THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT THIS CR ISSUE GO TO
Next Hit Forward Next Document New CR Search
Prev Hit Back Prev Document HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Daily Digest Help
Contents Display
[Page: H2377]
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from California [Mr. Dreier] is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. DREIER of California. Mr. Speaker. I take the well this afternoon to, for just a few moments, once again touch on what I described here a few weeks ago as this rather tragic crisis of confidence that we have here in the House of Representatives, in the Congress overall and basically in Washington and really among all those who are in elective office.
We have heard from many people that the level of frustration is high. We have witnessed what is described as incumbency run amok. We have heard that we will most likely this year exceed the 118 new Members, which is apparently the record for the past Congresses, when the 103d Congress convenes in January of next year.
It is interesting to note that while the frustration level seems to be coming from many in the American electorate, I was rather struck with an interview which I read over the weekend in my hometown newspaper, the Los Angeles Times. And in it we heard from a very famous and prominent Democrat, who has been one of the key pollsters and strategists in five Presidential campaigns, beginning when he was 21 years old and worked for George McGovern's campaign in 1972.
He also was the architect of the basically come-from-nowhere campaign of Jimmy Carter in 1976, and he now has once again moved to the forefront as one of the leaders of Jerry Brown's Presidential campaign, my former Governor.
I am talking about Patrick Caddell, who made a decision in 1986 to leave this town, leave Washington. I think he described Washington as being on the verge of irrelevance, and he made a decision to go to the area which I represent, southern California. He actually lives in Brentwood.
This article that was in Sunday's Los Angeles Times, which I sent around to my Republican colleagues, actually casts an incredible indictment on the majority leadership of this Congress. Caddell has gone to a great deal of pain analyzing the problems that we have seen. He talks about, in this interview, the fact that we are faced with a major crisis of alienation.
It is interesting that in the Prayer Breakfast last Thursday, the chaplain of the Senate, Dr. Halverson, was talking about the problem of alienation and how great it is. The problem really is not the Congress, he was saying, it is alienation that the American people feel with their elected officials.
There is an alienation among family members and Caddell, interestingly enough, then went on in this piece and commented on the alienation problem which exists for those of us who hold elective office and are trying to represent the views of the electorate.
Caddell goes on in this piece to talk about the necessity to bring about this great revolution of restoration, the way he puts it. This revolution of restoration means we have the challenge of trying to restore America's greatness.
Rather than paraphrasing, I am going to directly quote some of the lines that clearly, this very, very partisan Democrat, Pat Caddell, leveled in Sunday's L.A. Times about the Democrat leadership.
He was asked the question: `There are mechanical things that can be done,' are there not, in talking about the need for reform here in the Congress. `For instance, term limits. Does that make sense to you?'
`Yes, but it's such a minor thing. In a functioning democracy, I think term limits are wrong. But at the moment, I think you need a hatchet. I believe that America faces a crisis that only rivals the Civil War and the Revolution which bore it. It's not about term limits or campaign financing reform, it's about getting people in power.'
He says, `Tom Foley, the Speaker of the House, is not going to reform himself.'
When asked the question, `If the system is corrupt, can't one conclude that the political parties are corrupt as well?'
Caddell goes on to say, `Yes, and the Democratic corruption is much worse than the Republican corruption. I say that as a Democrat. My party is standing at the verge of following the Whigs into history, of disappearing overnight if they keep this up. The Republicans really do believe in what they say. When they say `Help the rich,' these people act in obedience to their principles. When people in my party do it, they do so in absolute treason of their principles. I realize that my friends are more corrupt than my enemies.'
Mr. Speaker, we do have a crisis of corruption in this House. I hope very much that as we look at our attempts to bring about reform, we can follow the words and advice of Patrick Caddell.
Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record a copy of the Los Angeles Times interview to which I referred.
[Page: H2378]
Question: What's going on in the country? There's obviously a tremendous amount of frustration with politics and politicians. What do you sense is happening in the minds of the electorate?
