[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 15]
[House]
[Pages 21489-21514]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



             BIPARTISAN CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM ACT OF 1999

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 283 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the State of the Union for the further consideration of the bill, 
H.R. 417.

                              {time}  1548


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of 
the bill (H.R. 417) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 
to reform the financing of campaigns for elections for Federal office, 
and for other purposes, with Mr. Hobson in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole House rose earlier 
today, time for general debate had expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as read for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule.
  The text of H.R. 417 is as follows:

                                H.R. 417

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Bipartisan 
     Campaign Finance Reform Act of 1999''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

            TITLE I--REDUCTION OF SPECIAL INTEREST INFLUENCE

Sec. 101. Soft money of political parties.
Sec. 102. Increased contribution limits for State committees of 
              political parties and aggregate contribution limit for 
              individuals.
Sec. 103. Reporting requirements.

           TITLE II--INDEPENDENT AND COORDINATED EXPENDITURES

Sec. 201. Definitions.
Sec. 202. Express advocacy determined without regard to background 
              music.
Sec. 203. Civil penalty.
Sec. 204. Reporting requirements for certain independent expenditures.
Sec. 205. Independent versus coordinated expenditures by party.
Sec. 206. Coordination with candidates.

                         TITLE III--DISCLOSURE

Sec. 301. Filing of reports using computers and facsimile machines.
Sec. 302. Prohibition of deposit of contributions with incomplete 
              contributor information.
Sec. 303. Audits.
Sec. 304. Reporting requirements for contributions of $50 or more.
Sec. 305. Use of candidates' names.
Sec. 306. Prohibition of false representation to solicit contributions.
Sec. 307. Soft money of persons other than political parties.
Sec. 308. Campaign advertising.

                    TITLE IV--PERSONAL WEALTH OPTION

Sec. 401. Voluntary personal funds expenditure limit.
Sec. 402. Political party committee coordinated expenditures.

                         TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS

Sec. 501. Codification of Beck decision.

[[Page 21490]]

Sec. 502. Use of contributed amounts for certain purposes.
Sec. 503. Limit on congressional use of the franking privilege.
Sec. 504. Prohibition of fundraising on Federal property.
Sec. 505. Penalties for violations.
Sec. 506. Strengthening foreign money ban.
Sec. 507. Prohibition of contributions by minors.
Sec. 508. Expedited procedures.
Sec. 509. Initiation of enforcement proceeding.
Sec. 510. Protecting equal participation of eligible voters in 
              campaigns and elections.
Sec. 511. Penalty for violation of prohibition against foreign 
              contributions.
Sec. 512. Expedited court review of certain alleged violations of 
              Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971.
Sec. 513. Conspiracy to violate presidential campaign spending limits.
Sec. 514. Deposit of certain contributions and donations in Treasury 
              account.
Sec. 515. Establishment of a clearinghouse of information on political 
              activities within the Federal Election Commission.
Sec. 516. Enforcement of spending limit on presidential and vice 
              presidential candidates who receive public financing.

      TITLE VI--INDEPENDENT COMMISSION ON CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM

Sec. 601. Establishment and purpose of Commission.
Sec. 602. Membership of Commission.
Sec. 603. Powers of Commission.
Sec. 604. Administrative provisions.
Sec. 605. Report and recommended legislation.
Sec. 606. Expedited congressional consideration of legislation.
Sec. 607. Termination.
Sec. 608. Authorization of appropriations.

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

Sec. 701. Prohibiting use of White House meals and accommodations for 
              political fundraising.

  TITLE VIII--SENSE OF THE CONGRESS REGARDING FUNDRAISING ON FEDERAL 
                          GOVERNMENT PROPERTY

Sec. 801. Sense of the Congress regarding applicability of controlling 
              legal authority to fundraising on Federal government 
              property.

TITLE IX--PROHIBITING SOLICITATION TO OBTAIN ACCESS TO CERTAIN FEDERAL 
                          GOVERNMENT PROPERTY

Sec. 901. Prohibition against acceptance or solicitation to obtain 
              access to certain Federal government property.

     TITLE X--REIMBURSEMENT FOR USE OF AIR FORCE ONE FOR POLITICAL 
                              FUNDRAISING

Sec. 1001. Requiring national parties to reimburse at cost for use of 
              Air Force One for political fundraising.

           TITLE XI--PROHIBITING USE OF WALKING AROUND MONEY

Sec. 1101. Prohibiting campaigns from providing currency to individuals 
              for purposes of encouraging turnout on date of election.

            TITLE XII--ENHANCING ENFORCEMENT OF CAMPAIGN LAW

Sec. 1201. Enhancing enforcement of campaign finance law.

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

Sec. 1301. Ban on coordination of soft money for issue advocacy by 
              presidential candidates receiving public financing.

    TITLE XIV--POSTING NAMES OF CERTAIN AIR FORCE ONE PASSENGERS ON 
                                INTERNET

Sec. 1401. Requirement that names of passengers on Air Force One and 
              Air Force Two be made available through the Internet.

  TITLE XV--EXPULSION PROCEEDINGS FOR HOUSE MEMBERS RECEIVING FOREIGN 
                             CONTRIBUTIONS

Sec. 1501. Permitting consideration of privileged motion to expel House 
              member accepting illegal foreign contribution.

TITLE XVI--SEVERABILITY; CONSTITUTIONALITY; EFFECTIVE DATE; REGULATIONS

Sec. 1601. Severability.
Sec. 1602. Review of constitutional issues.
Sec. 1603. Effective date.
Sec. 1604. Regulations.
            TITLE I--REDUCTION OF SPECIAL INTEREST INFLUENCE

     SEC. 101. SOFT MONEY OF POLITICAL PARTIES.

       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:


                   ``soft money of political parties

       ``Sec. 323. (a) National Committees.--
       ``(1) In general.--A national committee of a political 
     party (including a national congressional campaign committee 
     of a political party) and any officers or agents of such 
     party committees, shall not solicit, receive, or direct to 
     another person a contribution, donation, or transfer of 
     funds, or spend any funds, that are not subject to the 
     limitations, prohibitions, and reporting requirements of this 
     Act.
       ``(2) Applicability.--This subsection shall apply to an 
     entity that is directly or indirectly established, financed, 
     maintained, or controlled by a national committee of a 
     political party (including a national congressional campaign 
     committee of a political party), or an entity acting on 
     behalf of a national committee, and an officer or agent 
     acting on behalf of any such committee or entity.
       ``(b) State, District, and Local Committees.--
       ``(1) In general.--An amount that is expended or disbursed 
     by a State, district, or local committee of a political party 
     (including an entity that is directly or indirectly 
     established, financed, maintained, or controlled by a State, 
     district, or local committee of a political party and an 
     officer or agent acting on behalf of such committee or 
     entity) for Federal election activity shall be made from 
     funds subject to the limitations, prohibitions, and reporting 
     requirements of this Act.
       ``(2) Federal election activity.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `Federal election activity' 
     means--
       ``(i) voter registration activity during the period that 
     begins on the date that is 120 days before the date a 
     regularly scheduled Federal election is held and ends on the 
     date of the election;
       ``(ii) 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 (regardless of whether a candidate for State or 
     local office also appears on the ballot); and
       ``(iii) 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).
       ``(B) Excluded activity.--The term `Federal election 
     activity' does not include an amount expended or disbursed by 
     a State, district, or local committee of a political party 
     for--
       ``(i) campaign activity conducted solely on behalf of a 
     clearly identified candidate for State or local office, 
     provided the campaign activity is not a Federal election 
     activity described in subparagraph (A);
       ``(ii) a contribution to a candidate for State or local 
     office, provided the contribution is not designated or used 
     to pay for a Federal election activity described in 
     subparagraph (A);
       ``(iii) the costs of a State, district, or local political 
     convention;
       ``(iv) the costs of grassroots campaign materials, 
     including buttons, bumper stickers, and yard signs, that name 
     or depict only a candidate for State or local office;
       ``(v) the non-Federal share of a State, district, or local 
     party committee's administrative and overhead expenses (but 
     not including the compensation in any month of an individual 
     who spends more than 20 percent of the individual's time on 
     Federal election activity) as determined by a regulation 
     promulgated by the Commission to determine the non-Federal 
     share of a State, district, or local party committee's 
     administrative and overhead expenses; and
       ``(vi) the cost of constructing or purchasing an office 
     facility or equipment for a State, district or local 
     committee.
       ``(c) Fundraising Costs.--An amount spent by a national, 
     State, district, or local committee of a political party, by 
     an entity that is established, financed, maintained, or 
     controlled by a national, State, district, or local committee 
     of a political party, or by an agent or officer of any such 
     committee or entity, to raise funds that are used, in whole 
     or in part, to pay the costs of a Federal election activity 
     shall be made from funds subject to the limitations, 
     prohibitions, and reporting requirements of this Act.
       ``(d) Tax-Exempt Organizations.--A national, State, 
     district, or local committee of a political party (including 
     a national congressional campaign committee of a political 
     party), an entity that is directly or indirectly established, 
     financed, maintained, or controlled by any such national, 
     State, district, or local committee or its agent, and an 
     officer or agent acting on behalf of any such party committee 
     or entity, shall not solicit any funds for, or make or direct 
     any donations to, an organization that is described in 
     section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and 
     exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of such Code (or 
     has submitted an application to the Commissioner of the 
     Internal Revenue Service for determination of tax-exemption 
     under such section).
       ``(e) Candidates.--
       ``(1) In general.--A candidate, individual holding Federal 
     office, agent of a candidate or individual holding Federal 
     office, or an entity directly or indirectly established, 
     financed, maintained or controlled by or acting on behalf of 
     one or more candidates or

