They Wine and Dine, You Wind Up Fleeced : Let’s ban the bipartisan addiction to gifts and free meals

Should it be legal for the nation’s legislators to enjoy tropical vacations, lavish meals, Super Bowl tickets and other luxuries at the expense of lobbyists who expect legislative favors in return?

The average citizen, regardless of political party, says no. Thus, in Minnesota, United We Stand America, the broadly conservative organization of Ross Perot supporters, joins the liberal public interest group Common Cause in support of federal legislation banning gifts by lobbyists.

Unfortunately, the citizenry’s wishes count for little in the face of bipartisan addiction in Washington to all those freebies. Common Cause reports that during 1992-93, when health care reform was a hot issue in Congress, lobbyists paid for more than 180 trips by U.S. legislators, of which half were to popular vacation destinations in California and Florida. Other destinations included Montego Bay, San Juan and Paris.

After enjoying this largess at the expense of those whose own corporate profits and personal incomes stood to suffer if the cost of U.S. health care were reined in, did Congress base its decision to back away from health care reform purely on the merits? As the health care crisis returns in the form of a Medicare crisis, are the health care lobbyists even now booking a new round of all-expenses-paid excursions?

Washington’s tolerance of influence buying stinks to high heaven, and yet the lamentably short list of eight senators who have promised not to accept gifts or financial favors from lobbyists includes neither California senator.

And of California’s 52 members of the House of Representatives, only five have had the guts to just say no: Anthony C. Beilenson (D-Woodland Hills), Anna G. Eshoo (D-Atherton), Vic Fazio (D-West Sacramento), Tom Lantos (D-Burlingame) and Lynn Woolsey (D-Petaluma).

Total abstinence. Cold turkey. No gifts at all. Is this too much to ask? Not long ago Majority Leader Bob Dole seemed to think basic reform reasonable. “I support the gift ban provisions,” he said. “No lobbyist lunches. No entertainment. No travel. No contributions to legal defense funds. No fruit baskets. No nothing.”

But that statement, made last October, was, well, a campaign promise, and we all know about campaign promises. According to a published report, Dole later told freshman GOP can senators that he would block any attempt to add a gift ban to the Congressional Accountability Act, passed by the Senate in January. Sadly, that was a promise he kept.

Three senators--Paul Wellstone (D-Minn.), Russell D. Feingold (D-Wis.) and Frank R. Lautenberg (D-N.J.)--have promised to attach a gift ban amendment to legislation on the Senate floor some time in the coming weeks. For all too obvious reasons, their determination has made them unpopular with their colleagues, but they have our wholehearted backing.

A ban on lobbyist gifts involves nothing so controversial as public funding of political campaigns. A flat ban costs the taxpayers nothing. What it buys is a legislature that pays for its own damned lunch and does the job it was elected to do.