[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 78 (Tuesday, June 16, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H4629-H4636]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                               AMENDMENTS

  Under clause 6 of rule XXIII, proposed amendments were submitted as 
follows:

                               H.R. 2183

                         Offered By: Mr. DeLay

        (To the Amendments Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 78: Add at the end the following new title:

   TITLE __--SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT 
                                COUNSEL

     SEC. __01. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING APPOINTMENT OF 
                   INDEPENDENT COUNSEL TO INVESTIGATE CLINTON 
                   ADMINISTRATION.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds as follows:

[[Page H4630]]

       (1) The Independent Counsel Act (chapter 40 of title 28, 
     United States Code) was designed to avoid even the appearance 
     of impropriety in the consideration of allegations of 
     misconduct by high-level Executive Branch officials.
       (2) Section 591(a)(1) of title 28, United States Code, 
     requires the Attorney General of the United States to conduct 
     a preliminary investigation whenever the Attorney General 
     finds specific and credible evidence that a covered person 
     ``may have violated any Federal criminal law ...''.
       (3) Under the statute (28 U.S.C. 591(b)), the President is 
     a covered person.
       (4) The bribery statute (chapter 11 of title 18, United 
     States Code) prohibits Federal officials, including the 
     President, from receiving any benefit in return for any 
     official action.
       (5) Numerous published reports describe circumstances that 
     suggest that President Clinton may have received campaign 
     contributions in return for official government actions he 
     took on behalf of the contributors.
       (6) Any such scheme may also violate other statutes 
     including the following sections of title 18, United States 
     Code: section 371 (conspiracy to defraud the United States), 
     section 600 (promising of government benefits in return for 
     political support), section 872 (extortion by government 
     officials), and sections 1341, 1343, and 1346 (mail and wire 
     fraud by defrauding the United States of honest services).
       (7) On February 13, 1997, the Washington Post reported that 
     the Department of Justice had obtained intelligence 
     information that the government of the People's Republic of 
     China had sought to direct contributions from foreign sources 
     to the Democratic National Committee (``DNC'') before the 
     1996 presidential campaign.
       (8) In March 1995, Johnny Chung, a Democratic National 
     Committee trustee and a businessman from Torrance, 
     California, brought six officials of the government of the 
     People's Republic of China and its state-owned companies, 
     including Hongye Zheng, Chairman of the China Council for the 
     Promotion of International Trade, and Yang Zanzhong, 
     President of China Petro-Chemical Corp., to hear the 
     President give his regular Saturday radio address.
       (9) On March 8, 1995, Johnny Chung came to the First Lady's 
     office in the White House seeking various favors for the 
     officials, including admission to the radio address.
       (10) Aides to Mrs. Clinton, Margaret Williams and Evan 
     Ryan, suggested that Mr. Chung could get the favors if he 
     helped Mrs. Clinton with her debts to the DNC for holiday 
     parties.
       (11) The next day, Mr. Chung gave Ms. Williams a check for 
     $50,000, and received a lunch in the White House mess, a 
     picture with Mrs. Clinton, and admission to the radio address 
     for himself and the officials. Id. Records indicate that on 
     Friday, March 17, 1995, Mr. Chung donated $50,000 to the 
     Democratic National Committee and on April 12, 1995, he 
     donated an additional $125,000.
       (12) In commenting on the solicitation in the White House 
     by the First Lady's aides, Mr. Chung said, ``I see the White 
     House is like a subway: You have to put in coins to open the 
     gates.''
       (13) On February 6, 1996, Wang Jun attended a coffee at the 
     White House with President Clinton. Mr. Wang is the head of 
     the state-owned company, China International Trade and 
     Investment Corp. (``CITIC''), a $21,000,000,000 conglomerate, 
     and its subsidiary Poly Technologies. Poly Technologies is 
     the primary arms dealing company for the Chinese military. 
     Mr. Wang gained access to the coffee through Charles Yah Lin 
     Trie, an old Arkansas friend of President Clinton and 
     Democratic Party fund-raiser.
       (14) After the Wang visit came to public attention, 
     President Clinton said he remembered ``literally nothing'' 
     about the meeting, but he conceded that it was ``clearly 
     inappropriate.''
       (15) Mr. Trie had a number of interesting sources of funds. 
     Among other things, in the spring of 1996, Mr. Trie delivered 
     suspicious donations totaling $789,000 to the President's 
     legal defense fund.
       (16) Mr. Trie made the donations on three dates: March 21, 
     1996, $460,000; April 24, 1996, $179,000; and May 17, 1996, 
     $150,000. These donations have now been returned. Recent 
     reports reveal that most of this money came from members of a 
     Taiwan-based religious sect, Suma Ching Hai. President and 
     Mrs. Clinton knew about these suspicious donations at the 
     time, and they concurred in efforts to conceal them until 
     after the election. Notwithstanding that knowledge, President 
     Clinton continued to grant favors to Mr. Trie.
       (17) On April 19, 1996, President Clinton appointed Mr. 
     Trie to the Commission on U.S. Pacific Trade and Investment 
     Policy. On April 26, President Clinton signed a letter to Mr. 
     Trie relating to U.S. policy in putting carriers in the 
     Taiwan Straits.
       (18) During 1995 and 1996, Mr. Trie received a series of 
     wire transfers in amounts of $50,000 and $100,000 from the 