[[Page 21491]]

     individuals holding Federal office, shall not--
       ``(A) solicit, receive, direct, transfer, or spend funds in 
     connection with an election for Federal office, including 
     funds for any Federal election activity, unless the funds are 
     subject to the limitations, prohibitions, and reporting 
     requirements of this Act; or
       ``(B) solicit, receive, direct, transfer, or spend funds in 
     connection with any election other than an election for 
     Federal office or disburse funds in connection with such an 
     election unless the funds--
       ``(i) are not in excess of the amounts permitted with 
     respect to contributions to candidates and political 
     committees under paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 315(a); 
     and
       ``(ii) are not from sources prohibited by this Act from 
     making contributions with respect to an election for Federal 
     office.
       ``(2) State law.--Paragraph (1) does not apply to the 
     solicitation, receipt, or spending of funds by an individual 
     who is a candidate for a State or local office in connection 
     with such election for State or local office if the 
     solicitation, receipt, or spending of funds is permitted 
     under State law for any activity other than a Federal 
     election activity.
       ``(3) Fundraising events.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a 
     candidate may attend, speak, or be a featured guest at a 
     fundraising event for a State, district, or local committee 
     of a political party.''.

     SEC. 102. INCREASED CONTRIBUTION LIMITS FOR STATE COMMITTEES 
                   OF POLITICAL PARTIES AND AGGREGATE CONTRIBUTION 
                   LIMIT FOR INDIVIDUALS.

       (a) Contribution Limit for State Committees of Political 
     Parties.--Section 315(a)(1) of the Federal Election Campaign 
     Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(1)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``or'' at the end;
       (2) in subparagraph (C)--
       (A) by inserting ``(other than a committee described in 
     subparagraph (D))'' after ``committee''; and
       (B) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``; 
     or''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) to a political committee established and maintained 
     by a State committee of a political party in any calendar 
     year that, in the aggregate, exceed $10,000''.
       (b) Aggregate Contribution Limit for Individual.--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 ``$30,000''.

     SEC. 103. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) Reporting Requirements.--Section 304 of the Federal 
     Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 434) (as amended by 
     section 204) is amended by inserting after subsection (d) the 
     following:
       ``(e) Political Committees.--
       ``(1) National and congressional political committees.--The 
     national committee of a political party, any national 
     congressional campaign committee of a political party, and 
     any subordinate committee of either, shall report all 
     receipts and disbursements during the reporting period.
       ``(2) Other political committees to which section 323 
     applies.--In addition to any other reporting requirements 
     applicable under this Act, a political committee (not 
     described in paragraph (1)) to which section 323(b)(1) 
     applies shall report all receipts and disbursements made for 
     activities described in paragraphs (2)(A) and (2)(B)(v) of 
     section 323(b).
       ``(3) Itemization.--If a political committee has receipts 
     or disbursements to which this subsection applies from any 
     person aggregating in excess of $200 for any calendar year, 
     the political committee shall separately itemize its 
     reporting for such person in the same manner as required in 
     paragraphs (3)(A), (5), and (6) of subsection (b).
       ``(4) Reporting periods.--Reports required to be filed 
     under this subsection shall be filed for the same time 
     periods required for political committees under subsection 
     (a).''.
       (b) Building Fund Exception to the Definition of 
     Contribution.--Section 301(8)(B) of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431(8)(B)) is amended--
       (1) by striking clause (viii); and
       (2) by redesignating clauses (ix) through (xiv) as clauses 
     (viii) through (xiii), respectively.
           TITLE II--INDEPENDENT AND COORDINATED EXPENDITURES

     SEC. 201. DEFINITIONS.

       (a) Definition of Independent Expenditure.--Section 301 of 
     the Federal Election Campaign Act (2 U.S.C. 431) is amended 
     by striking paragraph (17) and inserting the following:
       ``(17) Independent expenditure.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `independent expenditure' means 
     an expenditure by a person--
       ``(i) for a communication that is express advocacy; and
       ``(ii) that is not coordinated activity or is not provided 
     in coordination with a candidate or a candidate's agent or a 
     person who is coordinating with a candidate or a candidate's 
     agent.''.
       (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.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `express advocacy' means a 
     communication that advocates the election or defeat of a 
     candidate by--
       ``(i) containing a phrase such as `vote for', `re-elect', 
     `support', `cast your ballot for', `(name of candidate) for 
     Congress', `(name of candidate) in 1997', `vote against', 
     `defeat', `reject', or a campaign slogan or words that in 
     context can have no reasonable meaning other than to advocate 
     the election or defeat of one or more clearly identified 
     candidates;
       ``(ii) referring to one or more clearly identified 
     candidates in a paid advertisement that is transmitted 
     through radio or television within 60 calendar days preceding 
     the date of an election of the candidate and that appears in 
     the State in which the election is occurring, except that 
     with respect to a candidate for the office of Vice President 
     or President, the time period is within 60 calendar days 
     preceding the date of a general election; or
       ``(iii) expressing unmistakable and unambiguous support for 
     or opposition to one or more clearly identified candidates 
     when taken as a whole and with limited reference to external 
     events, such as proximity to an election.
       ``(B) Voting record and voting guide exception.--The term 
     `express advocacy' does not include a communication which is 
     in printed form or posted on the Internet that--
       ``(i) presents information solely about the voting record 
     or position on a campaign issue of one or more candidates 
     (including any statement by the sponsor of the voting record 
     or voting guide of its agreement or disagreement with the 
     record or position of a candidate), so long as the voting 
     record or voting guide when taken as a whole does not express 
     unmistakable and unambiguous support for or opposition to one 
     or more clearly identified candidates;
       ``(ii) is not coordinated activity or is not made in 
     coordination with a candidate, political party, or agent of 
     the candidate or party, or a candidate's agent or a person 
     who is coordinating with a candidate or a candidate's agent, 
     except that nothing in this clause may be construed to 
     prevent the sponsor of the voting guide from directing 
     questions in writing to a candidate about the candidate's 
     position on issues for purposes of preparing a voter guide or 
     to prevent the candidate from responding in writing to such 
     questions; and
       ``(iii) does not contain a phrase such as `vote for', `re-
     elect', `support', `cast your ballot for', `(name of 
     candidate) for Congress', `(name of candidate) in (year)', 
     `vote against', `defeat', or `reject', or a campaign slogan 
     or words that in context can have no reasonable meaning other 
     than to urge the election or defeat of one or more clearly 
     identified candidates.''.
       (c) Definition of Expenditure.--Section 301(9)(A) of the 
     Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431(9)(A)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in clause (i), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in clause (ii), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(iii) a payment made by a political committee for a 
     communication that--
       ``(I) refers to a clearly identified candidate; and
       ``(II) is for the purpose of influencing a Federal election 
     (regardless of whether the communication is express 
     advocacy).''.

     SEC. 202. EXPRESS ADVOCACY DETERMINED WITHOUT REGARD TO 
                   BACKGROUND MUSIC.

       Section 301(20) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 
     1971 (2 U.S.C. 431(20)), as added by section 201(b), is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(C) Background music.--In determining whether any 
     communication by television or radio broadcast constitutes 
     express advocacy for purposes of this Act, there shall not be 
     taken into account any background music not including lyrics 
     used in such broadcast.''.

     SEC. 203. CIVIL PENALTY.

       Section 309 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 437g) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in paragraph (4)(A)--
       (i) in clause (i), by striking ``clause (ii)'' and 
     inserting ``clauses (ii) and (iii)''; and
       (ii) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(iii) If the Commission determines by an affirmative vote 
     of 4 of its members that there is probable cause to believe 
     that a person has made a knowing and willful violation of 
     section 304(c), the Commission shall not enter into a 
     conciliation agreement under this paragraph and may institute 
     a civil action for relief under paragraph (6)(A).''; and
       (B) in paragraph (6)(B), by inserting ``(except an action 
     instituted in connection with a knowing and willful violation 
     of section 304(c))'' after ``subparagraph (A)''; and
       (2) in subsection (d)(1)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``Any person'' and 
     inserting ``Except as provided in subparagraph (D), any 
     person''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) In the case of a knowing and willful violation of 
     section 304(c) that involves the reporting of an independent 
     expenditure, the violation shall not be subject to this 
     subsection.''.

