From the office of Congressman Andy Harris:
As reported in a recent edition of “60 Minutes,” the current ban on personal use political committee funds does not include leadership PACs. Rep. Andy Harris, M.D., has introduced H.R. 3356, “Clean Campaign Contributions Act,” to close that loophole. The bill will extend the current ban on the personal use of funds by candidate reelection campaigns by clarifying that the ban also applies to leadership PACs, a campaign committee of a political party, and every kind of campaign committee.
“Public opinion of Congress is already low enough. We should close this loophole so no appearance of impropriety exists.” said Rep. Harris. “By banning the personal use of political committee funds, we can help improve the public trust in Congress.”
The Federal Election Commission has recommended extending the personal use ban to all political committees. According to the FEC, while it is illegal to use candidate committee contributions for personal use (to fulfill any commitment, obligation, or expense that would exist irrespective of the candidate’s election campaign or duties as a holder of Federal office) “no corresponding provision covers individuals who convert contributions received by party committees, separate segregated funds, leadership PACs, and other political committees to their own personal use, including through theft or embezzlement.”
The FEC has “seen a substantial number of instances where individuals with access to the funds received by political committees have used such funds to make unauthorized disbursements to pay for their own personal expenses.”
This bill simply treats all campaign committees equally regarding the personal use of funds.
Hey Andy, you say you want to improve the image (and trust) of Congress? Then do the proper thing legislatively….stop voting with those tea-bagger extremes colleagues of yours (and while your at it, convince some others of that ilk to do the same!) 🙂
Damn, you actually are doing something I agree with. There has to be a catch somewhere…..
And this is the most pressing issue we currently face as a country?
Thanks Andy enjoy you last term.
I am surprised that I am starting to agree with Rep Harris more and more.
To WTF, when you resort to name calling, you automatically make you comments irrelevant.
Mr Harris has demonstrated a lack of interest in the well being of the public for the particular interests that support him. Those interests are ignorant and self serving andnot at all interested in the larger issues that face all of us. Using the term “Tea Bagger” breaks the language down into a phrase that is easily understood by those who cannot tolerate a wall of text to describe their dissatisfaction with the man. Yes it is name calling. Did you get the point he was making? Yes you did. Communication complete.
His point is that he is unable to communicate in a civil manner. Point taken. The rest of his post became irrelevant.
Hey Bob, if the shoe fits, wear it! (you tea-baggin’ mo fo!)
Hey because, it was fun last night tea bagging with you. You swing great my friend. I have never been so superbly licked.
Golf clap, Mr. Harris, golf clap. We are to be impressed?
“George Washington Plunkitt became wealthy by practicing what he called “honest graft” in politics. He was a cynically honest practitioner of what today is generally known as “machine politics,” patronage-based and frank in its exercise of power for personal gain. In one of his speeches, quoted in Plunkitt of Tammany Hall, he describes the difference between dishonest and honest graft: for dishonest graft one worked solely for one’s own interests, while for honest graft one pursued the interests of one’s party, one’s state, and one’s personal interests all together.”
For further reference, see “Throw Them All Out: How Politicians and Their Friends Get Rich off Insider Stock Tips, Land Deals, and Cronyism That Would Send the Rest of Us to Prison” by
Peter Schweizer
None of them are working for you. Wake up America.
You are accurate in citing the distinction Plunkitt made. However, by “Honest graft” he meant simultaneously pursuing the public’s interest and one’s personal interests . Some historians, while avoiding use of this term, suggest that the Founding Fathers acted on the same impulse
in advocating for America’s independence from England.
You are correct, as the wealthiest of the day, they also stood to gain the most from not having to pay all those taxes to England.
However, my point (and the one made in the book I referenced) is that there is largely only an appearance of serving the public good. Many times they are using pork, riders, and promoting legislation that either benefits them directly, or their campaign contributors. If it happens to serve a public interest, so much the better, but by and large they can spin almost anything to that end, regardless of the real good being served however little of it actually exists. The reason I tied it into this announcement is that with one hand Harris is proud to boast of this bill, while with the other hand he’s taking part in the same honest graft as the rest of them, overspending and enacting bills for projects and programs that serve interests other than the public good.
And Mr. Plunkitt was ultimately arrested, mind you.
Congressman Harris, I am sure all of the Democrats will vote for this. You can see from some of the comments above that there are those that don’t want you to rock the boat. Congress needs to be reformed and Obama needs to be thrown out period.
I no one will vote for it because leadership will never let it get a vote. After all doesn’t Eric Cantor have a fund and he is the only one who can call a vote without a discharge petition!
I don’t KNOW.
Someone once said that an honest politician is on that, once bought, stays bought.
What I want for Christmas:
1. A president that doesn’t lie.
2. A Congress that doesn’t lie.
3. A Congress that doesn’t profit personally from anything they do.
4. An informed electorate that votes.
Alas, there is no Santa.
More and more I agree with Noble. They all have to go and I regret that there might be a very few of them that were innocent but got hurt.
Take them all out. It’s the only way to be sure.
Alas something I like from Congressman Harris. I don’t think it is our most pressing issue like maybe working out a spending plan. Alex I again find myself in agreement with you!
If you haven’t read the bill, please do so. Yes, it extends the limitations on personal use expenditures, so someone like Christine O’Donnell could be in big trouble, but it does nothing to stop the BIG MONEY expenditures by corporations who are running the country. This is exactly what was going on over 100 years ago and why Teddy went after them, with anti-monopoly legislation. If Harris REALLY cared about his poor image, he would introduce a bill that addresses the Citizens United decision, limiting corporate contributions and preventing them from claiming that they are “persons” under the law. That decision is probably one of the worst by any Supreme Court in our history!