     Chinese government's state-owned bank, the Bank of China.
       (19) Recent Senate testimony reveals that Mr. Trie received 
     $1,400,000 in wire transfers from abroad from 1994 through 
     1996. At least $220,000 of this money has been traced into 
     the treasury of the DNC.
       (20) Of the total Mr. Trie received from overseas, $905,000 
     came from Ng Lap Seng, a Macao-based businessman who was 
     Trie's partner and who was also known as Mr. Wu. Mr. Ng is an 
     adviser to the Chinese Communist government. Although he is a 
     foreign national who cannot legally make donations to U.S. 
     campaigns, he gave money through two employees to attend a 
     dinner for big contributors with President Clinton on 
     February 16, 1995.
       (21) Returning to Mr. Wang's visit to the coffee with 
     President Clinton, just four days before the meeting, Mr. 
     Wang's arms trading company received special permission to 
     import 100,000 assault weapons, along with millions of 
     bullets, into the United States despite the assault weapons 
     ban.
       (22) On the day of the coffee, Democratic fund-raiser 
     Ernest G. Green, another Arkansas friend of the President's, 
     delivered a $50,000 donation to the Democratic National 
     Committee. Mr. Green, a managing director at Lehman Brothers, 
     had never before given such a large contribution to the 
     Democratic Party. Mr. Wang used a letter of invitation 
     written by Mr. Green to obtain a visa for Mr. Wang's trip to 
     the White House for coffee. After delivering the check, Mr. 
     Green met with Mr. Wang before Mr. Wang went to the White 
     House.
       (23) Several lengthy reports in the Chicago Tribune and the 
     Washington Post detail the depths of Mr. Wang's international 
     arms dealing activities.
       (24) Beginning in the summer of 1994, Federal agents began 
     an undercover sting investigation of Poly's efforts to 
     smuggle weapons into the United States. On March 8, 1996, 
     just a month after Mr. Wang's visit with President Clinton, 
     the President of Poly's U.S. subsidiary, Robert Ma, sold his 
     house in Atlanta and fled the country.
       (25) On March 18, 1996, Federal agents surreptitiously 
     seized a Poly shipment of 2,000 AK-47 assault rifles in 
     Oakland, California. These weapons had left China on February 
     18 aboard a vessel belonging to another state-owned company, 
     the Chinese Ocean Shipping Company (``COSCO''). Id. In May, 
     Federal agents hastily shut down the operation when they 
     learned that the Chinese had been tipped to its existence. 
     The stories indicate that the Department is currently 
     investigating to determine the source of the leak.
       (26) Smuggling the weapons into the United States has not 
     harmed the fortunes of COSCO. In April 1996, with the support 
     of the Clinton Administration, COSCO signed a lease with the 
     City of Long Beach, California to rent a now defunct navy 
     base in Long Beach, California. In addition, the Clinton 
     Administration has allowed COSCO's ships access to our most 
     sensitive ports with one day's notice rather than the usual 
     four, and it has given COSCO a $138,000,000 loan guarantee to 
     build ships in Alabama. The Administration has made all of 
     these concessions since the coffee with Mr. Wang. That COSCO 
     participated in the shipment of illegal arms does not appear 
     to have dampened the Administration's enthusiasm in any of 
     these matters.
       (27) These circumstances strongly suggest that there was a 
     quid pro quo, and that the contributions from Mr. Chung, Mr. 
     Green, and Mr. Trie, may have come from the Chinese 
     government in return for the various government favors 
     described. The President met directly with the Chinese 
     officials whom Mr. Chung and Mr. Trie brought to the White 
     House, and he knew about the suspicious circumstances of Mr. 
     Trie's donations. If the President knew about a quid pro quo, 
     he may have violated section 201 of title 18, United States 
     Code, and the other statutes cited above.
       (28) Mr. Chung has admitted that a large portion of the 
     money he raised for the Democrats originated with the 
     People's Liberation Army in China. He has identified the 
     conduit as a Chinese aerospace executive, based in Hong Kong, 
     who is also the daughter of General Liu Huaqing, who was 
     China's top military commander at the time.
       (29) Closely related to the allegations concerning the 
     government of the People's Republic of China are the 
     allegations relating to the Lippo Group.
       (30) The Lippo Group (``Lippo'') is a multi-billion dollar 
     real estate and financial conglomerate based in Indonesia. 
     The Riady family, an ethnic Chinese family living in 
     Indonesia, owns and controls Lippo. The patriarch of the 
     Riady family is Mochtar Riady. His son, James, has known 
     President Clinton since the late 1970s when he interned with 
     an investment bank in Little Rock, Arkansas. Since President 
     Clinton began his first presidential campaign in 1991, 
     members of the Riady family and Lippo's subsidiaries and 
     executives have contributed more than $475,000 to the 
     Democratic Party and its candidates. Lippo and the Riady 
     family have numerous business interests in China and Hong 
     Kong.
       (31) In the early 1980s, John Huang, the former Commerce 
     Department official at the center of this controversy, worked 
     for Lippo in Little Rock at the Worthen Bank, in which Lippo 
     had a large stake. In 1986, Mr. Huang moved to Los Angeles to 
     help run the Lippo Bank, which has had a number of problems 
     with banking regulators. In that role, he became Lippo's 
     chief representative in the United States.
       (32) Mr. Huang began raising illegal contributions for the 
     Democratic Party as early as 1992. The recent Senate 
     Governmental Affairs Committee hearings revealed that in 
     August 1992 Huang gave a $50,000 contribution to the DNC 
     through Hip Hing Holdings, a U.S.-based Lippo subsidiary. He 
     then requested and received reimbursement for the