[[Page 21492]]



     SEC. 204. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN INDEPENDENT 
                   EXPENDITURES.

       Section 304 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 434) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (c)(2), by striking the undesignated 
     matter after subparagraph (C);
       (2) by redesignating paragraph (3) of subsection (c) as 
     subsection (f); and
       (3) by inserting after subsection (c)(2) (as amended by 
     paragraph (1)) the following:
       ``(d) Time for Reporting Certain Expenditures.--
       ``(1) Expenditures aggregating $1,000.--
       ``(A) Initial report.--A person (including a political 
     committee) that makes or contracts to make independent 
     expenditures aggregating $1,000 or more after the 20th day, 
     but more than 24 hours, before the date of an election shall 
     file a report describing the expenditures within 24 hours 
     after that amount of independent expenditures has been made.
       ``(B) Additional reports.--After a person files a report 
     under subparagraph (A), the person shall file an additional 
     report within 24 hours after each time the person makes or 
     contracts to make independent expenditures aggregating an 
     additional $1,000 with respect to the same election as that 
     to which the initial report relates.
       ``(2) Expenditures aggregating $10,000.--
       ``(A) Initial report.--A person (including a political 
     committee) that makes or contracts to make independent 
     expenditures aggregating $10,000 or more at any time up to 
     and including the 20th day before the date of an election 
     shall file a report describing the expenditures within 48 
     hours after that amount of independent expenditures has been 
     made.
       ``(B) Additional reports.--After a person files a report 
     under subparagraph (A), the person shall file an additional 
     report within 48 hours after each time the person makes or 
     contracts to make independent expenditures aggregating an 
     additional $10,000 with respect to the same election as that 
     to which the initial report relates.
       ``(3) Place of filing; contents.--A report under this 
     subsection--
       ``(A) shall be filed with the Commission; and
       ``(B) shall contain the information required by subsection 
     (b)(6)(B)(iii), including the name of each candidate whom an 
     expenditure is intended to support or oppose.''.

     SEC. 205. INDEPENDENT VERSUS COORDINATED EXPENDITURES BY 
                   PARTY.

       Section 315(d) of the Federal Election Campaign Act (2 
     U.S.C. 441a(d)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``and (3)'' and inserting 
     ``, (3), and (4)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) Independent Versus Coordinated Expenditures by 
     Party.--
       ``(A) In general.--On or after the date on which a 
     political party nominates a candidate, a committee of the 
     political party shall not make both expenditures under this 
     subsection and independent expenditures (as defined in 
     section 301(17)) with respect to the candidate during the 
     election cycle.
       ``(B) Certification.--Before making a coordinated 
     expenditure under this subsection with respect to a 
     candidate, a committee of a political party shall file with 
     the Commission a certification, signed by the treasurer of 
     the committee, that the committee has not and shall not make 
     any independent expenditure with respect to the candidate 
     during the same election cycle.
       ``(C) Application.--For the purposes of this paragraph, all 
     political committees established and maintained by a national 
     political party (including all congressional campaign 
     committees) and all political committees established and 
     maintained by a State political party (including any 
     subordinate committee of a State committee) shall be 
     considered to be a single political committee.
       ``(D) Transfers.--A committee of a political party that 
     submits a certification under subparagraph (B) with respect 
     to a candidate shall not, during an election cycle, transfer 
     any funds to, assign authority to make coordinated 
     expenditures under this subsection to, or receive a transfer 
     of funds from, a committee of the political party that has 
     made or intends to make an independent expenditure with 
     respect to the candidate.''.

     SEC. 206. COORDINATION WITH CANDIDATES.

       (a) Definition of Coordination With Candidates.--
       (1) Section 301(8).--Section 301(8) of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431(8)) is amended--
       (A) in subparagraph (A)--
       (i) by striking ``or'' at the end of clause (i);
       (ii) by striking the period at the end of clause (ii) and 
     inserting ``; or''; and
       (iii) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(iii) coordinated activity (as defined in subparagraph 
     (C)).''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) `Coordinated activity' means anything of value 
     provided by a person in coordination with a candidate, an 
     agent of the candidate, or the political party of the 
     candidate or its agent for the purpose of influencing a 
     Federal election (regardless of whether the value being 
     provided is a communication that is express advocacy) in 
     which such candidate seeks nomination or election to Federal 
     office, and includes any of the following:
       ``(i) A payment made by a person in cooperation, 
     consultation, or concert with, at the request or suggestion 
     of, or pursuant to any general or particular understanding 
     with a candidate, the candidate's authorized committee, the 
     political party of the candidate, or an agent acting on 
     behalf of a candidate, authorized committee, or the political 
     party of the candidate.
       ``(ii) A payment made by a person for the production, 
     dissemination, distribution, or republication, in whole or in 
     part, of any broadcast or any written, graphic, or other form 
     of campaign material prepared by a candidate, a candidate's 
     authorized committee, or an agent of a candidate or 
     authorized committee (not including a communication described 
     in paragraph (9)(B)(i) or a communication that expressly 
     advocates the candidate's defeat).
       ``(iii) A payment made by a person based on information 
     about a candidate's plans, projects, or needs provided to the 
     person making the payment by the candidate or the candidate's 
     agent who provides the information with the intent that the 
     payment be made.
       ``(iv) A payment made by a person if, in the same election 
     cycle in which the payment is made, the person making the 
     payment is serving or has served as a member, employee, 
     fundraiser, or agent of the candidate's authorized committee 
     in an executive or policymaking position.
       ``(v) A payment made by a person if the person making the 
     payment has served in any formal policy making or advisory 
     position with the candidate's campaign or has participated in 
     formal strategic or formal policymaking discussions (other 
     than any discussion treated as a lobbying contact under the 
     Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 in the case of a candidate 
     holding Federal office or as a similar lobbying activity in 
     the case of a candidate holding State or other elective 
     office) with the candidate's campaign relating to the 
     candidate's pursuit of nomination for election, or election, 
     to Federal office, in the same election cycle as the election 
     cycle in which the payment is made.
       ``(vi) A payment made by a person if, in the same election 
     cycle, the person making the payment retains the professional 
     services of any person that has provided or is providing 
     campaign-related services in the same election cycle to a 
     candidate (including services provided through a political 
     committee of the candidate's political party) in connection 
     with the candidate's pursuit of nomination for election, or 
     election, to Federal office, including services relating to 
     the candidate's decision to seek Federal office, and the 
     person retained is retained to work on activities relating to 
     that candidate's campaign.
       ``(vii) A payment made by a person who has directly 
     participated in fundraising activities with the candidate or 
     in the solicitation or receipt of contributions on behalf of 
     the candidate.
       ``(viii) A payment made by a person who has communicated 
     with the candidate or an agent of the candidate (including a 
     communication through a political committee of the 
     candidate's political party) after the declaration of 
     candidacy (including a pollster, media consultant, vendor, 
     advisor, or staff member acting on behalf of the candidate), 
     about advertising message, allocation of resources, 
     fundraising, or other campaign matters related to the 
     candidate's campaign, including campaign operations, 
     staffing, tactics, or strategy.
       ``(ix) The provision of in-kind professional services or 
     polling data (including services or data provided through a 
     political committee of the candidate's political party) to 
     the candidate or candidate's agent.
       ``(x) A payment made by a person who has engaged in a 
     coordinated activity with a candidate described in clauses 
     (i) through (ix) for a communication that clearly refers to 
     the candidate or the candidate's opponent and is for the 
     purpose of influencing that candidates's election (regardless 
     of whether the communication is express advocacy).
       ``(D) For purposes of subparagraph (C), the term 
     `professional services' means polling, media advice, 
     fundraising, campaign research or direct mail (except for 
     mailhouse services solely for the distribution of voter 
     guides as defined in section 431(20)(B)) services in support 
     of a candidate's pursuit of nomination for election, or 
     election, to Federal office.
       ``(E) For purposes of subparagraph (C), all political 
     committees established and maintained by a national political 
     party (including all congressional campaign committees) and 
     all political committees established and maintained by a 
     State political party (including any subordinate committee of 
     a State committee) shall be considered to be a single 
     political committee.''.
       (2) Section 315(a)(7).--Section 315(a)(7) (2 U.S.C. 
     441a(a)(7)) is amended by striking subparagraph (B) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(B) a coordinated activity, as described in section 
     301(8)(C), shall be considered to be a contribution to the 
     candidate, and in the case of a limitation on expenditures, 
     shall be treated as an expenditure by the candidate.
       (b) Meaning of Contribution or Expenditure for the Purposes 
     of Section 316.--Section 316(b)(2) of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441b(b)) is

[[Page 21493]]

     amended by striking ``shall include'' and inserting 
     ``includes a contribution or expenditure, as those terms are 
     defined in section 301, and also includes''.
                         TITLE III--DISCLOSURE

     SEC. 301. FILING OF REPORTS USING COMPUTERS AND FACSIMILE 
                   MACHINES.

