Sheila Jackson Lee Quotes

Campaign finance reform is vital. It is impossible for us to win, especially in committees, because we can never outbid the opposition.

Most important of all the structural reforms, we need to follow through on the recent Congressional effort to discipline the use of money in politics, by setting reasonable limits on campaign spending, limiting and publicizing individual and organizational gifts and channeling much more of the money (including … all general election spending) through the respective party committees rather than through individual candidates’ treasuries.

We need to end unlimited, unaccountable money for all political parties by passing comprehensive campaign finance reform.

I think we have to look at the whole way campaigns are financed. The No. 1 problem is PAC and special-interest money.

All contributions by corporations to any political committee or for any political purpose should be forbidden by law.

Spending limits have proven a monumental failure at limiting campaign spending in presidential elections, merely diverting the money underground.

More money is being spent on our elections, with less disclosure of where that money is coming from, than ever before.

The best way to shine a light on all of this 'dark money' flooding into our elections would be for Congress to pass legislation requiring all organizations to disclose their political spending in a timely manner.

One such issue that Arkansans want action taken on is campaign finance reform. And this is a problem that is not really all that complicated.

While normal people have to disclose donations directly to a candidate, there is no such transparency on people donating to certain types of nonprofit organizations that can play a major role in our elections.

In fact, corporate and union moneys go overwhelmingly to incumbents, so limiting that money, as Congress did in the campaign finance law, may be the single most self-denying thing that Congress has ever done.

Ultimately, the question of campaign contributions will be decided by the public.

By law, super PACs are required to disclose their donors. There are groups that have never had to disclose their donors, non-profits such as the Sierra Club, Planned Parenthood, the NAACP, and the NRA. If you want more disclosure, super PACs are a step forward.

Who do you think controls the Republican Party? Big money controls the Republican Party. This is where their campaign contributions come from.

Nobody wants campaign finance reform more than me. It would save me a fortune.

The McCain-Feingold limit on how much you give a candidate didn't really work because people found ways to get around it.

Well, paycheck protection is an important ingredient for a successful campaign finance reform measure.

We need a complete ban on soft money, which is sort of an enveloping problem, and a ceiling on the amount of money that can be spent on a given race.

Much of the money raised in politics does not come free of charge.

Not since the gilded age has our politics been opened so wide to corporate contribution and donations from secret sources.

Stemming the tide of special interest campaign cash - and restoring fiscal responsibility in Congress - is no easy task. But there is one place where concerned citizens in both parties can begin: Changing the source of money that funds all campaigns.

If Republicans want to defend the rights of corporations and billionaires to spend unlimited, secret money in campaigns, then they should say so.

There's no doubt that there's a public backlash against the way campaign money is raised, but I don't think the only alternative is to elect people with money.

What we have are - some of the big political donors behind the super PACs are big on promoting more of these trade agreements which cost us jobs - another reason that we need to end political action committees and have only individual donations with their donations being disclosed completely with names and addresses and other information.

Wealthy individuals have always had the capacity to influence politics, of course, but only after two key campaign finance cases - Wisconsin Right to Life and and Citizens United, have they been able to do it in such a large and blatant way.