[[Page H4631]]

     contribution from Lippo's Indonesian headquarters. Senator 
     Lieberman said, ``Here's a clear trail of foreign money 
     coming into United States elections.''
       (33) Maria L. Haley, a presidential aide, recommended Mr. 
     Huang for a job at the Commerce Department in October 1993. 
     In January 1994 while he was still an employee of Lippo, Mr. 
     Huang received a top-secret security clearance without a full 
     background check.
       (34) On July 18, 1994, he became principal deputy assistant 
     secretary for international economic policy in the Department 
     of Commerce. He received a $780,000 severance payment from 
     Lippo. David J. Rothkopf, the deputy undersecretary of 
     commerce, and Jeffrey Garten, the undersecretary, expressed 
     misgivings about Mr. Huang's suitability for the job. In 
     recent Senate testimony, Mr. Garten said that Mr. Huang was 
     ``totally unqualified'' for the job and that ``he should not 
     be involved in China at all.'' Mr. Rothkopf has said his 
     complaints were to no avail and that he ``got the distinct 
     impression that this was a done deal. But it was unclear to 
     me at what level it was done.'' The Riadys have apparently 
     boasted to friends that they placed Huang in the job.
       (35) The Commerce Department now acknowledges that Mr. 
     Huang attended 109 meetings at which classified information 
     might have been discussed. Phone records show that Mr. Huang 
     made at least 70 calls to Lippo during his tenure at the 
     Commerce Department, many of which occurred near the time of 
     the briefings. He had contacts with officials of the Chinese 
     Embassy. Mr. Huang also maintained an office at a private 
     investment firm with Arkansas and Asian ties, Stephens, Inc., 
     where he made numerous phone calls and received faxes and 
     packages during his Commerce tenure.
       (36) Mr. Huang began to raise money illegally before he 
     even left the Commerce Department, and the DNC attributed 
     these donations to his wife. In mid-1995, he expressed an 
     interest in going to the DNC to raise funds. DNC Chairman Don 
     Fowler did not think that the move was necessary and took no 
     action.
       (37) In September 1995, the President and his closest 
     adviser, Bruce Lindsey, met with Mr. Huang, James Riady, and 
     C. Joseph Giroir, a former law partner of Mrs. Clinton's who 
     was close to the Riadys, regarding Mr. Huang's desire to move 
     to the DNC. The President has acknowledged that he had a role 
     in recommending Mr. Huang for the DNC job, and other former 
     Clinton aides with ties to Asia, including Mr. Giroir, 
     apparently mounted a concerted campaign to bring about Mr. 
     Huang's job there. In December 1995, Mr. Huang moved to the 
     DNC with the title finance vice chairman. After Mr. Huang 
     left, his Commerce Department position was eliminated. Id. 
     Strangely, however, Mr. Huang kept his security clearance 
     long after he left the Commerce Department.
       (38) At the DNC, Mr. Huang embarked on an unusual fund-
     raising drive in which he raised $3,400,000. Of that amount, 
     the DNC has identified $1,6000,000 as being illegal, 
     improper, or sufficiently suspect that it will be sent back 
     to donors. Many of these donations came from fictitious 
     donors and, in at least one case, a dead person. One of the 
     most egregious examples is the $450,000 donated by Arief and 
     Soraya Wiriadinata. Until December 1995 when they left the 
     country, this couple lived in a modest townhouse in Northern 
     Virginia. Mr. Wiriadinata was a landscape architect, and Mrs. 
     Wiriadinata was a homemaker. Despite these modest 
     circumstances, the couple wrote 23 separate checks to the DNC 
     totaling $425,000 from November 9, 1995 until June 7, 1996. 
     However, Mrs. Wiriadinata is the daughter of Hashim Ning, a 
     partner of the Riadys in owning Lippo. Democratic Party 
     officials had concerns about the legality of Mr. Huang's 
     activities as early as July 1996, but they did not remove him 
     from his job.
       (39) The Wiriadinatas are not the only conduit through 
     which Lippo money apparently benefited the Clintons. Existing 
     Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr is reportedly investigating 
     whether payments that Lippo made to Webster Hubbell were made 
     to buy his silence in the Whitewater investigation. These 
     payments reportedly included paying for a vacation the 
     Hubbell family took to Bali in the summer of 1994.
       (40) One possible quid pro quo for this Lippo money is the 
     possibility that Lippo bought Mr. Huang's position in the 
     Commerce Department as well as the accompanying access to 
     classified information. In addition, during September 1996, 
     the President announced that he was designating 1.7 million 
     acres of Utah wilderness as a national monument. This 
     designation abruptly halted plans to mine the world's largest 
     deposit of clean-burning ``super compliance coal.'' The 
     President made this move with virtually no consultation with 
     people in the affected area of Utah. The second largest 
     deposit of this kind of coal lies in Indonesia, and critics 
     suggest that the designation was made as a reward to Lippo.
       (41) If there was a quid pro quo for Mr. Huang's position 
     at the Department of Commerce, his access to classified 
     information, the designation of the national monument, or all 
     three, then there may have been a violation of section 201 of 
     title 18, United States Code, and the other statutes 
     mentioned above. The President's direct involvement includes 
     his participation in the September 1995 meeting at which Mr. 
     Huang expressed his desire to go to the DNC and his 
     participation in the designation of the national monument.
       (42) On February 20, 1997, the Wall Street Journal reported 
     that a Miami computer executive with close ties to the 
     government of Paraguay had a number of dealings with the 
     White House.
       (43) The computer executive, Mark Jimenez, is a native of 
     the Philippines, and he is a legal resident of the United 
     States. His company, Future Tech International, sells 
     computer parts in Latin America, including Paraguay. He 
     apparently has close ties to the government of Paraguay. 
     Since 1993, Mr. Jimenez and his employees have given over 
     $800,000 to the Democratic Party, the Clinton-Gore campaign, 
     and other private initiatives linked to President Clinton, 
     like the effort to restore the President's birthplace. Mr. 
     Jimenez has visited the White House at least twelve times 
     since April 1994, and on at least seven of these occasions, 
     he met personally with President Clinton.
       (44) The timing of some of these donations strongly 
     suggests that there was a quid pro quo. From February through 
     April 1996, Mr. Jimenez and various officials of the 
     government of Paraguay met in the White House with 
     presidential adviser and former chief of staff, Mack McLarty 
     regarding threats to the government of Paraguay. On March 1, 
     the State Department recommended that Paraguay no longer 
     receive American foreign aid because it had not done enough 
     to stop drug smuggling. President Clinton then issued a 
     waiver allowing the continued aid despite the State 
     Department's finding.
       (45) On April 22, the military of Paraguay attempted a coup 
     against the President of Paraguay, Carlos Wasmosy. The White 
     House allowed President Wasmosy to take refuge in the 
     American embassy in Asuncion and took other steps to support 
     him. The same day, Mr. Jimenez gave $100,000 to the 
     Democratic National Committee.
       (46) In addition, during February 1996, Mr. Jimenez 
     attended one of the now famous White House coffees. Ten days 
     later, he gave another $50,000 to the Democratic National 
     Committee. On September 30, 1996, Mr. Jimenez arranged for a 
     White House tour for a number of business friends who were 
     attending a meeting of the International Monetary Fund. The 
     same day, he sent $75,000 to the Democratic National 
     Committee. The close coincidence of Mr. Jimenez's 
     contributions with the favors he received is highly 
     suspicious. The President's direct involvement includes his 
     calling President Wasmosy to assure him of American support 
     with respect to the coup attempt and his direct participation 
     in the coffee in question. If there was a quid pro quo 
     involved, these incidents may violate section 201, of title 
     18, United States Code, and the other statutes cited above.
       (47) In February, the Washington Post reported that on 
     September 4, 1995, First Lady Hillary Clinton stopped over in 
     Guam on the way to the International Women's Conference in 
     Beijing, China. She ended her visit with a shrimp cocktail 
     buffet hosted by Guam's governor, Carl T. Gutierrez, a 
     Democrat. Three weeks later, a Guam Democratic Party official 
     arrived in Washington with more than $250,000 in campaign 
     contributions. Within six additional months, Governor 
     Gutierrez and a small group of Guam businessmen had produced 
     an additional $132,000 for the Clinton-Gore reelection 
     campaign and $510,000 in soft money for the Democratic 
     National Committee.
       (48) In December 1996, the Administration circulated a memo 
     that would have granted a long sought reversal of the 
     Administration's position on labor and immigration issues in 
     a way that was very favorable to businesses in Guam. The 
     story gave the following reason for this shift: Some 
     officials also attribute the administration's support for the 
     reversal to the money raised for the president's reelection 
     campaign. One senior U.S. official said ``the political 
     side'' of her agency had informed her that the 
     administration's shift was linked to campaign contributions. 
     ``We had always opposed giving Guam authority over its own 
     immigration,'' the official said. ``But when that $600,000 
     was paid, the political side switched.'' United States 
     officials from three other agencies added that they too had 
     been told that the policy shift was linked to money.
       (49) Various published reports discussed below indicate 
     that the President was intimately involved in the details of 
     fundraising for his reelection. As President, he ultimately 
     controls the Administration's policy. Thus, if these 
     assertions prove true, a reasonable mind could reach the 
     conclusion that the President knew about and condoned a 
     direct quid pro quo for these policy changes. If he did so, 
     such a quid pro quo would violate section 201 of title 18, 
     United States Code, and the other statutes.
       (50) At least three criminal statutes address the use of 
     the White House for political purposes. Section 600 of title 
     18, United States Code, prohibits the promising of any 
     government benefit in return for any kind of political 
     support or activity. Section 607 of title 18, United States 
     Code, prohibits the solicitation or receipt of contributions 
     for Federal campaigns in Federal buildings. Section 641 of 
     title 18, United States Code, prohibits the conversion of 
     government property to personal use.
       (51) During January 1995, President Clinton authorized a 
     plan under which the Democratic National Committee would hold 
     fund-raising coffees and sleepovers in the White House. 
     During 1995 and 1996, the White House held 103 of the 
     coffees. To quote the New York Times, ``[t]he documents 
     [released by the White House] themselves make explicit