       Section 304(a) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 
     (2 U.S.C. 434(a)) is amended by striking paragraph (11) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(11)(A) The Commission shall promulgate a regulation 
     under which a person required to file a designation, 
     statement, or report under this Act--
       ``(i) is required to maintain and file a designation, 
     statement, or report for any calendar year in electronic form 
     accessible by computers if the person has, or has reason to 
     expect to have, aggregate contributions or expenditures in 
     excess of a threshold amount determined by the Commission; 
     and
       ``(ii) may maintain and file a designation, statement, or 
     report in electronic form or an alternative form, including 
     the use of a facsimile machine, if not required to do so 
     under the regulation promulgated under clause (i).
       ``(B) The Commission shall make a designation, statement, 
     report, or notification that is filed electronically with the 
     Commission accessible to the public on the Internet not later 
     than 24 hours after the designation, statement, report, or 
     notification is received by the Commission.
       ``(C) In promulgating a regulation under this paragraph, 
     the Commission shall provide methods (other than requiring a 
     signature on the document being filed) for verifying 
     designations, statements, and reports covered by the 
     regulation. Any document verified under any of the methods 
     shall be treated for all purposes (including penalties for 
     perjury) in the same manner as a document verified by 
     signature.''.

     SEC. 302. PROHIBITION OF DEPOSIT OF CONTRIBUTIONS WITH 
                   INCOMPLETE CONTRIBUTOR INFORMATION.

       Section 302 of Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 432) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(j) Deposit of Contributions.--The treasurer of a 
     candidate's authorized committee shall not deposit, except in 
     an escrow account, or otherwise negotiate a contribution from 
     a person who makes an aggregate amount of contributions in 
     excess of $200 during a calendar year unless the treasurer 
     verifies that the information required by this section with 
     respect to the contributor is complete.''.

     SEC. 303. AUDITS.

       (a) Random Audits.--Section 311(b) of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 438(b)) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(1) In general.--'' before ``The 
     Commission'';
       (2) by moving the text 2 ems to the right; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Random audits.--
       ``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the 
     Commission may conduct random audits and investigations to 
     ensure voluntary compliance with this Act. The selection of 
     any candidate for a random audit or investigation shall be 
     based on criteria adopted by a vote of at least four members 
     of the Commission.
       ``(B) Limitation.--The Commission shall not conduct an 
     audit or investigation of a candidate's authorized committee 
     under subparagraph (A) until the candidate is no longer a 
     candidate for the office sought by the candidate in an 
     election cycle.
       ``(C) Applicability.--This paragraph does not apply to an 
     authorized committee of a candidate for President or Vice 
     President subject to audit under section 9007 or 9038 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986.''.
       (b) Extension of Period During Which Campaign Audits May Be 
     Begun.--Section 311(b) of the Federal Election Campaign Act 
     of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 438(b)) is amended by striking ``6 months'' 
     and inserting ``12 months''.

     SEC. 304. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTRIBUTIONS OF $50 OR 
                   MORE.

       Section 304(b)(3)(A) of the Federal Election Campaign Act 
     at 1971 (2 U.S.C. 434(b)(3)(A) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``$200'' and inserting ``$50''; and
       (2) by striking the semicolon and inserting ``, except that 
     in the case of a person who makes contributions aggregating 
     at least $50 but not more than $200 during the calendar year, 
     the identification need include only the name and address of 
     the person;''.

     SEC. 305. USE OF CANDIDATES' NAMES.

       Section 302(e) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 
     (2 U.S.C. 432(e)) is amended by striking paragraph (4) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(4)(A) The name of each authorized committee shall 
     include the name of the candidate who authorized the 
     committee under paragraph (1).
       ``(B) A political committee that is not an authorized 
     committee shall not--
       ``(i) include the name of any candidate in its name; or
       ``(ii) except in the case of a national, State, or local 
     party committee, use the name of any candidate in any 
     activity on behalf of the committee in such a context as to 
     suggest that the committee is an authorized committee of the 
     candidate or that the use of the candidate's name has been 
     authorized by the candidate.''.

     SEC. 306. PROHIBITION OF FALSE REPRESENTATION TO SOLICIT 
                   CONTRIBUTIONS.

       Section 322 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 441h) is amended--
       (1) by inserting after ``Sec. 322.'' the following: ``(a) 
     In General.--''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(b) Solicitation of Contributions.--No person shall 
     solicit contributions by falsely representing himself or 
     herself as a candidate or as a representative of a candidate, 
     a political committee, or a political party.''.

     SEC. 307. SOFT MONEY OF PERSONS OTHER THAN POLITICAL PARTIES.

       (a) In General.--Section 304 of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 434) (as amended by section 
     103(c) and section 204) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(g) Disbursements of Persons Other Than Political 
     Parties.--
       ``(1) In general.--A person, other than a political 
     committee of a political party or a person described in 
     section 501(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, that 
     makes an aggregate amount of disbursements in excess of 
     $50,000 during a calendar year for activities described in 
     paragraph (2) shall file a statement with the Commission--
       ``(A) on a monthly basis as described in subsection 
     (a)(4)(B); or
       ``(B) in the case of disbursements that are made within 20 
     days of an election, within 24 hours after the disbursements 
     are made.
       ``(2) Activity.--The activity described in this paragraph 
     is--
       ``(A) Federal election activity;
       ``(B) an activity described in section 316(b)(2)(A) that 
     expresses support for or opposition to a candidate for 
     Federal office or a political party; and
       ``(C) an activity described in subparagraph (B) or (C) of 
     section 316(b)(2).
       ``(3) Applicability.--This subsection does not apply to--
       ``(A) a candidate or a candidate's authorized committees; 
     or
       ``(B) an independent expenditure.
       ``(4) Contents.--A statement under this section shall 
     contain such information about the disbursements made during 
     the reporting period as the Commission shall prescribe, 
     including--
       ``(A) the aggregate amount of disbursements made;
       ``(B) the name and address of the person or entity to whom 
     a disbursement is made in an aggregate amount in excess of 
     $200;
       ``(C) the date made, amount, and purpose of the 
     disbursement; and
       ``(D) if applicable, whether the disbursement was in 
     support of, or in opposition to, a candidate or a political 
     party, and the name of the candidate or the political 
     party.''.
       (b) Definition of Generic Campaign Activity.--Section 301 
     of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431 et 
     seq.) (as amended by section 201(b)) is further amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(21) Generic campaign activity.--The term `generic 
     campaign activity' means an activity that promotes a 
     political party and does not promote a candidate or non-
     Federal candidate.''.

     SEC. 308. CAMPAIGN ADVERTISING.

       Section 318 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 441d) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1)--
       (i) by striking ``Whenever'' and inserting ``Whenever a 
     political committee makes a disbursement for the purpose of 
     financing any communication through any broadcasting station, 
     newspaper, magazine, outdoor advertising facility, mailing, 
     or any other type of general public political advertising, or 
     whenever'';
       (ii) by striking ``an expenditure'' and inserting ``a 
     disbursement''; and
       (iii) by striking ``direct''; and
       (B) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``and permanent street 
     address'' after ``name''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Any printed communication described in subsection (a) 
     shall--
       ``(1) be of sufficient type size to be clearly readable by 
     the recipient of the communication;
       ``(2) be contained in a printed box set apart from the 
     other contents of the communication; and
       ``(3) be printed with a reasonable degree of color contrast 
     between the background and the printed statement.
       ``(d)(1) Any communication described in paragraphs (1) or 
     (2) of subsection (a) which is transmitted through radio or 
     television shall include, in addition to the requirements of 
     that paragraph, an audio statement by the candidate that 
     identifies the candidate and states that the candidate has 
     approved the communication.
       ``(2) If a communication described in paragraph (1) is 
     transmitted through television, the communication shall 
     include, in addition to the audio statement under paragraph 
     (1), a written statement that--
       ``(A) appears at the end of the communication in a clearly 
     readable manner with a reasonable degree of color contrast 
     between the background and the printed statement, for a 
     period of at least 4 seconds; and
       ``(B) is accompanied by a clearly identifiable photographic 
     or similar image of the candidate.

[[Page 21494]]

       ``(e) Any communication described in paragraph (3) of 
     subsection (a) which is transmitted through radio or 
     television shall include, in addition to the requirements of 
     that paragraph, in a clearly spoken manner, the following 
     statement: `________ is responsible for the content of this 
     advertisement.' (with the blank to be filled in with the name 
     of the political committee or other person paying for the 
     communication and the name of any connected organization of 
     the payor). If transmitted through television, the statement 
     shall also appear in a clearly readable manner with a 
     reasonable degree of color contrast between the background 
     and the printed statement, for a period of at least 4 
     seconds.''.
                    TITLE IV--PERSONAL WEALTH OPTION

     SEC. 401. VOLUNTARY PERSONAL FUNDS EXPENDITURE LIMIT.