Answer: Politics is disconnected from the country. We were already seeing signs of protest in 1990--David Duke, Dianne Feinstein, Clayton Williams [of Texas] and Bernie Sanders [of Vermont] were all supping out of the same pot. And it wasn't about ideology. For the last 25 years, the politicians in this country have presided over a decline, and it is impossible for them to acknowledge it. Because to change, to turn the country toward what has to be done, they would first have to tell the truth. And to do that would be to risk their own power, because, in a democracy, that means standing up and saying, `We have failed.' And the track record of people who do that is not very good. So the Democratic Party lives a lie, the Washington Establishment lives a lie: `Nothing's really wrong, don't worry about the $400-million deficit, just elect us.'
Q: This feeling of anti-incumbency has been building for a good while. Do you sense that it's finally coming to a head?
A: There are three things that have brought us to what I think is a firestorm. First, an alienated public. Alienation is something I've been dealing with politically since the beginning of my career. But this is the worst I've ever seen it. In the 1960s, when you asked, `Do your leaders do what's best for you and not for special interests?' people overwhelmingly agreed--60% or 70% of them. Now it's totally reversed. People today simply believe the political and economic system is stacked against them.
The second thing is a sense of decline. This are people saying that America is not No. 1 anymore. Americans will rage against that idea, because all America is built on the notion that things will get better. Moving across that psychological divide is a major thing.
Q: So are you saying that you accept the notion that things won't get better, that what we are, in fact, in decline?
A: Absolutely! Get somebody up here to argue with me that, as individuals and as a society, we are better off now than we were in 1968. You don't have to convince the American people of that--they now know it. Now the third thing, which I don't think anyone has articulated yet, is that what we pass on should be greater than what we got. We leave our children a better America, and more opportunity. You kill that idea and you will kill this country. And that's exactly what's happening! That's the overwhelming moral issue. When I look at the political leadership, the economic elite that has ripped off the country, the press that has been its propaganda mouthpiece, I tell you this: In their collective and individual pursuit of power, they have committed acts that are worse than treason. And that's what the American people feel now. That is the third great force that is at work here, and we have not even seen the full fury of that yet.
Q: Is it your role to offer a prescription?
A: No. I want to be like Toto in `The Wizard of Oz.' I want to be the person who pulls back the curtain and shows them that there is no wizard, just an old man with a microphone. My job is to help people connect, and to see that they are not alone. I left politics, and I said I would never be in a venture where I couldn't speak with my own voice. I don't speak for Jerry Brown and he doesn't speak for me.
Q: Still, are there mechanical things that can be done? For instance, term limits. Does that make any sense to you?
A: Yes, But it's such a minor thing. In a functioning democracy, I think term limits are wrong. But at the moment, I think you need a hatchet. I believe that America faces a crisis that only rivals the Civil War and the Revolution which bore it. It's not about term limits or campaign-financing reform, it's about getting people in power. Tom Foley [the Speaker of the House] is not going to reform himself.
Q: Do you get rid of the legislature, do you get rid of the congressional staffs? Do you recreate the bureaucracy, do you move the government to Lincoln, Neb.?
A: I don't know. First of all, nobody has a single answer. Maybe you should break up the government. You've got to cut the staffs down; they are out of control. But you don't have to totally change the system. There's nothing wrong with the Constitution. When I say this country needs a revolution, it needs a revolution of restoration. We must first get an agenda of consensus in this country--that the country is in crisis and that we are willing to come together to deal with it. It's not about arguing if we like this health-care plan or that one. It's about taking the big steps to save the country. That's what the issue is, a commitment to change, to the restoration of American greatness, It's that simple.
Q: If the system is corrupt, can't one conclude that the political parties are corrupt as well?
A: Yes, and the Democratic corruption is much worse than the Republican corruption. I say that as a Democrat. My party is standing at the verge of following the Whigs into history, of disappearing overnight if they keep this up. The Republicans really do believe in what they say. When they say `Help the rich,' these people act in obedience to their principles. When people in my party do it, they do so in absolute treason of their principles. I've realized that my friends are more corrupt than my enemies.
Q: You hear the term `populist' a lot these days. What do you think about that term, what do you think it means?
A: Populist means nothing to me. What, populist--for the people? Our problems are much broader. We need new political language for the new reality.
Q: What's your relationship with Ross Perot? Do you meet with him, do you speak with him regularly?
A: I have had one meeting with Ross Perot, several months ago, and we talked and I encouraged him. Other than that I have nothing to say about my relationship with Ross Perot.