[[Page H4632]]

     that the coffees were fund-raising vehicles....[they] also 
     make clear that the Democratic National Committee was 
     virtually being run out of the Clinton White House despite 
     the President's initial efforts after the election to draw a 
     distinction between his own campaign organization and the 
     committee.'' The Los Angeles Times said: ``The result [of the 
     coffees] was not only lucrative, according to some involved, 
     but occasionally bizarre--sometimes the political equivalent 
     of the bar scene in the film `Star Wars.' The president and 
     vice president were surrounded by rotating casts of rich 
     strangers with unknown motives or backgrounds, including some 
     from faraway places who didn't speak the same language.''
       (52) These reports indicate that Democratic Party 
     fundraising staff have said in interviews that they directly 
     sold access to the President and Vice President at the 
     coffees. The New York Times quoted a Democratic fund-raiser's 
     response to a White House denial that there was a requirement 
     for a coffee participant to make a contribution as: ``I don't 
     understand why they continue to deny the obvious.'' The Los 
     Angeles Times quoted a fund-raiser as saying: ``I can't count 
     the number of times I heard, `Tell them they can come to a 
     coffee with the President for $50,000.' It was routine. In 
     fact, when [staffers] said, `This is all I can raise,' they 
     were told, `Keep selling the coffees.' ''
       (53) In short, these reports make it obvious that the 
     coffees, which President Clinton directly authorized, were 
     nothing but fundraising events. According to the New York 
     Times, the Democratic National Committee raised $27,000,000 
     from 350 people who attended White House coffees.
       (54) President Clinton also entertained 938 overnight 
     guests in the White House during his first term. This, too, 
     became a means of fund-raising. When the original plan to 
     hold coffees was suggested to the President, he not only 
     approved it, but also originated the idea of the overnight 
     visits. On the memo suggesting the plan, he wrote, ``Ready to 
     start overnights right away ... get other names at 100,000 or 
     more, 50,000 or more.'' The New York Times reports that these 
     guests donated $10,210,840 to the Democratic Party from 1992 
     through 1996. The New York Times said about the President's 
     notation: ``The memorandum to Mr. Clinton and the response 
     from the President show Mr. Clinton's direct involvement in 
     authorizing the fund-raising practices that are now under 
     scrutiny by Congressional and Justice Department 
     investigators.''
       (55) At least one document the White House has recently 
     released strongly suggests that President Clinton made 
     telephone solicitations from the White House. The document, 
     written by Vice President Gore's deputy chief of staff, David 
     Strauss, contained the notation, ``BC made 15 to 20 calls, 
     raised 500K.'' Other documents indicate that presidential 
     adviser Harold Ickes also proposed that President Clinton 
     make fund-raising calls. President Clinton has said that he 
     cannot remember whether he made the calls. If President 
     Clinton made these calls from the White House, he may have 
     violated section 607 of title 18, United States Code.
       (56) The circumstances of the coffees, the sleepovers, and 
     the possible telephone calls strongly suggest that the 
     President may have violated the following provisions of title 
     18, United States Code: (1) Section 600 (by promising 
     government access in return for campaign contributions). (2) 
     Section 607 (by soliciting campaign contributions in Federal 
     buildings). (3) Section 641 (by converting Federal property, 
     the White House, to his own private use).
       (57) Under the independent counsel statute (28 U.S.C. 
     591(b)(1)), the Vice President is a covered person. Based on 
     published reports, the Attorney General has sufficient 
     grounds to investigate whether Vice President Gore may have 
     violated Federal criminal law.
       (58) On April 29, 1996, Vice President Gore attended a 
     fund-raiser at the Hsi Lai Buddhist Temple in Hacienda 
     Heights, California. This fund-raiser, organized by John 
     Huang, brought in $140,000 for the Democratic National 
     Committee. When the event first came to public attention, the 
     Vice President claimed that the event was intended as 
     ``community outreach'' and that ``[i]t was not billed as a 
     fund-raiser'' and ``no money was offered or collected or 
     raised''. The Vice President made this claim notwithstanding 
     reports that checks changed hands at the event and that 
     virtually everyone else involved thought the event was an 
     explicit fund-raiser.
       (59) In January 1997, the Vice President admitted that he 
     knew the event was ``a finance-related event.'' A month 
     later, documents released by the White House revealed that 
     the Vice President's staff had referred to the event as a 
     fund-raiser in making inquiries to the National Security 
     Council staff about the appropriateness of the event. The 
     National Security Council advised that he should proceed with 
     ``great, great caution'', but the Vice President proceeded to 
     go forward with the fund-raiser. This event is apparently now 
     under investigation by a Federal grand jury.
       (60) Hsi Lai Temple, if it is like most religious 
     organizations, is a tax-exempt organization under section 
     501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code. If that is so, it may 
     not ``participate in, or intervene in (including the 
     publishing or distributing of statements), any political 
     campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for 
     public office.'' (section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986). By holding such an obviously political event, 
     the Temple violated its tax exempt status, and Vice President 
     Gore actively and enthusiastically participated in that 
     violation. That action may violate section 371 of title 18, 
     United States Code, as a conspiracy to defraud the United 
     States by interfering with the functions of the Internal 
     Revenue Service, and section 7201 of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986, as an evasion of the income tax.
       (61) On March 2, 1997, the Washington Post reported 
     thatVice President Gore ``played the central role in 
     soliciting millions of dollars in campaign money for the 
     Democratic Party during the 1996 election'' and that he was 
     known as the administration's ``solicitor-in-chief''. The 
     next day, Vice President Gore held a nationally televised 
     press conference in which he admitted making numerous calls 
     from the White House in which he solicited campaign 
     contributions. He said that he made these phone calls with a 
     DNC credit card. His spokesman later clarified that the card 
     that he used belonged to the Clinton-Gore reelection campaign 
     (statement of Vice Presidential Communications Director 
     Lorraine Voles, dated March 5, 1997). The use of the Clinton-
     Gore credit card suggests that the solicitations were for 
     ``hard money'' which goes to campaigns rather than ``soft 
     money'' which goes to parties.
       (62) Documents that the White House has only recently 
     released reveal that Vice President Gore made 86 fundraising 
     calls from his White House Office. More disturbingly, these 
     new records reveal that Vice President Gore made twenty of 
     these calls at taxpayer expense. This use of taxpayer 
     resources for private political uses may violate section 641 
     of title 18, United States Code, (converting government 
     property to personal use).
       (63) On its face, the conduct to which Vice President Gore 
     admitted appears to be a clear violation of section 607 of 
     title 18, United States Code. Section 607 of such title makes 
     it unlawful for ``any person to solicit ... any [campaign] 
     contribution ... in any room or building occupied in the 
     discharge of official [government] duties....''.
       (64) Recent reports have completely undermined these two 
     claims with respect to the calls that Vice President Gore 
     made. The Washington Post on September 3, 1997, reported that 
     at least $120,000 of the money he solicited from his office 
     was ``hard money.''. As the story notes, ``The [hard] money 
     came from at least eight of 46 donors the vice president 
     telephoned from his White House office to ask for 
     contributions to the Democratic National Committee, according 
     to records released by Gore's office.'' The American people 
     should be are deeply troubled by the length of time it took 
     for these records, which have apparently been under Vice 
     President Gore's control, to come to public light. With 
     respect to the second claim, no person has made any claim 
     that Vice President Gore made these calls from any place 
     other than his office, an area clearly covered under section 
     607 of title 18, United States Code, as a ``room or building 
     occupied in the discharge of official [government] duties.''
       (65) The Washington Post also asserted that Vice President 
     Gore made the telephone solicitations ``with an urgency and 
     directness that several large Democratic donors said they 
     found heavy-handed and inappropriate.'' The story quoted two 
     donors as follows: ``Another donor recalled Gore phoning and 
     saying, `I've been tasked with raising $2,000,000 by the end 
     of the week, and you're on my list.' The donor, a well-known 
     business figure who declined to allow his name to be used, 
     gave about $100,000 to the DNC. The donor said he felt 
     pressured by the Vice President's sales pitch. `It's 
     revolting,' said the donor, a longtime Gore friend and 
     supporter. Yet another major business figure and donor who 
     was solicited by Gore, and who refused to be identified, 
     said, `There were elements of a shakedown in the call. It was 
     very awkward. For a Vice President, particularly this Vice 
     President who has real power and is the heir apparent, to ask 
     for money gave me no choice. I have so much business that 
     touches on the Federal Government--the Telecommunications 
     Act, tax policy, regulations galore.' The donor said he 
     immediately sent a check for $100,000 to the DNC.''.
       (66) Although the Vice President may legally solicit 
     campaign contributions, it is not legal to exert pressure 
     based on government actions. The bribery statute (section 
     201(b)(2) of title 18, United States Code) provides that a 
     public official may not ``directly or indirectly, corruptly 
     demand[], [or] seek[], ... anything of value personally or 
     for any other person or entity, in return for: (A) being 
     influenced in the performance of any official act; ...'' In 
     addition, section 872 of title 18, United States Code, 
     prohibits government officials from engaging in acts of 
     extortion. Through the use of untoward pressure, the Vice 
     President may have violated these statutes.
       (67) Sufficient specific and credible evidence exists to 
     warrant a preliminary investigation under the independent 
     counsel statute.
       (68) The fund-raising disclosures have blown up into the 
     biggest scandal in the United States since Watergate.
       (69) This situation is paralyzing the President, 
     preoccupying Congress and fueling public cynicism about our 
     political system.

