Louie Gohmert Quotes

You now have six-year campaigns for the Senate - you never stop running. It's not uncommon for a member of the Senate to have a fundraising breakfast, a fundraising lunch and a fundraising dinner, and then when the Senate breaks for the week to go home, more fundraisers. And that's driven by the cost of campaigning.

It is not that candidates who get the most money win, but that winning candidates get the most money.

Public [campaign] financing and free television time are the things that will diminish the high influence that money has on politics.

We have to talk about the way we finance campaigns.

The dominant advertising advantage of Clinton, with spending of 10 to 1 over Trump, reinforced the perception that she was trying to buy, rather than earn, votes.

The first thing I learned is that campaigns are about money. I had this romantic idea that campaigns were about law and debates and so forth, which is just not true. It's about money.

Elections are a competition with only one winner. Giving more money to the opponent every time one speaks on behalf of a favored candidate discourages the speech that triggers the matching funds.

A million dollars in the presidential election is a spit in the ocean. It's not a lot of money.

The American people have a right to know the source of the money that is being spent. They should be told who is behind the millions of dollars in campaign ads, and they should receive this information before they vote.

Few developments in campaigning have been as vilified and misunderstood as independent expenditure PACs, or, as they are colloquially known, super PACs.

The degree to which campaigns have become dominated by marketing is breaking the spirit of democracy, and we're all just so sick of it, across party lines.

We have to have campaign contributions to apprise the public about our qualifications.

You can’t get to be an officeholder in America without buying television time.

Spending for congressional campaigns is getting to be like the arms race.

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.

I mean this is a revolution in how campaigns work - more money was spent by super PACs than by either myself or John Faso. So what that means is that if you're a voter in this district you are more likely to have heard from a super PAC than from me or my opponent.

The Koch brothers are spending more money against me than I've been able to raise.

In politics, name recognition matters a lot.

In 2016, Hillary Clinton had so much more money than the Trump campaign, yet, we see who won that election.

Trump is not a fan of fundraising, but he's willing to do it.

[Donald Trump] doesn't have the money to run commercials and I launched into a tirade on money in politics.

Incumbents don't like it, but political competition is a good thing. Incumbents usually outspend challengers by better than 3 to 1. Super PACs, which tend to support challengers, have nullified some of this advantage.

I would do away with super PACs. I think it's a cancer.

The first thing you need to run for President is a budget of around $20 million dollars a day.

When I ran for governor of Minnesota, I only raised $300,000.