Q: Perot is apparently getting thousands of phone calls a day offering support. How come the public, which presumably knows next to nothing about Perot's politics, is seemingly so eager to get behind him?
A: I don't know if this is going to be real; he has a tough course ahead of him. But he is a genuine folk hero. When he goes on TV and talks, people listen. He's said he will only run if his supporters pave the way for him, if they do the work. Instead of selling out to the Democrats or the Republicans, he says to the people, `I'll sell you out to you.' His message is the reverse of Jerry Brown's. Jerry's was, `If I build it, they will come.' Perot's is, `If you build it, I will come.' His politics are much more complex than they seemed in the beginning. The man is pro-choice, pro-gun control. He's very eclectic guy.
Q: Tell me about Jerry Brown. How deep do you think his appeal can be?
A: I don't know yet. He's still growing, and they're still responding. He has a transition to make from simply being the vehicle for discontent, to where people see him as an acceptable leader. You know, in all my life in politics, I am used to dealing with people who are basically finished men. Grown. One thing that struck me about Jerry Brown, in the last year or so, is that the guy is still growing. Can he pass the test of being a real leader in people's minds? If so, he has many advantages that Ross Perot will never have. He can speak with knowledge about the government. He's run it.
Q: How optimistic are you about Brown's chances of capturing the nomination?
A: Every day Jerry Brown is raising $80,000 to $100,000 on his 800 number. He has gone from being a joke to being able to raise $100,000 every day, from people contributing less than $100! Man, I want to tell you, it's out there, the people are ready. As far as I am concerned, the campaign is just beginning. What happens if Brown sweeps his way through the primaries? He's going to go to the convention and tell the delegates that he is running on a platform that indicts them as personally corrupt. That's going to be very tough for those folks to swallow.
This is going to be as exciting as 1968 was politically. We don't know now how it's going to shape up. But there are great forces there, and great moments of possibility.
I remember hearing the Washington insiders view of Jerry Brown: `Great message, wrong messenger.' And I would bristle. If your problem is the messenger, if you agree with his analysis of the problems with the political system, then I must ask, `How come his is the only voice?' The answer is there is not another voice, because they are not allowed in. We have a self-perpetuating class of people who have designed the system to keep anyone who questions it on the outside. It's a system designed to take democracy away from the people. So when Jerry Brown raises the banner of taking back the country, they must kill this message. It's a message of death for all of them. It is Cromwell, `Out, you are not a Parliament.'
Q: Jerry Brown is running a campaign that has similarities to the race you helped run for Jimmy Carter. Carter also ran as an outside and a reformer. Can you make a comparison between the two campaigns?
A: It's gotten much worse. With Carter, we were battling with muskets. Now it's thermonuclear war. In 1976, the [Democratic] party was still a good party. It had not become what it is today.
Q: If the system is indeed failing, can this leadership recharge the engine, get the growth back? Or do we just have to face the reality of decline?
A: This country cannot survive if the reality is that we continue to go downhill economically. That is not necessary. There's no reason for it. We can get that engine moving. Jerry Brown's idea about the flat tax is an idea about getting that machinery going. When he announced it, I didn't know anything about it. I nearly fell on the floor. But I've gotten much more enthusiastic the more I look at it. The principle of it is to get something that's fair. Even the New York Times said it's the first interesting idea this year.
Q: Do you have any prediction for Tuesday's primary in New York.
A: Yes I do, but I'm not going to share it with you, because I don't believe in jinxing myself. Right this very minute, as I talk to you, I think Jerry Brown--I don't even want to say this--but it could be a big moment. Let me say this. On Tuesday night, there is the possibility that American politics could be shaken to its foundations in a way that has not happened in our lifetime.
[Page: H2379]
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Oberstar] is recognized for 5 minutes.
[Mr. OBERSTAR addressed the House. His remarks will appear hereafter in the extensions of remarks.]
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from California [Mr. Riggs] is recognized for 5 minutes.
[Mr. RIGGS addressed the House. His remarks will appear hereafter in the
extensions of remarks.]
THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT THIS CR ISSUE GO TO
Next Hit Forward Next Document New CR Search
Prev Hit Back Prev Document HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Daily Digest Help
Contents Display