[[Page H4633]]

       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     Attorney General Reno should apply immediately for the 
     appointment of an independent counsel to investigate alleged 
     criminal conduct relating to the financing of the 1996 
     Federal elections.

                               H.R. 2183

                         Offered By: Mr. DeLay

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 79: Add at the end the following new title:

 TITLE __--SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING FUNDRAISING ON FEDERAL PROPERTY

     SEC. __01. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING APPLICABILITY OF 
                   CONTROLLING LEGAL AUTHORITY TO FUNDRAISING ON 
                   FEDERAL PROPERTY.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) On March 2, 1997, the Washington Post reported that 
     Vice President Gore ``played the central role in soliciting 
     millions of dollars in campaign money for the Democratic 
     Party during the 1996 election'' and that he was known as the 
     administration's ``solicitor-in-chief''.
       (2) The next day, Vice President Gore held a nationally 
     televised press conference in which he admitted making 
     numerous calls from the White House in which he solicited 
     campaign contributions.
       (3) The Vice President said that there was ``no controlling 
     legal authority'' regarding the use of government telephones 
     and properties for the use of campaign fundraising.
       (4) Documents that the White House released reveal that 
     Vice President Gore made 86 fundraising calls from his White 
     House office, and these new records reveal that Vice 
     President Gore made 20 of these calls at taxpayer expense.
       (5) Section 641 of title 18, United States Code, 
     (prohibiting the conversion of government property to 
     personal use) clearly prohibits the use of government 
     property to raise campaign funds.
       (6) On its face, the conduct to which Vice President Gore 
     admitted appears to be a clear violation of section 607 of 
     title 18, United States Code, which makes it unlawful for 
     ``any person to solicit...any (campaign) contribution...in 
     any room or building occupied in the discharge of official 
     (government) duties''.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     Federal law clearly demonstrates that ``controlling legal 
     authority'' prohibits the use of Federal property to raise 
     campaign funds.

                               H.R. 2183

                         Offered By: Mr. DeLay

        (To the Amendments Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 80: Add at the end the following new title:

            TITLE __--REPEAL OF MEDIA EXPENDITURE EXEMPTION

     SEC. __01. REPEAL MEDIA EXEMPTION FROM TREATMENT AS 
                   EXPENDITURE UNDER FEDERAL ELECTION LAW.

       Section 301(9)(B) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 
     1971 (2 U.S.C. 431(9)(B)) is amended by striking clause (i).

                               H.R. 2183

                         Offered By: Mr. DeLay

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 81: Add at the end of section 301(20) of the 
     Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as added by section 
     201(b) of the substitute, the following:
       ``(C) Exception for legislative alerts.--The term `express 
     advocacy' does not include any communication which--
     ``(i) deals solely with an issue or legislation which is or 
     may be the subject of a vote in the Senate or House of 
     Representatives; and
     ``(ii) encourages an individual to contact an elected 
     representative in Congress in order to exercise the right 
     protected under the first amendment of the Constitution to 
     inform the representative of the individual's views on such 
     issue or legislation.''.

                               H.R. 2183

                         Offered By: Mr. DeLay

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 82: Strike section 301(20)(B) of the Federal 
     Election Campaign Act of 1971, as added by section 201(b) of 
     the substitute, and insert the following:
       ``(B) Nonapplication to publications on voting records.--
     The term `express advocacy' shall not apply with respect to 
     any communication which provides information or commentary on 
     the voting record of, or positions on issues taken by, any 
     individual holding Federal office or any candidate for 
     election for Federal office, unless the communication 
     contains explicit words expressly urging a vote for or 
     against any identified candidate or political party.''.

                               H.R. 2183

                         Offered By: Mr. DeLay

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 83. In section 301(8)(C) of the Federal 
     Election Campaign Act of 1971, as added by section 
     205(a)(1)(B) of the substitute, strike clause (vi) and 
     redesignate clauses (vii) through (x) as clauses (vi) through 
     (ix).

