GOP fund-raising and the princess of wails

0 Comments | Insight on the News, March 13, 1995 | by Paul Weyrich

What do they serve at a $50,000-a-plate dinner?" I was asked in February during the media hype over our National Empowerment Television, or NET, fund-raiser with Newt Gingrich. The answer was "about the same as they serve at a $50 a plate dinner," since the object is to raise money.

My explanation was insufficient for Rep. Patricia Schroeder, a Democrat from Colorado, who attacked NET on the House Floor as "24 hours of `Newt-speak.'" She was followed by many other House Democrats demanding an investigation of Gingrich's relationship with NET.

This, of course, brought a flood of media inquiries. Our producer Genevieve Wood immediately called Schroeder's office and invited her to appear on my nightly program Direct Line. Anyone who has watched NET knows she would not be the first liberal to appear on the show. But she declined. She wasn't interested in finding out what NET really is like. She wanted to make an issue against Gingrich.

You remember Patsy Schroeder. She's the woman who ran for president, saying it was time women were regarded as equals to men -- and then cried at her press conference announcing her withdrawal from the race. This is the same Schroeder who is railing about some members of Congress sleeping in their offices, while serious members of Congress are discussing things like term limits and the balanced-budget amendment. Gingrich was, of course, asked about all of this at his live press conference on Tuesday. He told the media that if NET were liberal and if he suddenly decided that we were a national treasure and wanted to raise taxes to provide a subsidy to keep us on the air, there would be cheers from the media and the Democrats. But because we are a private organization and he is raising money for us the way he does for the Salvation Army, the Atlanta Zoo and Habitat for Humanity, suddenly it is a big issue.

Meanwhile, Schroeder's attack was enough to bring out the crazies. As my wife and I pulled up to the Hay-Adams Hotel for the dinner, there were picketers with a bullhorn screaming nasty comments about Newt and Arianna and Michael Huffington, the hosts for the event. When we entered the hotel, there was a solid wall of reporters and camera crews. At issue was the $50,000 price tag.

Immediately the lights came on. A reporter asked, "Aren't the participants buying access to Speaker Gingrich with this money."

I answered, "If you can afford that sort of money, you don't need a dinner like this to get access."

Another question: "Well, if the contributions are tax-deductible, isn't that a subsidy?"

"That is the existing law," I reminded them. "Of course, if we'd pass Dick Armey's flat tax, deductions like this would be abolished'"

And so it went. Gingrich came through a back door and avoided all of the media and we had a nice, pleasant dinner and we raised some money to keep NET going.

The fact is, we get our money from the private sector. Advertising dollars don't yet cover our costs. But for the efforts of people like Gingrich, NET would not be able to continue.

Is the dinner or even NET really the issue? Of course not. Complaints of book deals, 24-hour television and now even his wife's employment are part of a protracted effort by the liberal wing of the Democratic Party to discredit Gingrich. Why? Because they believe it is the only way to reclaim the 60 or so moderate Democrats who now support the Republicans' "Contract With America."

Gingrich is under attack because of his ideas; his ideas are populist, like NET. At our next dinner, we'll be sure and toast the Schroeders of the world, whose ridiculous complaints about the speaker have helped bring so much attention to NET.

Paul Weyrich is president of National Empowerment Television.