       Title III of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 431 et seq.), as amended by section 101, is further 
     amended by adding at the end the following new section:


              ``voluntary personal funds expenditure limit

       ``Sec. 324. (a) Eligible Congressional Candidate.--
       ``(1) Primary election.--
       ``(A) Declaration.--A candidate for election for Senator or 
     Representative in or Delegate or Resident Commissioner to the 
     Congress is an eligible primary election Congressional 
     candidate if the candidate files with the Commission a 
     declaration that the candidate and the candidate's authorized 
     committees will not make expenditures in excess of the 
     personal funds expenditure limit.
       ``(B) Time to file.--The declaration under subparagraph (A) 
     shall be filed not later than the date on which the candidate 
     files with the appropriate State officer as a candidate for 
     the primary election.
       ``(2) General election.--
       ``(A) Declaration.--A candidate for election for Senator or 
     Representative in or Delegate or Resident Commissioner to the 
     Congress is an eligible general election Congressional 
     candidate if the candidate files with the Commission--
       ``(i) a declaration under penalty of perjury, with 
     supporting documentation as required by the Commission, that 
     the candidate and the candidate's authorized committees did 
     not exceed the personal funds expenditure limit in connection 
     with the primary election; and
       ``(ii) a declaration that the candidate and the candidate's 
     authorized committees will not make expenditures in excess of 
     the personal funds expenditure limit.
       ``(B) Time to file.--The declaration under subparagraph (A) 
     shall be filed not later than 7 days after the earlier of--
       ``(i) the date on which the candidate qualifies for the 
     general election ballot under State law; or
       ``(ii) if under State law, a primary or run-off election to 
     qualify for the general election ballot occurs after 
     September 1, the date on which the candidate wins the primary 
     or runoff election.
       ``(b) Personal Funds Expenditure Limit.--
       ``(1) In general.--The aggregate amount of expenditures 
     that may be made in connection with an election by an 
     eligible Congressional candidate or the candidate's 
     authorized committees from the sources described in paragraph 
     (2) shall not exceed $50,000.
       ``(2) Sources.--A source is described in this paragraph if 
     the source is--
       ``(A) personal funds of the candidate and members of the 
     candidate's immediate family; or
       ``(B) proceeds of indebtedness incurred by the candidate or 
     a member of the candidate's immediate family.
       ``(c) Certification by the Commission.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Commission shall determine whether a 
     candidate has met the requirements of this section and, based 
     on the determination, issue a certification stating whether 
     the candidate is an eligible Congressional candidate.
       ``(2) Time for certification.--Not later than 7 business 
     days after a candidate files a declaration under paragraph 
     (1) or (2) of subsection (a), the Commission shall certify 
     whether the candidate is an eligible Congressional candidate.
       ``(3) Revocation.--The Commission shall revoke a 
     certification under paragraph (1), based on information 
     submitted in such form and manner as the Commission may 
     require or on information that comes to the Commission by 
     other means, if the Commission determines that a candidate 
     violates the personal funds expenditure limit.
       ``(4) Determinations by commission.--A determination made 
     by the Commission under this subsection shall be final, 
     except to the extent that the determination is subject to 
     examination and audit by the Commission and to judicial 
     review.
       ``(d) Penalty.--If the Commission revokes the certification 
     of an eligible Congressional candidate--
       ``(1) the Commission shall notify the candidate of the 
     revocation; and
       ``(2) the candidate and a candidate's authorized committees 
     shall pay to the Commission an amount equal to the amount of 
     expenditures made by a national committee of a political 
     party or a State committee of a political party in connection 
     with the general election campaign of the candidate under 
     section 315(d).''.

     SEC. 402. POLITICAL PARTY COMMITTEE COORDINATED EXPENDITURES.

       Section 315(d) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 
     (2 U.S.C. 441a(d)) (as amended by section 204) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) This subsection does not apply to expenditures made 
     in connection with the general election campaign of a 
     candidate for Senator or Representative in or Delegate or 
     Resident Commissioner to the Congress who is not an eligible 
     Congressional candidate (as defined in section 324(a)).''.
                         TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS

     SEC. 501. CODIFICATION OF BECK DECISION.

       Section 8 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 
     158) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(h) Nonunion Member Payments to Labor Organization.--
       ``(1) In general.--It shall be an unfair labor practice for 
     any labor organization which receives a payment from an 
     employee pursuant to an agreement that requires employees who 
     are not members of the organization to make payments to such 
     organization in lieu of organization dues or fees not to 
     establish and implement the objection procedure described in 
     paragraph (2).
       ``(2) Objection procedure.--The objection procedure 
     required under paragraph (1) shall meet the following 
     requirements:
       ``(A) The labor organization shall annually provide to 
     employees who are covered by such agreement but are not 
     members of the organization--
       ``(i) reasonable personal notice of the objection 
     procedure, a list of the employees eligible to invoke the 
     procedure, and the time, place, and manner for filing an 
     objection; and
       ``(ii) reasonable opportunity to file an objection to 
     paying for organization expenditures supporting political 
     activities unrelated to collective bargaining, including but 
     not limited to the opportunity to file such objection by 
     mail.
       ``(B) If an employee who is not a member of the labor 
     organization files an objection under the procedure in 
     subparagraph (A), such organization shall--
       ``(i) reduce the payments in lieu of organization dues or 
     fees by such employee by an amount which reasonably reflects 
     the ratio that the organization's expenditures supporting 
     political activities unrelated to collective bargaining bears 
     to such organization's total expenditures; and
       ``(ii) provide such employee with a reasonable explanation 
     of the organization's calculation of such reduction, 
     including calculating the amount of organization expenditures 
     supporting political activities unrelated to collective 
     bargaining.
       ``(3) Definition.--In this subsection, the term 
     `expenditures supporting political activities unrelated to 
     collective bargaining' means expenditures in connection with 
     a Federal, State, or local election or in connection with 
     efforts to influence legislation unrelated to collective 
     bargaining.''.

     SEC. 502. USE OF CONTRIBUTED AMOUNTS FOR CERTAIN PURPOSES.

       Title III of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 431 et seq.) is amended by striking section 313 and 
     inserting the following:


           ``use of contributed amounts for certain purposes

       ``Sec. 313. (a) Permitted Uses.--A contribution accepted by 
     a candidate, and any other amount received by an individual 
     as support for activities of the individual as a holder of 
     Federal office, may be used by the candidate or individual--
       ``(1) for expenditures in connection with the campaign for 
     Federal office of the candidate or individual;
       ``(2) for ordinary and necessary expenses incurred in 
     connection with duties of the individual as a holder of 
     Federal office;
       ``(3) for contributions to an organization described in 
     section 170(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; or
       ``(4) for transfers to a national, State, or local 
     committee of a political party.
       ``(b) Prohibited Use.--
       ``(1) In general.--A contribution or amount described in 
     subsection (a) shall not be converted by any person to 
     personal use.
       ``(2) Conversion.--For the purposes of paragraph (1), a 
     contribution or amount shall be considered to be converted to 
     personal use if the contribution or amount is used to fulfill 
     any commitment, obligation, or expense of a person that would 
     exist irrespective of the candidate's election campaign or 
     individual's duties as a holder of Federal officeholder, 
     including--
       ``(A) a home mortgage, rent, or utility payment;
       ``(B) a clothing purchase;
       ``(C) a noncampaign-related automobile expense;
       ``(D) a country club membership;
       ``(E) a vacation or other noncampaign-related trip;
       ``(F) a household food item;
       ``(G) a tuition payment;
       ``(H) admission to a sporting event, concert, theater, or 
     other form of entertainment

[[Page 21495]]

     not associated with an election campaign; and
       ``(I) dues, fees, and other payments to a health club or 
     recreational facility.''.

     SEC. 503. LIMIT ON CONGRESSIONAL USE OF THE FRANKING 
                   PRIVILEGE.

       Section 3210(a)(6) of title 39, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(A) A Member of Congress shall not mail any mass mailing 
     as franked mail during the 180-day period which ends on the 
     date of the general election for the office held by the 
     Member or during the 90-day period which ends on the date of 
     any primary election for that office, unless the Member has 
     made a public announcement that the Member will not be a 
     candidate for reelection during that year or for election to 
     any other Federal office.''.

     SEC. 504. PROHIBITION OF FUNDRAISING ON FEDERAL PROPERTY.

