[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 4 (Tuesday, January 9, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S293-S294]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself, Mr. Cochran, Mr. McCain, Mr. 
        Durbin, Mr. Allard, Mr. Lugar, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. 
        Grassley, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. Levin, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Cornyn, 
        Mr. Graham, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Salazar, Mr. Obama, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. 
        Wyden, Mr. Rockefeller, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Reed, and Mrs. 
        Feinstein):
  S. 223. A bill to require Senate candidates to file designations, 
statements, and reports in electronic form; to the committee on Rules 
and Administration.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today I will once again introduce with 
the, Senator from Mississippi, Mr. Cochran, and the Senator from 
Arizona, Mr. McCain, a bill to bring Senate campaigns into the 21st 
century by requiring that Senate candidates file their campaign finance 
disclosure reports electronically and that those reports be promptly 
made available to the public. This step is long overdue, and I hope 
that the fact that we now have two dozen or so bipartisan cosponsors 
indicates that the Senate will act quickly on this legislation.
  A series of reports by the Campaign Finance Institute has highlighted 
the anomaly in the election laws that makes it nearly impossible for 
the public to get access to Senate campaign finance reports while most 
other reports are available on the Internet within 24 hours of their 
filing with the Federal Election Commission (FEC). The Campaign Finance 
Institute asks a rhetorical question: ``What makes the Senate so 
special that it exempts itself from a key requirement of campaign 
finance disclosure that applies to everyone else, including candidates 
for the House of Representatives and Political Action Committees?''
  The answer, of course, is nothing. The United States Senate is 
special in many ways. I am proud to serve here. But there is no excuse 
for keeping our campaign finance information inaccessible to the public 
when the information filed by House candidates or others is readily 
available. A recent Washington Post editorial called this delay 
``completely unjustified.'' I couldn't agree more, especially now, when 
the Senate is debating ethics reforms designed to increase transparency 
and accountability to the public. I ask unanimous consent that the text 
of this editorial be printed in the Record following the text of the 
bill.
  My bill amends the section of the election laws dealing with 
electronic filing to require reports filed with the Secretary of the 
Senate to be filed electronically and forwarded to the FEC within 24 
hours. The FEC is required to make available on the Internet within 24 
hours any filing it receives electronically. So if this bill is 
enacted, electronic versions of Senate reports should be available to 
the public within 48 hours of their filing. That will be a vast 
improvement over the current situation, which, according to the 
Campaign Finance Institute, requires journalists and interested members 
of the public to review computer images of paper-filed copies of 
reports, and involves a completely wasteful expenditure of hundreds of 
thousands of dollars to re-enter information into databases that almost 
every campaign has available in electronic format.
  The current filing system also means that the detailed coding that 
the FEC does, which allows for more sophisticated searches and 
analysis, is completed over a week later for Senate reports than for 
House reports. This means that the final disclosure reports covering 
the first two weeks of October are often not susceptible to detailed 
scrutiny before the election. According to the Campaign Finance 
Institute, in the 2006 election, ``[v]oters in six of the hottest 
Senate races were out of luck the week before the November 7 election 
if they did Web searches for information on general election 
contributions since June 30. In all ten of the most closely followed 
Senate races voters were unable to search through any candidate reports 
for information on `pre-general election (October 1-18)' donations.'' 
And a September 18, 2006, column by Jeffery H. Birnbaum in the 
Washington Post noted that ``When the polls opened in November 2004, 
voters were in the dark about $53 million in individual Senate 
contributions of $200 or more dating all the way back to July . . .''
  It is time for the Senate to at long last relinquish its backward 
attitude toward campaign finance disclosure. I am encouraged by the 
supportive statements from a number of my colleagues on both sides of 
the aisle, including the new Minority Leader and Minority Whip, and the 
new Chair of the Rules Committee. I urge the enactment of this simple 
bill that will make our reports subject to the same prompt, public 
scrutiny as those filed by PACs, House and Presidential candidates, and 
even 527 organizations. I close with another question from the Campaign 
Finance Institute: ``Isn't it time that the Senate join the 21st 
century and allow itself to vote on a simple legislative fix that could 
significantly improve our democracy?'' This Congress, let us answer 
that question in the affirmative.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 223

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Senate Campaign Disclosure 
     Parity Act''.