                               H.R. 2183

                         Offered By: Mr. DeLay

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 84: In section 301(8) of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971, as amended by section 205(a)(1)(B) of 
     the substitute, add at the end the following:
       ``(F) For purposes of subparagraph (C), no communication 
     with a Senator or Member of the House of Representatives 
     (including the staff of a Senator or Member) regarding any 
     pending legislative matter, including any survey, 
     questionnaire, or written communication soliciting or 
     providing information regarding the position of any Senator 
     or Member on such matter, may be construed to establish 
     coordination with a candidate.''.

                               H.R. 2183

                         Offered By: Mr. DeLay

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 85: In section 301(8)(A)(iii) of the Federal 
     Election Campaign Act of 1971, as added by section 
     205(a)(1)(A)(iii) of the substitute, strike ``for the purpose 
     of influencing'' and all that follows and insert the 
     following: ``if the value being provided is a communication 
     that is express advocacy.''.

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Doolittle

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 86: Add at the end the following new title:

 TITLE __--TERMINATION OF TAXPAYER FINANCING OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 
                               CAMPAIGNS

     SEC. __01. TERMINATION OF TAXPAYER FINANCING OF PRESIDENTIAL 
                   ELECTION CAMPAIGNS.

       (a) Termination of Designation of Income Tax Payments.--
     Section 6096 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended 
     by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(d) Termination.--This section shall not apply to taxable 
     years beginning after December 31, 1998.''
       (b) Termination of Fund and Account.--
       (1) Termination of presidential election campaign fund.--
       (A) In general.--Chapter 95 of subtitle H of such Code is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 9014. TERMINATION.

     ``The provisions of this chapter shall not apply with respect 
     to any presidential election (or any presidential nominating 
     convention) after December 31, 1998, or to any candidate in 
     such an election.''
       (B) Transfer of excess funds to general fund.--Section 9006 
     of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new subsection:
       ``(d) Transfer of Funds Remaining After 1998.--The 
     Secretary shall transfer all amounts in the fund after 
     December 31, 1998, to the general fund of the Treasury.''
       (2) Termination of account.--Chapter 96 of subtitle H of 
     such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``SEC. 9043. TERMINATION.

     ``The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to any 
     candidate with respect to any presidential election after 
     December 31, 1998.''
       (c) Clerical Amendments.--
       (1) The table of sections for chapter 95 of subtitle H of 
     such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     item:

``Sec. 9014. Termination.''

       (2) The table of sections for chapter 96 of subtitle H of 
     such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     item:

``Sec. 9043. Termination.''

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Doolittle

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 87: Add at the end of title V the following 
     new section (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 510. TERM LIMITS FOR STAFF DIRECTOR AND GENERAL COUNSEL 
                   OF FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION.

       (a) In General.--The first sentence of section 306(f)(1) of 
     the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 
     437c(f)(1)) is amended by striking ``by the Commission'' and 
     inserting the following: ``by an affirmative vote of not less 
     than 4 members of the Commission and may not serve for a term 
     of more than 4 consecutive years''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (b) 
     shall apply with respect to any individual serving as the 
     staff director or general counsel of the Federal Election 
     Commission on or after January 1, 1999, without regard to 
     whether or not the individual served as staff director or 
     general counsel prior to such date.

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Doolittle

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 88: Add at the end of title V the following 
     new section (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 510. PERMITTING COURTS TO REQUIRE FEDERAL ELECTION 
                   COMMISSION TO PAY ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS TO 
                   CERTAIN PREVAILING PARTIES.

       Section 309 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 437g) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new subsection:
       ``(e) In any action or proceeding brought by the Commission 
     against any person which is based on an alleged violation of 
     this Act or

[[Page H4634]]

     of chapter 95 or 96 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, the 
     court in its discretion may require the Commission to pay the 
     costs incurred by the person under the action or proceeding, 
     including a reasonable attorney's fee, if the court finds 
     that the law, rule, or regulation upon which the action or 
     proceeding is based is unconstitutional or that the bringing 
     of the action or proceeding against the person is 
     unconstitutional.''.

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Doolittle

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 89: Section 201 is amended by striking 
     subsection (c).

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Doolittle

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 90: Section 201(b) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       (b) Definition of Express Advocacy.--Section 301 of the 
     Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(20) Express advocacy.--The term `express advocacy' means 
     a communication containing express words of advocacy of 
     election or defeat of a candidate, such as `vote for', 
     `elect', `support', `cast your ballot for', `(name of 
     candidate) for Congress', `vote against', `defeat', or 
     `reject'.''.

                               H.R. 2183

                        Offered By: Mr. Fossella

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 91: Add at the end of title V the following 
     new section (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 510. PROHIBITING NON-CITIZEN INDIVIDUALS FROM MAKING 
                   CONTRIBUTIONS IN CONNECTION WITH FEDERAL 
                   ELECTIONS.

       (a) Prohibition Applicable to All Non-Citizens.--Section 
     319(b)(2) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 441e(b)(2)) is amended by striking ``and who is not 
     lawfully admitted'' and all that follows and inserting a 
     period.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply with respect to contributions or expenditures 
     made on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.

                               H.R. 2183

                        Offered By: Mr. Gillmor

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 92: Add at the end of title V the following 
     new section (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 510. PROTECTING EQUAL PARTICIPATION OF ELIGIBLE VOTERS 
                   IN CAMPAIGNS AND ELECTIONS.

       Title III of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 431 et. seq.), as amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:


 ``protecting equal participation of eligible voters in campaigns and 
                              elections''

       ``Sec. 326. Nothing in this Act may be construed to 
     prohibit any individual eligible to vote in an election for 
     Federal office from making contributions or expenditures in 
     support of a candidate for such an election (including 
     voluntary contributions or expenditures made through a 
     separate segregated fund established by the individual's 
     employer or labor organization) or otherwise participating in 
     any campaign for such an election in the same manner and to 
     the same extent as any other individual eligible to vote in 
     an election for such office.''

                               H.R. 2183

                   Offered By: Mr. Miller of Florida

        (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays and Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 93: Page 39, line 3, insert ``(a) In 
     General.--'' before ``Section''.
       Page 41, after line 6, insert the following:
       (b) Reporting and Disclosure.--
       (1) Requirements.--Section 201(b) of the Labor Management 
     and Disclosure Act of 1959 is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3), by striking ``$10,000'' and inserting 
     ``40,000'';
       (2) by redesignating paragraphs (5) and (6) as (7) and (8), 
     respectively; and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (4), the following:
       ``(5) a functional allocation that--
       ``(A) aggregates the amount spent for (i) officer payments, 
     (ii) employee payments, (iii) fees, fines, and assessments, 
     (iv) office and administrative expense and direct taxes, (v) 
     educational and publicity expenses, (vi) professional fees, 
     benefits, (vii) contributions, gifts and grants, and
       ``(B) specifies the total amount reported for each category 
     in subparagraph (A) and the portion of such total expended 
     for (i) contract negotiations, (ii) organizing, (iii) strike 
     activities, (iv) political activities, and (v) lobbying and 
     promotional activities,;''.
       (2) Effective Date.--The amendments made by paragraph (1) 
     shall take effect on December 31, 2000.

