So far this year, 56 members of Congress have announced that they will not seek re-election in November, the largest voluntary departure since World War II. Among those who have decided not to return are Democratic Senators Tim Wirth of Colorado and Kent Conrad of North Dakota and Republican Congressman Vin Weber of Minnesota. At a round-table session, Wirth, Conrad and Weber discussed their reasons for leaving and how their attitudes toward government and public service were changed by their experiences in Washington. Excerpts:
Q. How can Congress be strengthened so it functions in ways that make sense to people like you and the people who will succeed you?
WIRTH: Let me start with campaign-finance reform. Congress is awash in money. Interests have emerged that have enormous amounts of cash and that stand between the Congress and its constituency. In my 18 years in the Congress, I have seen the denominator of debate get lower and lower, and I think much of that is explained by fear -- fear that you will be unable to raise money from a certain group; or worse, that the interest group will give the money to the other guy; or worse still, that the money will go to a third party as a so- called independent expenditure. We need reform that would do three things: provide shared public-private funding, similar to the current system for presidential campaigns; second, limit how much a candidate can spend; and third, ensure nonincumbents of enough money to be competitive -- which would, by the way, ensure better members of Congress.
WEBER: I question the impact of special-interest money on policy. The contribution limit for a special-interest group (($5,000)) has not changed in the 12 years that I've been here. That means the value of each contribution has eroded considerably. So how can we argue it's an increasing problem?
WIRTH: I just came from a discussion on product-liability reform. The room was filled with trial lawyers -- and with fear of them. The problem isn't just that trial lawyers donate campaign money, but they can give a maximum of $5,000 in the primary and $5,000 in the general, and they're a phalanx that can have an effect on every candidate who's out there. And it isn't just money. It's also all the emoluments and blandishments.
WEBER: But I think the impact of special-interest groups is greater when they're organizing voters in your district. Take, for example, ((groups like)) the American Association of Retired Persons or the National Federation of Independent Businesses. Their ability to organize makes them more of a power than the amount of a check they might write. Yet I'm sure none of us want to curtail the ability of people to organize and express themselves.