The extraordinary cost of running a political campaign today— the total cost of the 1982 midterm election came to somewhere around $300 million-gives the moneyed political action committees an undue influence over the election process and reduces respect for the legislative process. Few candidates for office can afford to turn down PAC contributions, but the Nation can scarcely afford the damage to public policy caused by this need to court campaign money. Placing reasonable limits on campaign spending seems no more a violation of freedom of speech than to forbid movie patrons to yell "fire" in a crowded theater. The capacity of seat-buying to ruin a democracy is surely one that the Court ought to weigh in a freedom-of-speech decision. The Supreme Court may one day reverse its decision in Buckley v. Valeo. This would certainly be simpler than the process of constitutional amendment. Short of a constitutional amendment, former Congressman John Anderson made a number of recommendations for controlling the financial power of special interest groups and their PAC's, including public financing for Senate and House candidates modeled after the Presidential system, limiting contributions of PAC's to the same $1,000 ceiling currently imposed on individuals, and enactment of a fairness rule that would require all radio and TV stations that accept political advertisements from independent PAC's not formally part of a candidates campaign to provide equal time for rebuttal at no cost. Although the Joint Economic Committee's hearings were called to consider the constitutional changes needed to improve the functioning of our government, our witnesses suggested numerous improvements that could be made in our government within the existing provisions of our Constitution. John Anderson, for example, urged that Congress adopt a twoyear budget cycle in order to reduce election year influences on spending and to give Congress more time for its other legislative duties. Henry Steele Commager urged that we drastically shorten the time spent on presidential and congressional campaigns, that the President be given a line-item veto, and that Congress take a more active role in the conduct of foreign affairs. James Sundquist urged much greater use of the legislative veto, in order to give the President more discretion in setting policy while enabling the Congress to keep a necessary check on the President. The bicentennial of our Constitution is scarcely four years away. We need a thorough and thoughtful reappraisal of our Constitution, particularly those sections which impede decisionmaking by the Congress and the President. Although a small group of Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution in 1787, the review of the Constitution between now and 1987 must be a nationwide undertaking, with results that reflect the deliberations, and command the respect, of all Americans. These Joint Economic Committee hearings, published here, are a first step in this review of our Constitution. During the next few years, a newly formed private group-the Committee on the Constitutional System, under the cochairmanship of Lloyd Cutler and Douglas Dillon-will conduct studies and hold public meetings on how our Constitution might be improved. The events of the past decade-with Congress and the President at loggerheads over economic policy, and our economy reeling directionless from one crisis to another-suggest that reform of the structure of our government may be in order. CONTENTS Reuss, Hon. Henry S., chairman of the Joint Economic Committee: Opening Bentsen, Hon. Lloyd, a U.S. Senator from the State of Texas. Cutler, Lloyd N., senior partner, Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering, Washington, Page Richardson, Elliot, senior partner, Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy Strout, Richard L., correspondent, Christian Science Monitor Sundquist, James L., senior fellow, the Brookings Institution, Washington, 276 Niskanen, Hon. William A., Member, Council of Economic Advisers....... Aranson, Peter H., professor of economics, Law and Economics Center, Emory Page Article entited "Constitutional and Institutional Reform Act," by Senator Claiborne Pell, from the Congressional Record, December 5, 1980 Paper entitled "The Presidency: Concensus and Credibility" Article entitled "Courts and Political Thickets," by Harold Leventhal, Article entitled "Money and the Pollution of Politics: Is the First Amend- ment an Obstacle to Political Equality?" by J. Skelly Wright, from the Reedy, George E.: Prepared statement 76 Speech given at the Fletcher School of Diplomacy, Tufts University, May 183 Statement entitled "Constitutional Reform in the United States," by Charles M. Hardin, University of California, Davis, July 9, 1980...... Article entitled "A Presidential Puzzle," by Vermont Royster, from the Article entitled "Reason To Cry Over This Year's Political Carnival," by Article entitled "Mob Rule," by Dick Dabney, from the Washington Post.. Article entitled "Japanese Economic Power Stems From Education," by 253 POLITICAL ECONOMY AND CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 1982 CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in room 2128, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Henry S. Reuss (chairman of the committee) presiding. Present: Representative Reuss. Also present: James K. Galbraith, executive director; Louis C. Krauthoff II, assistant director; Betty Maddox, assistant director for administration; and William R. Buechner and Chris Frenze, professional staff members. OPENING STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE REUSS, CHAIRMAN Representative REUSS. Good morning. The Joint Economic Committee will be in order for the series of hearings on Government and the Economy. In 1987, the United States will celebrate the bicentennial of the ratification of our Constitution. It was a marvelous document 200 years ago, and it remains a marvelous document today. In it, the Founding Fathers created a structure of Government-with power and responsibility spread over three separate branches of Government-that has generally served our Nation well in all its stages of growth from undeveloped backwater to the most powerful industrial Nation in the world. In these 200 years, our Constitution has weathered many crises and our Government has endured wars and depressions that destroyed other governments around the world. We are fond of our form of Government, and we have done well under it. But during the past decade, our Government has often seemed paralyzed as the economy has been battered by one crisis after another. The separation of powers between the President and Congress, the decentralization of power in the House and Senate, the decline of the parties, and the rise of the media politician have undermined the ability of our Government to respond effectively. Through three recessions, two oil crises, two periods of prolonged inflation, and three periods of skyrocketing interest rates; through an entire decade of low productivity growth, inadequate business investment, stagnant output, and falling real incomes-our Government stood helplessly by, unable to develop or implement effective economic policies. |