                               H.R. 2183

                   Offered By: Mr. Miller of Florida

        (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Schaffer of Colorado)

       Amendment No. 94: Page 39, line 3, insert ``(a) In 
     General.--'' before ``Section''.
       Page 41, after line 6, insert the following:
       (b) Reporting and Disclosure.--
       (1) Requirements.--Section 201(b) of the Labor Management 
     and Disclosure Act of 1959 is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3), by striking ``$10,000'' and inserting 
     ``40,000'';
       (2) by redesignating paragraphs (5) and (6) as (7) and (8), 
     respectively; and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (4), the following:
       ``(5) a functional allocation that--
       ``(A) aggregates the amount spent for (i) officer payments, 
     (ii) employee payments, (iii) fees, fines, and assessments, 
     (iv) office and administrative expense and direct taxes, (v) 
     educational and publicity expenses, (vi) professional fees, 
     benefits, (vii) contributions, gifts and grants, and
       ``(B) specifies the total amount reported for each category 
     in subparagraph (A) and the portion of such total expended 
     for (i) contract negotiations, (ii) organizing, (iii) strike 
     activities, (iv) political activities, and (v) lobbying and 
     promotional activities,;''.
       (2) Effective Date.--The amendments made by paragraph (1) 
     shall take effect on December 31, 2000.

                               H.R. 2183

                         Offered By: Mr. Paxon

        (To the Amendments Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 95: Add at the end the following new title:

                       TITLE   --UNION DISCLOSURE

     SEC.    01. UNION DISCLOSURE.

       (a) In General.--Section 201(b) of the Labor Management 
     Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (29 U.S.C. 431(b)) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (5); and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(7) an itemization of amounts spent by the labor 
     organization for--
       ``(A) contract negotiation and administration;
       ``(B) organizing activities;
       ``(C) strike activities;
       ``(D) political activities;
       ``(E) lobbying and promotional activities; and
       ``(F) market recovery and job targeting programs; and
       ``(8) all transactions involving a single source or payee 
     for each of the activities described in subparagraphs (A) 
     through (F) of paragraph (7) in which the aggregate cost 
     exceeds $10,000.''.
       (b) Computer Network Access.--Section 201(c) of the Labor 
     Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (29 U.S.C. 
     431(c)) is amended by inserting ``including availability of 
     such reports via a public Internet site or another publicly 
     accessible computer network,'' after ``its members,''.
       (c) Reporting by Secretary.--Section 205(a) of the Labor 
     Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (29 U.S.C. 
     435(a)) is amended by inserting after ``and the Secretary'' 
     the following: ``shall make the reports and documents filed 
     pursuant to section 201(b) available via a public Internet 
     site or another publicly accessible computer network. The 
     Secretary''.

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Pickering

        (To the Amendments Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 96: Add at the end the following new title:

        TITLE __--PROHIBITING FUNDRAISING ON RELIGIOUS PROPERTY

     SEC. __01. PROHIBITING FUNDRAISING EVENTS ON RELIGIOUS 
                   PROPERTY.

       Title III of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 431 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:


         ``prohibiting fundraising events on religious property

       ``Sec. 323. (a) In General.--It shall be unlawful for any 
     political committee to sponsor directly or indirectly any 
     event which is held on any religious property for the purpose 
     of raising amounts in support of any political party or the 
     campaign for electoral office of any candidate.
       ``(b) Religious Property Defined.--In subsection (a), the 
     term `religious property' means any church, synagogue, 
     mosque, religious cemetery, or other religious property.''.

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Whitfield

        (To the Amendments Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 97: Add at the end the following new title:

  TITLE __--BAN ON COORDINATED SOFT MONEY ACTIVITIES BY PRESIDENTIAL 
                               CANDIDATES

     SEC. __01. BAN ON COORDINATION OF SOFT MONEY FOR ISSUE 
                   ADVOCACY BY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES RECEIVING 
                   PUBLIC FINANCING.

       (a) In General.--Section 9003 of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 9003) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(f) Ban on Coordination of Soft Money for Issue 
     Advocacy.--
       ``(1) In general.--No candidate for election to the office 
     of President or Vice President who is certified to receive 
     amounts from the Presidential Election Campaign Fund under 
     this chapter or chapter 96 may coordinate the expenditure of 
     any funds for issue advocacy with any political party unless 
     the

[[Page H4635]]

     funds are subject to the limitations, prohibitions, and 
     reporting requirements of the Federal Election Campaign Act 
     of 1971.
       ``(2) Issue advocacy defined.--In this section, the term 
     `issue advocacy' means any activity carried out for the 
     purpose of influencing the consideration or outcome of any 
     Federal legislation or the issuance or outcome of any Federal 
     regulations, or educating individuals about candidates for 
     election for Federal office or any Federal legislation, law, 
     or regulations (without regard to whether the activity is 
     carried out for the purpose of influencing any election for 
     Federal office).''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall apply with respect to elections occurring on or after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act.

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Whitfield

        (To the Amendments Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 98: In section 323(a) of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971, as added by section 101 of the 
     substitute, insert after paragraph (1) the following new 
     paragraph (and redesignate paragraph (2) as paragraph (3)):
       ``(2) Exception for certain activities.--Paragraph (1) 
     shall not apply with respect to the use of funds for voter 
     identification, get-out-the-vote activity, or generic 
     campaign activity conducted in connection with an election in 
     which a candidate for Federal office appears on the ballot.''

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Whitfield

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 99: In section 323(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Federal 
     Election Campaign Act of 1971, as added by section 101 of the 
     substitute, strike ``120 days'' and insert ``7 days''.

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Whitfield

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 100: In section 323(b)(2) of the Federal 
     Election Campaign Act of 1971, as added by section 101 of the 
     substitute, strike subparagraph (A) and insert the following:
       ``(A) In general.--The term `Federal election activity' 
     means a communication that refers to a clearly identified 
     candidate for Federal office (regardless of whether a 
     candidate for State or local office is also mentioned or 
     identified) and is made for the purpose of influencing a 
     Federal election (regardless of whether the communication is 
     express advocacy).''

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Whitfield

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 101: In section 323(b)(2)(B)(i) of the 
     Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as added by section 
     101 of the substitute, strike ``, provided the campaign 
     activity is not a Federal election activity described in 
     subparagraph (A)''.

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Whitfield

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 102: In section 323(b)(2)(B)(iv) of the 
     Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as added by section 
     101 of the substitute, strike ``only a candidate for State or 
     local office'' and insert ``a candidate for Federal, State, 
     or local office''.

