in\nRep. Meehan's district) on April 18, the anniversary of the\nBattle of Lexington and Concord.\nAfter discussing possible themes with you, Common Cause, and\nothers, we propose to capitalize on the historical symbolism of\nthe President's July 4 challenge, and the time and place of the\nevent.\nSpecifically, we propose that the event serve as a kickoff\nfor a \"Scholars for Campaign Reform\" committee. The Committee\ncould comprise of high profile scholars, such as Arthur\nSchlesinger, David McCullough, Derek Bok, and Doris Kearns\nGoodwin (who has previously served on Administration campaign\nreform efforts).\nThe Committee might also be established as an affiliate of\nthe Kassebaum-Baker/Mondale committee.\nThese Professors command real respect among opinion-makers,\nand their turning out to lend their name to the bipartisan\ncampaign reform effort would be newsworthy. Moreover, these\nluminaries might link the current bipartisan campaign reform\neffort to other episodes from U.S. history, such as the\nRevolution, the Declaration, and the Constitution. Such a\nmessage would play well with the elite media, such as the News\nHour (where Dr. Goodwin is a regular). It would also play well\nwith USAToday and local media, which would seize on the patriotic\nsymbolism of the event.\nI have been in touch with Bok, Common Cause, and others, all\nof whom have been receptive to the idea. In addition, Rep.\nMeehan is a personal friend of Professor Goodwin's, and is\nhopeful that he could bring her into the effort.\nThe event could also be supplemented with good visuals\nfor instance, the reenactment of the Battle of Lexington and\nConcord, which is already scheduled for April 18 as part of the\nannual Massachusetts Patriots Day ceremonies which commemorate\nthe battle.\n03/19/97\n16:00\n2022260771\nCong. Meehan\n004/004\nOur office is continuing to develop plans. (As you can see\nfrom the attached clips, Rep. Meehan held a town hall event in\nConcord last year with the participation of Paul Tsongas and Ross\nPerot; with help from outside groups, we could build an even\nbigger and better event) . White House participation, needless to\nsay, could make the event all the more successful.\nWe look forward to speaking with you about this opportunity.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nOFFICE OF\nSPEECHWRITING\nPhone number (202) 456-2777\nFax number (202) 456-5709\nTO:\nRoss CORSON\nFROM:\nMICHAEL WALDMAN\nRECEIVER FAX AND PHONE NUMBER: (612) 340 - 6306\nNUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER SHEET):\n5\nCOMMENTS:\n***WARNING***\nUNAUTHORIZED USE OF THESE MATERIALS IS SUBJECT TO FEDERAL\nPROSECUTION\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nOFFICE OF\nSPEECHWRITING\nPhone number (202) 456-2777\nFax number (202) 456-5709\nTO:\nJAN VOLEVICH\nFROM:\nMICHAEL WALDMAN\nRECEIVER FAX AND PHONE NUMBER: (202)508-3402\nNUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER SHEET):\n5\nCOMMENTS:\n***WARNING***\nUNAUTHORIZED USE OF THESE MATERIALS IS SUBJECT TO FEDERAL\nPROSECUTION"
}