[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 95 (Tuesday, June 25, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6816-S6817]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM
The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill.
Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, the McCain-Feingold campaign finance
reform bill is not a perfect bill. But it is a good bill. More
important, it provides a good start on what ought to be one of our top
priorities: loosening the grip of big-money special interests on
politics.
I will vote for cloture not because I think this bill cannot be
improved--it can--but because we must change the way campaigns are
financed, and this is, for now, the only means we have to make that
change.
There are those who say they oppose cloture because they want to be
able to amend this bill and improve it. But let no one in this Chamber
be fooled: a vote against cloture is a vote to kill campaign finance
reform. We know that because the leading opponent of this bill has told
us he intends to filibuster this bill and kill it if we give him the
chance.
To block reform with calls for debate is more than cynical. It is
dangerous.
A while back, the Kettering Institute conducted a survey of
Americans' attitudes about the influence of money on politics. The
survey found a widespread belief that ``campaign contributions
determine more than voting, so why bother?'' It described ``a political
system that is perceived of as so autonomous that the public is no
longer able to control or direct it.''
``People talk about government,'' the study said, ``as if it has been
taken over by alien beings.''
We will never restore faith in government if people believe the
political system is rigged against them, if they believe it serves the
wealthy, the powerful, and the politically connected at their expense.
The McCain-Feingold proposal, as I have said, is not perfect. For
instance, I believe we should encourage participation in our political
process by individuals who get together not because they have some
narrow economic interest in a particular bill but because they have a
broad interest in the direction of government. That is exactly the kind
of grassroots participation that groups like EMILY'S List and, yes,
WISH List, encourage. Yet this bill would ban such participation. In my
opinion, that is a serious flaw.
But this bill does fix some of what is most broken about the current
campaign finance system. It sets reasonable spending limits. It makes
political campaigns more competitive for challengers. And it sets
reasonable limits on the influence of PAC's.
This is not an attempt by one party to rewrite the rules to its own
advantage. This is a bipartisan effort that will be good for both our
parties, and for our Nation. I want to thank Senators McCain and
Feingold for their leadership in getting us to this point against what
must have seemed at times very long odds.
I will vote for cloture because I believe it is wrong if another
Congress comes and goes and does nothing about campaign finance reform.
Talk may be cheap. But when endless talk is used to block action on
campaign finance reform, it becomes terribly expensive because special
interests are able to undermine efforts to solve the problems that
matter most to America's families.
A while back, the Speaker of the House said, and I quote--``One of
the big myths in modern politics is that campaigns are too expensive.
The political process is not overfunded; it is underfunded.''
Mr. President, the American people do not agree. A poll conducted
earlier this year by a Republican and a Democratic pollster asked
people whether they agreed that ``those who make large campaign
contributions get special favors from politicians.'' Sixty-eight
percent said yes, they agreed, and they said they were deeply troubled
by it.
So the need for campaign finance reform will not go away, even if,
for some reason, campaign finance reform is not enacted in this
Congress. Ultimately, we must change the rules. We must lessen the
influence of money on politics. I urge my colleagues to join me in
beginning that change by voting now to bring this reasonable, modest
proposal forward for a vote.
Mr. LOTT addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may use
leader time for a very brief statement.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, just very briefly, I want to commend the
Senate for the quality of the debate on this campaign finance reform
issue. I have been able to listen to several of the speeches that have
been given. I think on both sides of the issue and on both sides of the
aisle, it has been an outstanding debate.
I commend specifically Senator McCain, Senator Feingold, Senator
Thompson, and others who have sponsored this legislation, and for the
quality of their cooperation and debate.
I also commend the courage, once again, of the outstanding leader of
the opposition to this campaign finance reform, Senator McConnell. He
has done a magnificent job. I think we should recognize that.
I think this is an important issue which we will address, I am sure,
again in the future. But I think it is too important to address right
at this point in the heat of the national election debate.
I do not think we have the solutions here. So I urge that cloture not
be invoked.
I hope the Senate will not invoke cloture on the McCain-Feingold
substitute amendment to S. 1219.
We all agree that campaign finance reform is an important issue. But
it's become too important to deal with it during the heat of a national
election.
It is already too late in the calendar year to make this bill's
provisions apply to the elections of 1996. So we are not going to lose
anything by waiting until early next year to get this job done.
When we do it, we have to do it right--the first time. We should not
make the same mistake the Senate made back in 1974, when it hastily
cobbled together a campaign reform bill that later came apart at the
seams before the Supreme Court.
Since the Court's decision in Buckley versus Valeo in 1974, the
Congress has been on notice that, when it comes to imposing rules and
restrictions on the financing of political campaigns, we must be
scrupulously careful of the first amendment.
In short, our good intentions must pass constitutional muster. My
personal judgment is that this bill does not do so.
I recognize that others may disagree, but when it comes to the free
speech protections of the first amendment, I prefer to err on the side
of caution, rather than zeal.
I need not go into all the details already covered by other speakers,
but I note that one of the key provisions in this legislation--
concerning political action committees--has a fallback provision, in
case the original provision is overturned by the Supreme Court as a
violation of the first amendment.
What that means to me is that we know at least some parts of this
bill are on shaky ground. I think we should craft campaign finance
reforms that are rock solid.
Two of our colleagues from the Republican side of the aisle have
played crucial roles with regard to this legislation. Both have acted
out of conscience and principle, and have come to opposite conclusions.
[[Page S6817]]
Senator McCain took the lead in shaping this legislation and
advancing it to this point. His determination has kept this issue in
the spotlight, and I know he will not give up the fight now.
I hope to work with him over the next several months to see how we
can build on his efforts for a bill that will be more broadly supported
and, finally, enacted into law.
Senator McConnell has, in this 104th Congress as in preceding years,
been a consistent critic of campaign finance laws which, in his
judgment, would limit access to the political process or inhibit
participation in it.
To speak bluntly, he has put his neck out to defend the first
amendment rights of all Americans, even when it was not fashionable to
do so. I commend him for doing so. I know he will be equally vigilant
in the future, to ensure that the Congress does not attempt to achieve
a worthy goal by less than worthy means.
I think everyone has had their say about campaign finance reform. Now
it's time for the Senate to move on to other pressing issues.
So I will vote against cloture. And if my colleagues agree with me,
and cloture is not invoked, it will then be my intention to return to
the Department of Defense authorization bill.
____________________