       Section 607 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following:
       ``(a) Prohibition.--
       ``(1) In general.--It shall be unlawful for any person to 
     solicit or receive a donation of money or other thing of 
     value in connection with a Federal, State, or local election 
     from a person who is located in a room or building occupied 
     in the discharge of official duties by an officer or employee 
     of the United States. An individual who is an officer or 
     employee of the Federal Government, including the President, 
     Vice President, and Members of Congress, shall not solicit a 
     donation of money or other thing of value in connection with 
     a Federal, State, or local election while in any room or 
     building occupied in the discharge of official duties by an 
     officer or employee of the United States, from any person.
       ``(2) Penalty.--A person who violates this section shall be 
     fined not more than $5,000, imprisoned more than 3 years, or 
     both.''; and
       (2) in subsection (b), by inserting ``or Executive Office 
     of the President'' after ``Congress''.

     SEC. 505. PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS.

       (a) Increased Penalties.--Section 309(a) of the Federal 
     Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 437g(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraphs (5)(A), (6)(A), and (6)(B), by striking 
     ``$5,000'' and inserting ``$10,000''; and
       (2) in paragraphs (5)(B) and (6)(C), by striking ``$10,000 
     or an amount equal to 200 percent'' and inserting ``$20,000 
     or an amount equal to 300 percent''.
       (b) Equitable Remedies.--Section 309(a)(5)(A) of the 
     Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(5)) 
     is amended by striking the period at the end and inserting 
     ``, and may include equitable remedies or penalties, 
     including disgorgement of funds to the Treasury or community 
     service requirements (including requirements to participate 
     in public education programs).''.
       (c) Automatic Penalty for Late Filing.--Section 309(a) of 
     the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 437g(a)) 
     is amended--
       (1) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(13) Penalty for Late Filing.--
       ``(A) In general.--
       ``(i) Monetary penalties.--The Commission shall establish a 
     schedule of mandatory monetary penalties that shall be 
     imposed by the Commission for failure to meet a time 
     requirement for filing under section 304.
       ``(ii) Required filing.--In addition to imposing a penalty, 
     the Commission may require a report that has not been filed 
     within the time requirements of section 304 to be filed by a 
     specific date.
       ``(iii) Procedure.--A penalty or filing requirement imposed 
     under this paragraph shall not be subject to paragraph (1), 
     (2), (3), (4), (5), or (12).
       ``(B) Filing an exception.--
       ``(i) Time to file.--A political committee shall have 30 
     days after the imposition of a penalty or filing requirement 
     by the Commission under this paragraph in which to file an 
     exception with the Commission.
       ``(ii) Time for commission to rule.--Within 30 days after 
     receiving an exception, the Commission shall make a 
     determination that is a final agency action subject to 
     exclusive review by the United States Court of Appeals for 
     the District of Columbia Circuit under section 706 of title 
     5, United States Code, upon petition filed in that court by 
     the political committee or treasurer that is the subject of 
     the agency action, if the petition is filed within 30 days 
     after the date of the Commission action for which review is 
     sought.'';
       (2) in paragraph (5)(D)--
       (A) by inserting after the first sentence the following: 
     ``In any case in which a penalty or filing requirement 
     imposed on a political committee or treasurer under paragraph 
     (13) has not been satisfied, the Commission may institute a 
     civil action for enforcement under paragraph (6)(A).''; and
       (B) by inserting before the period at the end of the last 
     sentence the following: ``or has failed to pay a penalty or 
     meet a filing requirement imposed under paragraph (13)''; and
       (3) in paragraph (6)(A), by striking ``paragraph (4)(A)'' 
     and inserting ``paragraph (4)(A) or (13)''.

     SEC. 506. STRENGTHENING FOREIGN MONEY BAN.

       (a) In General.--Section 319 of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441e) is amended--
       (1) by striking the heading and inserting the following: 
     ``contributions and donations by foreign nationals''; and
       (2) by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following:
       ``(a) Prohibition.--It shall be unlawful for--
       ``(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make--
       ``(A) a donation of money or other thing of value, or to 
     promise expressly or impliedly to make a donation, in 
     connection with a Federal, State, or local election, or
       ``(B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a 
     political party; or
       ``(2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive such a 
     contribution or donation from a foreign national.''.
       (b) Prohibiting Use of Willful Blindness as Defense Against 
     Charge of Violating Foreign Contribution Ban.--
       (1) In general.--Section 319 of such Act (2 U.S.C. 441e) is 
     amended--
       (A) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (c); and
       (B) by inserting after subsection (a) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(b) Prohibiting Use of Willful Blindness Defense.--It 
     shall not be a defense to a violation of subsection (a) that 
     the defendant did not know that the contribution originated 
     from a foreign national if the defendant should have known 
     that the contribution originated from a foreign national, 
     except that the trier of fact may not find that the defendant 
     should have known that the contribution originated from a 
     foreign national solely because of the name of the 
     contributor.''.
       (2) Effective date.--The amendments made by this subsection 
     shall apply with respect to violations occurring on or after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 507. PROHIBITION OF CONTRIBUTIONS BY MINORS.

       Title III of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 431 et seq.), as amended by sections 101 and 401, is 
     further amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:


                ``prohibition of contributions by minors

       ``Sec. 325. An individual who is 17 years old or younger 
     shall not make a contribution to a candidate or a 
     contribution or donation to a committee of a political 
     party.''.

     SEC. 508. EXPEDITED PROCEDURES.

       (a) In General.--Section 309(a) of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 437g(a)) (as amended by 
     section 505(c)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(14)(A) If the complaint in a proceeding was filed within 
     60 days preceding the date of a general election, the 
     Commission may take action described in this subparagraph.
       ``(B) If the Commission determines, on the basis of facts 
     alleged in the complaint and other facts available to the 
     Commission, that there is clear and convincing evidence that 
     a violation of this Act has occurred, is occurring, or is 
     about to occur, the Commission may order expedited 
     proceedings, shortening the time periods for proceedings 
     under paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (4) as necessary to allow 
     the matter to be resolved in sufficient time before the 
     election to avoid harm or prejudice to the interests of the 
     parties.
       ``(C) If the Commission determines, on the basis of facts 
     alleged in the complaint and other facts available to the 
     Commission, that the complaint is clearly without merit, the 
     Commission may--
       ``(i) order expedited proceedings, shortening the time 
     periods for proceedings under paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and 
     (4) as necessary to allow the matter to be resolved in 
     sufficient time before the election to avoid harm or 
     prejudice to the interests of the parties; or
       ``(ii) if the Commission determines that there is 
     insufficient time to conduct proceedings before the election, 
     summarily dismiss the complaint.''.
       (b) Referral to Attorney General.--Section 309(a)(5) of the 
     Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(5)) 
     is amended by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(C) The Commission may at any time, by an affirmative 
     vote of at least 4 of its members, refer a possible violation 
     of this Act or chapter 95 or 96 of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986, to the Attorney General of the United States, 
     without regard to any limitation set forth in this 
     section.''.

     SEC. 509. INITIATION OF ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDING.

       Section 309(a)(2) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 
     1971 (2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(2)) is amended by striking ``reason to 
     believe that'' and inserting ``reason to investigate 
     whether''.

     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 sections 101, 401, and 
     507, is further amended by adding at the end the following 
     new section:

[[Page 21496]]




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

       ``Sec. 326. (a) In General.--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.
       ``(b) No Effect on Geographic Restrictions on 
     Contributions.--Subsection (a) may not be construed to affect 
     any restriction under this title regarding the portion of 
     contributions accepted by a candidate from persons residing 
     in a particular geographic area.''.

     SEC. 511. PENALTY FOR VIOLATION OF PROHIBITION AGAINST 
                   FOREIGN CONTRIBUTIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 319 of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441e), as amended by section 
     506(b), is further amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (d); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(c) Penalty.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), 
     notwithstanding any other provision of this title any person 
     who violates subsection (a) shall be sentenced to a term of 
     imprisonment which may not be more than 10 years, fined in an 
     amount not to exceed $1,000,000, or both.
       ``(2) Exception.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply with 
     respect to any violation of subsection (a) arising from a 
     contribution or donation made by an individual who is 
     lawfully admitted for permanent residence (as defined in 
     section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality 
     Act).''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply with respect to violations occurring on or after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 512. EXPEDITED COURT REVIEW OF CERTAIN ALLEGED 
                   VIOLATIONS OF FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT OF 
                   1971.

       (a) In General.--Section 309 of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 437g) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (c) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(d) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, 
     if a candidate (or the candidate's authorized committee) 
     believes that a violation described in paragraph (2) has been 
     committed with respect to an election during the 90-day 
     period preceding the date of the election, the candidate or 
     committee may institute a civil action on behalf of the 
     Commission for relief (including injunctive relief) against 
     the alleged violator in the same manner and under the same 
     terms and conditions as an action instituted by the 
     Commission under subsection (a)(6), except that the court 
     involved shall issue a decision regarding the action as soon 
     as practicable after the action is instituted and to the 
     greatest extent possible issue the decision prior to the date 
     of the election involved.
       ``(2) A violation described in this paragraph is a 
     violation of this Act or of chapter 95 or chapter 96 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 relating to--
       ``(A) whether a contribution is in excess of an applicable 
     limit or is otherwise prohibited under this Act; or
       ``(B) whether an expenditure is an independent expenditure 
     under section 301(17).''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply with respect to elections occurring after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 513. CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN 
                   SPENDING LIMITS.