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Whitfield

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 103: In section 323(b)(2)(B) of the Federal 
     Election Campaign Act of 1971, as added by section 101 of the 
     substitute, strike clause (v) and insert the following:
       ``(v) the Federal share of a State, district, or local 
     party committee's administrative and overhead expenses; 
     and''.

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Whitfield

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 104: Strike title I (and conform the table of 
     contents accordingly).
       In section 307(a), strike ``section 103(c) and section 
     203'' and insert ``section 203''.
       In section 401, strike ``(as amended by section 101)''.
       Redesignate section 324 of the Federal Election Campaign 
     Act of 1971, as added by section 401, as section 323.
       In section 507, strike ``sections 101 and 401'' and insert 
     ``section 401''.
       Redesignate section 325 of the Federal Election Campaign 
     Act of 1971, as added by section 507, as section 324.

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Whitfield

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 105: In section 323 of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971, as added by section 101 of the 
     substitute, strike subsection (d) and redesignate subsection 
     (e) as subsection (d).

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Whitfield

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 106: In section 323 of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971, as added by section 101 of the 
     substitute, strike subsection (c) and redesignate subsections 
     (d) and (e) as subsections (c) and (d).

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Whitfield

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 107: Add at the end of title I the following 
     new section (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 104. INCREASE IN CONTRIBUTION LIMIT FOR CONTRIBUTIONS TO 
                   CANDIDATES BY PERSONS OTHER THAN PACS.

       Section 315(a)(1)(A) of the Federal Election Campaign Act 
     of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(1)(A)) is amended by striking 
     ``$1,000'' and inserting ``$3,000''.

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Whitfield

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 108: Amend section 102(b) to read as follows:
       (b) Increase in Aggregate Annual Contribution Limit for 
     Individuals.--Section 315(a)(3) of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(3)) is amended by 
     striking ``$25,000'' and inserting ``$50,000''. Add at the 
     end of title I the following new section (and conform the 
     table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 104. INCREASE IN CONTRIBUTION LIMIT FOR CONTRIBUTIONS TO 
                   CANDIDATES BY PERSONS OTHER THAN PACS.

       Section 315(a)(1)(A) of the Federal Election Campaign Act 
     of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(1)(A)) is amended by striking 
     ``$1,000'' and inserting ``$3,000''.

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Whitfield

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 109: Strike section 201(c).

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Whitfield

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 110. Strike section 303 (and redesignate the 
     succeeding provisions and conform the table of contents 
     accordingly).

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Whitfield

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 111: Strike section 304 (and redesignate the 
     succeeding provisions and conform the table of contents 
     accordingly).

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Whitfield

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 112: In section 3210(a)(6)(A) of title 39, 
     United States Code, as amended by section 503 of the 
     substitute, strike ``during the 180-day period'' and all that 
     follows and insert the following: ``during the 90-day period 
     which ends on the date of the general election for the office 
     held by the Member.''.

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Whitfield

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 113: Add at the end of title V the following 
     new section (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 510. REQUIRING FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION TO OBSERVE 
                   FIRST AMENDMENT LIMITS IN REGULATORY 
                   ACTIVITIES.

       Section 307 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 437d) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new subsection:
       ``(f)(1) When developing prescribed forms and making, 
     amending, or repealing rules pursuant to the authority 
     granted to the Commission by subsection (a)(8), the 
     Commission shall act in a manner that will have the least 
     restrictive effect on the rights of free speech and 
     association so protected by the First Article of Amendment to 
     the Constitution of the United States.
       ``(2) When the Commission's actions under paragraph (1) are 
     challenged, a reviewing court shall hold unlawful and set 
     aside any actions of the Commission that do not conform with 
     the principles set forth in paragraph (1).''.

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Whitfield

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 114: Insert after section 601 the following 
     new section (and redesignate the succeeding sections and 
     conform the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 602. APPLICATION OF STRICT SCRUTINY AS STANDARD FOR 
                   REVIEW.

       In any action brought to construe the constitutionality of 
     any provision of this Act or any amendment made by this Act, 
     the court may not find the provision or amendment to be 
     consistent with the Constitution of the United States unless 
     the court finds that the provision or amendment carries out a 
     compelling governmental interest in the least restrictive 
     manner possible.

[[Page H4636]]

                               H.R. 2183

                       Offered By: Mr. Whitfield

         (To the Amendment Offered By: Mr. Shays or Mr. Meehan)

       Amendment No. 115: Amend section 204 to read as follows 
     (and conform the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 204. REPEAL OF LIMITATIONS ON AMOUNT OF COORDINATED 
                   EXPENDITURES BY POLITICAL PARTIES IN 
                   CONGRESSIONAL ELECTIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 315(d) of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(d)) is amended by 
     striking paragraph (3).
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 315(d)(1) of such Act 
     (2 U.S.C. 441a(d)(1)) is amended by striking ``paragraphs (2) 
     and (3)'' and inserting ``paragraph (2)''.
       Strike section 402 (and conform the table of contents 
     accordingly).

                               H.R. 2183

                         Offered By: Mr. Wicker

               (To the Amendments Offered By: Mr. Shays)

       Amendment No. 116: Add at the end the following new title:

 TITLE __--PROHIBITING USE OF WHITE HOUSE MEALS AND ACCOMMODATIONS FOR 
                         POLITICAL FUNDRAISING

     SEC. __01. PROHIBITING USE OF WHITE HOUSE MEALS AND 
                   ACCOMMODATIONS FOR POLITICAL FUNDRAISING.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 29 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 612. Prohibiting use of meals and accommodations at 
       White House for political fundraising.

       ``(a) It shall be unlawful for any person to provide or 
     offer to provide any meals or accommodations at the White 
     House in exchange for any money or other thing of value, or 
     as a reward for the provision of any money or other thing of 
     value, in support of any political party or the campaign for 
     electoral office of any candidate.
       ``(b) Any person who violates this section shall be fined 
     under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or 
     both.
       ``(c) For purposes of this section, any official residence 
     or retreat of the President (including private residential 
     areas and the grounds of such a residence or retreat) shall 
     be treated as part of the White House.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 
     29 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at 
     the end the following new item:
``612. Prohibiting use of meals and accommodations at white house for 
              political fundraising.''.

                               H.R. 2183

                         Offered By: Mr. Wicker

               (To the Amendments Offered By: Mr. Shays)

       Amendment No. 117: Add at the end the following new title:

         TITLE __--PHOTO IDENTIFICATION REQUIREMENT FOR VOTERS

     SEC. __01. PERMITTING STATE TO REQUIRE VOTERS TO PRODUCE 
                   PHOTOGRAPHIC IDENTIFICATION.

       Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 
     (42 U.S.C. 1973gg-6) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (j) as subsection (k); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (i) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(i) Permitting States to Require Voters to Produce Photo 
     Identification.--A State may require an individual to produce 
     a valid photographic identification before receiving a ballot 
     for voting in an election for Federal office.''.