     SEC. 2. SENATE CANDIDATES REQUIRED TO FILE ELECTION REPORTS 
                   IN ELECTRONIC FORM.

       (a) In General.--Section 304(a)(11)(D) of the Federal 
     Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 434(a)(11)(D)) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(D) As used in this paragraph, the terms `designation', 
     `statement', or `report' mean a designation, statement or 
     report, respectively, which--
       ``(i) is required by this Act to be filed with the 
     Commission, or
       ``(ii) is required under section 302(g) to be filed with 
     the Secretary of the Senate and forwarded by the Secretary to 
     the Commission.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 302(g)(2) of such Act (2 U.S.C. 432(g)(2)) is 
     amended by inserting ``or 1 working day in the case of a 
     designation, statement, or report filed electronically'' 
     after ``2 working days''.
       (2) Section 304(a)(11)(B) of such Act (2 U.S.C. 
     434(a)(11)(B)) is amended by inserting ``or filed with the 
     Secretary of the Senate under section 302(g)(1) and forwarded 
     to the Commission'' after ``Act''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to any designation, statement, or report required 
     to be filed after the date of enactment of this Act.

[[Page S294]]

     
                                  ____
                [From The Washington Post, Dec. 6, 2006]

 Dark Ages Disclosure; It's Time for the Senate To Bring Its Campaign 
                   Filing System Into the Modern Era

       Three years ago we wrote an editorial using the headline 
     above. It decried the senseless and costly loophole under 
     which people running for the Senate--alone among federal 
     political candidates and committees--aren't required to file 
     campaign finance reports electronically. In an age when such 
     reports can be filed with the click of a mouse, Senate 
     candidates submit their disclosures on paper, with weeks of 
     delay before they are transferred to a form available and 
     searchable on the Internet. As a result, in the final stretch 
     of campaigns, anyone interested in learning who is 
     bankrolling Senate candidates or how they are spending the 
     cash has to go page by page through voluminous reports. This 
     delay is so obviously unjustified that we expected the legal 
     glitch to be quickly fixed.
       Naive us. Three years later, the situation remains 
     unaddressed. According to the Campaign Finance Institute, as 
     late as the week before Election Day, in all 10 of the most 
     closely followed Senate races, no detailed information was 
     available online about contributions between Oct. 1 and Oct. 
     18, the last filing period before the election. For six 
     candidates in those races--Democrats Ned Lamont (Conn.), 
     Claire McCaskill (Mo.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.), and 
     Republicans Mike DeWine (Ohio), Rick Santorum (Pa.) and 
     Thomas H. Kean Jr. (N.J.)--the only financial information 
     available was from before June 30.
       It would be easy to change the rule, and the Senate should 
     do so in the final days of the 109th Congress. More than 20 
     senators, of both parties, have signed on to S. 1508, the 
     Senate Campaign Disclosure Parity Act. If any senator opposes 
     requiring electronic filing, none is willing to say so. 
     Majority Whip Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who was rumored to be 
     opposed to the change, says he is for it. Senate Rules 
     Committee Chairman Trent Lott (R-Miss.), whose panel has 
     jurisdiction in this area, said three years ago that it was 
     ``part of honesty in elections, I think. Make it 
     accessible.'' Now what's needed is for Mr. Lott to get 
     committee members' approval to speed the matter to the Senate 
     floor.
       To put it bluntly: Republicans, why let the new Democratic 
     majority get credit for making this obvious fix? Do it now, 
     while you're still in charge.
                                 ______