       (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:
       ``(g) Prohibiting Conspiracy To Violate Limits.--
       ``(1) Violation of limits described.--If a candidate for 
     election to the office of President or Vice President who 
     receives amounts from the Presidential Election Campaign Fund 
     under chapter 95 or 96 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, 
     or the agent of such a candidate, seeks to avoid the spending 
     limits applicable to the candidate under such chapter or 
     under the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 by 
     soliciting, receiving, transferring, or directing funds from 
     any source other than such Fund for the direct or indirect 
     benefit of such candidate's campaign, such candidate or agent 
     shall be fined not more than $1,000,000, or imprisoned for a 
     term of not more than 3 years, or both.
       ``(2) Conspiracy to violate limits defined.--If two or more 
     persons conspire to violate paragraph (1), and one or more of 
     such persons do any act to effect the object of the 
     conspiracy, each shall be fined not more than $1,000,000, or 
     imprisoned for a term of not more than 3 years, or both.''.
       (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.

     SEC. 514. DEPOSIT OF CERTAIN CONTRIBUTIONS AND DONATIONS IN 
                   TREASURY ACCOUNT.

       (a) In General.--Title III of the Federal Election Campaign 
     Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431 et seq.), as amended by sections 
     101, 401, 507, and 510, is further amended by adding at the 
     end the following new section:


 ``treatment of certain contributions and donations to be returned to 
                                 donors

       ``Sec. 327. (a) Transfer to Commission.--
       ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this Act, if a political committee intends to return any 
     contribution or donation given to the political committee, 
     the committee shall transfer the contribution or donation to 
     the Commission if--
       ``(A) the contribution or donation is in an amount equal to 
     or greater than $500 (other than a contribution or donation 
     returned within 60 days of receipt by the committee); or
       ``(B) the contribution or donation was made in violation of 
     section 315, 316, 317, 319, 320, or 325 (other than a 
     contribution or donation returned within 30 days of receipt 
     by the committee).
       ``(2) Information included with transferred contribution or 
     donation.--A political committee shall include with any 
     contribution or donation transferred under paragraph (1)--
       ``(A) a request that the Commission return the contribution 
     or donation to the person making the contribution or 
     donation; and
       ``(B) information regarding the circumstances surrounding 
     the making of the contribution or donation and any opinion of 
     the political committee concerning whether the contribution 
     or donation may have been made in violation of this Act.
       ``(3) Establishment of escrow account.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Commission shall establish a single 
     interest-bearing escrow account for deposit of amounts 
     transferred under paragraph (1).
       ``(B) Disposition of amounts received.--On receiving an 
     amount from a political committee under paragraph (1), the 
     Commission shall--
       ``(i) deposit the amount in the escrow account established 
     under subparagraph (A); and
       ``(ii) notify the Attorney General and the Commissioner of 
     the Internal Revenue Service of the receipt of the amount 
     from the political committee.
       ``(C) Use of interest.--Interest earned on amounts in the 
     escrow account established under subparagraph (A) shall be 
     applied or used for the same purposes as the donation or 
     contribution on which it is earned.
       ``(4) Treatment of returned contribution or donation as a 
     complaint.--The transfer of any contribution or donation to 
     the Commission under this section shall be treated as the 
     filing of a complaint under section 309(a).
       ``(b) Use of Amounts Placed in Escrow To Cover Fines and 
     Penalties.--The Commission or the Attorney General may 
     require any amount deposited in the escrow account under 
     subsection (a)(3) to be applied toward the payment of any 
     fine or penalty imposed under this Act or title 18, United 
     States Code, against the person making the contribution or 
     donation.
       ``(c) Return of Contribution or Donation After Deposit in 
     Escrow.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Commission shall return a 
     contribution or donation deposited in the escrow account 
     under subsection (a)(3) to the person making the contribution 
     or donation if--
       ``(A) within 180 days after the date the contribution or 
     donation is transferred, the Commission has not made a 
     determination under section 309(a)(2) that the Commission has 
     reason to investigate whether that the making of the 
     contribution or donation was made in violation of this Act; 
     or
       ``(B)(i) the contribution or donation will not be used to 
     cover fines, penalties, or costs pursuant to subsection (b); 
     or
       ``(ii) if the contribution or donation will be used for 
     those purposes, that the amounts required for those purposes 
     have been withdrawn from the escrow account and subtracted 
     from the returnable contribution or donation.
       ``(2) No effect on status of investigation.--The return of 
     a contribution or donation by the Commission under this 
     subsection shall not be construed as having an effect on the 
     status of an investigation by the Commission or the Attorney 
     General of the contribution or donation or the circumstances 
     surrounding the contribution or donation, or on the ability 
     of the Commission or the Attorney General to take future 
     actions with respect to the contribution or donation.''.
       (b) Amounts Used To Determine Amount of Penalty for 
     Violation.--Section 309(a) of such Act (2 U.S.C. 437g(a)) is 
     amended by inserting after paragraph (9) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(10) For purposes of determining the amount of a civil 
     penalty imposed under this subsection for violations of 
     section 326, the amount of the donation involved shall be 
     treated as the amount of the contribution involved.''.

[[Page 21497]]

       (c) Disgorgement Authority.--Section 309 of such Act (2 
     U.S.C. 437g) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new subsection:
       ``(e) Any conciliation agreement, civil action, or criminal 
     action entered into or instituted under this section may 
     require a person to forfeit to the Treasury any contribution, 
     donation, or expenditure that is the subject of the agreement 
     or action for transfer to the Commission for deposit in 
     accordance with section 326.''.
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsections (a) 
     and (b) shall apply to contributions or donations refunded on 
     or after the date of the enactment of this Act, without 
     regard to whether the Federal Election Commission or Attorney 
     General has issued regulations to carry out section 326 of 
     the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (as added by 
     subsection (a)) by such date.

     SEC. 515. ESTABLISHMENT OF A CLEARINGHOUSE OF INFORMATION ON 
                   POLITICAL ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE FEDERAL 
                   ELECTION COMMISSION.

       (a) Establishment.--There shall be established within the 
     Federal Election Commission a clearinghouse of public 
     information regarding the political activities of foreign 
     principals and agents of foreign principals. The information 
     comprising this clearinghouse shall include only the 
     following:
       (1) All registrations and reports filed pursuant to the 
     Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) 
     during the preceding 5-year period.
       (2) All registrations and reports filed pursuant to the 
     Foreign Agents Registration Act, as amended (22 U.S.C. 611 et 
     seq.), during the preceding 5-year period.
       (3) The listings of public hearings, hearing witnesses, and 
     witness affiliations printed in the Congressional Record 
     during the preceding 5-year period.
       (4) Public information disclosed pursuant to the rules of 
     the Senate or the House of Representatives regarding 
     honoraria, the receipt of gifts, travel, and earned and 
     unearned income.
       (5) All reports filed pursuant to title I of the Ethics in 
     Government Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.) during the preceding 
     5-year period.
       (6) All public information filed with the Federal Election 
     Commission pursuant to the Federal Election Campaign Act of 
     1971 (2 U.S.C. 431 et seq.) during the preceding 5-year 
     period.
       (b) Disclosure of Other Information Prohibited.--The 
     disclosure by the clearinghouse, or any officer or employee 
     thereof, of any information other than that set forth in 
     subsection (a) is prohibited, except as otherwise provided by 
     law.
       (c) Director of Clearinghouse.--
       (1) Duties.--The clearinghouse shall have a Director, who 
     shall administer and manage the responsibilities and all 
     activities of the clearinghouse. In carrying out such duties, 
     the Director shall--
       (A) develop a filing, coding, and cross-indexing system to 
     carry out the purposes of this section (which shall include 
     an index of all persons identified in the reports, 
     registrations, and other information comprising the 
     clearinghouse);
       (B) notwithstanding any other provision of law, make copies 
     of registrations, reports, and other information comprising 
     the clearinghouse available for public inspection and 
     copying, beginning not later than 30 days after the 
     information is first available to the public, and permit 
     copying of any such registration, report, or other 
     information by hand or by copying machine or, at the request 
     of any person, furnish a copy of any such registration, 
     report, or other information upon payment of the cost of 
     making and furnishing such copy, except that no information 
     contained in such registration or report and no such other 
     information shall be sold or used by any person for the 
     purpose of soliciting contributions or for any profit-making 
     purpose; and
       (C) not later than 150 days after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act and at any time thereafter, to prescribe, in 
     consultation with the Comptroller General, such rules, 
     regulations, and forms, in conformity with the provisions of 
     chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code, as are necessary to 
     carry out the provisions of this section in the most 
     effective and efficient manner.
       (2) Appointment.--The Director shall be appointed by the 
     Federal Election Commission.
       (3) Term of service.--The Director shall serve a single 
     term of a period of time determined by the Commission, but 
     not to exceed 5 years.
       (d) Penalties for Disclosure of Information.--Any person 
     who discloses information in violation of subsection (b), and 
     any person who sells or uses information for the purpose of 
     soliciting contributions or for any profit-making purpose in 
     violation of subsection (c)(1)(B), shall be imprisoned for a 
     period of not more than 1 year, or fined in the amount 
     provided in title 18, United States Code, or both.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to conduct 
     the activities of the clearinghouse.
       (f) Foreign Principal.--In this section, the term ``foreign 
     principal'' shall have the same meaning given the term 
     ``foreign national'' under section 319 of the Federal 
     Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441e), as in effect 
     as of the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 516. ENFORCEMENT OF SPENDING LIMIT ON PRESIDENTIAL AND 
                   VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES WHO RECEIVE 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) Illegal Solicitation of Soft Money.--No candidate for 
     election to the office of President or Vice President may 
     receive amounts from the Presidential Election Campaign Fund 
     under this chapter or chapter 96 unless the candidate 
     certifies that the candidate shall not solicit any funds for 
     the purposes of influencing such election, including any 
     funds used for an independent expenditure under the Federal 
     Election Campaign Act of 1971, unless the funds are subject 
     to the limitations, prohibitions, and reporting requirements 
     of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971.''.
       (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.
      TITLE VI--INDEPENDENT COMMISSION ON CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM

     SEC. 601. ESTABLISHMENT AND PURPOSE OF COMMISSION.

       There is established a commission to be known as the 
     ``Independent Commission on Campaign Finance Reform'' 
     (referred to in this title as the ``Commission''). The 
     purposes of the Commission are to study the laws relating to 
     the financing of political activity and to report and 
     recommend legislation to reform those laws.

     SEC. 602. MEMBERSHIP OF COMMISSION.

       (a) Composition.--The Commission shall be composed of 12 
     members appointed within 15 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act by the President from among individuals 
     who are not incumbent Members of Congress and who are 
     specially qualified to serve on the Commission by reason of 
     education, training, or experience.
       (b) Appointment.--
       (1) In general.--Members shall be appointed as follows:
       (A) Three members (one of whom shall be a political 
     independent) shall be appointed from among a list of nominees 
     submitted by the Speaker of the House of Representatives.
       (B) Three members (one of whom shall be a political 
     independent) shall be appointed from among a list of nominees 
     submitted by the majority leader of the Senate.
       (C) Three members (one of whom shall be a political 
     independent) shall be appointed from among a list of nominees 
     submitted by the minority leader of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (D) Three members (one of whom shall be a political 
     independent) shall be appointed from among a list of nominees 
     submitted by the minority leader of the Senate.
       (2) Failure to submit list of nominees.--If an official 
     described in any of the subparagraphs of paragraph (1) fails 
     to submit a list of nominees to the President during the 15-
     day period which begins on the date of the enactment of this 
     Act--
       (A) such subparagraph shall no longer apply; and
       (B) the President shall appoint three members (one of whom 
     shall be a political independent) who meet the requirements 
     described in subsection (a) and such other criteria as the 
     President may apply.
       (3) Political independent defined.--In this subsection, the 
     term ``political independent'' means an individual who at no 
     time after January 1992--
       (A) has held elective office as a member of the Democratic 
     or Republican party;
       (B) has received any wages or salary from the Democratic or 
     Republican party or from a Democratic or Republican party 
     office-holder or candidate; or
       (C) has provided substantial volunteer services or made any 
     substantial contribution to the Democratic or Republican 
     party or to a Democratic or Republican party office-holder or 
     candidate.
       (c) Chairman.--At the time of the appointment, the 
     President shall designate one member of the Commission as 
     Chairman of the Commission.
       (d) Terms.--The members of the Commission shall serve for 
     the life of the Commission.
       (e) Vacancies.--A vacancy in the Commission shall be filled 
     in the manner in which the original appointment was made.
       (f) Political Affiliation.--Not more than four members of 
     the Commission may be of the same political party.

     SEC. 603. POWERS OF COMMISSION.

       (a) Hearings.--The Commission may, for the purpose of 
     carrying out this title, hold hearings, sit and act at times 
     and places, take testimony, and receive evidence as the 
     Commission considers appropriate. In carrying out the 
     preceding sentence, the Commission shall ensure that a 
     substantial number of its meetings are open meetings, with 
     significant opportunities for testimony from members of the 
     general public.
       (b) Quorum.--Seven members of the Commission shall 
     constitute a quorum, but a

[[Page 21498]]

     lesser number may hold hearings. The approval of at least 
     nine members of the Commission is required when approving all 
     or a portion of the recommended legislation. Any member of 
     the Commission may, if authorized by the Commission, take any 
     action which the Commission is authorized to take under this 
     section.

     SEC. 604. ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS.

       (a) Pay and Travel Expenses of Members.--(1) Each member of 
     the Commission shall be paid at a rate equal to the daily 
     equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay payable for level 
     IV of the Executive Schedule under section 5315 of title 5, 
     United States Code, for each day (including travel time) 
     during which the member is engaged in the actual performance 
     of duties vested in the Commission.
       (2) Members of the Commission shall receive travel 
     expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, in 
     accordance with sections 5702 and 5703 of title 5, United 
     States Code.
       (b) Staff Director.--The Commission shall, without regard 
     to section 5311(b) of title 5, United States Code, appoint a 
     staff director, who shall be paid at the rate of basic pay 
     payable for level IV of the Executive Schedule under section 
     5315 of title 5, United States Code.
       (c) Staff of Commission; Services.--
       (1) In general.--With the approval of the Commission, the 
     staff director of the Commission may appoint and fix the pay 
     of additional personnel. The Director may make such 
     appointments without regard to the provisions of title 5, 
     United States Code, governing appointments in the competitive 
     service, and any personnel so appointed may be paid without 
     regard to the provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of 
     chapter 53 of that title relating to classification and 
     General Schedule pay rates, except that an individual so 
     appointed may not receive pay in excess of the maximum annual 
     rate of basic pay payable for grade GS-15 of the General 
     Schedule under section 5332 of title 5, United States Code.
       (2) Experts and consultants.--The Commission may procure by 
     contract the temporary or intermittent services of experts or 
     consultants pursuant to section 3109 of title 5, United 
     States Code.

     SEC. 605. REPORT AND RECOMMENDED LEGISLATION.

       (a) Report.--Not later than the expiration of the 180-day 
     period which begins on the date on which the second session 
     of the One Hundred Sixth Congress adjourns sine die, the 
     Commission shall submit to the President, the Speaker and 
     minority leader of the House of Representatives, and the 
     majority and minority leaders of the Senate a report of the 
     activities of the Commission.
       (b) Recommendations; Draft of Legislation.--The report 
     under subsection (a) shall include any recommendations for 
     changes in the laws (including regulations) governing the 
     financing of political activity (taking into account the 
     provisions of this Act and the amendments made by this Act), 
     including any changes in the rules of the Senate or the House 
     of Representatives, to which nine or more members of the 
     Commission may agree, together with drafts of--
       (1) any legislation (including technical and conforming 
     provisions) recommended by the Commission to implement such 
     recommendations; and
       (2) any proposed amendment to the Constitution recommended 
     by the Commission as necessary to implement such 
     recommendations, except that if the Commission includes such 
     a proposed amendment in its report, it shall also include 
     recommendations (and drafts) for legislation which may be 
     implemented prior to the adoption of such proposed amendment.
       (c) Goals of Recommendations and Legislation.--In making 
     recommendations and preparing drafts of legislation under 
     this section, the Commission shall consider the following to 
     be its primary goals:
       (1) Encouraging fair and open Federal elections which 
     provide voters with meaningful information about candidates 
     and issues.
       (2) Eliminating the disproportionate influence of special 
     interest financing of Federal elections.
       (3) Creating a more equitable electoral system for 
     challengers and incumbents.

     SEC. 606. EXPEDITED CONGRESSIONAL CONSIDERATION OF 
                   LEGISLATION.

       (a) In General.--If any legislation is introduced the 
     substance of which implements a recommendation of the 
     Commission submitted under section 605(b) (including a joint 
     resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution), 
     subject to subsection (b), the provisions of section 2908 
     (other than subsection (a)) of the Defense Base Closure and 
     Realignment Act of 1990 shall apply to the consideration of 
     the legislation in the same manner as such provisions apply 
     to a joint resolution described in section 2908(a) of such 
     Act.
       (b) Special Rules.--For purposes of applying subsection (a) 
     with respect to such provisions, the following rules shall 
     apply:
       (1) Any reference to the Committee on Armed Services of the 
     House of Representatives shall be deemed a reference to the 
     Committee on House Oversight of the House of Representatives 
     and any reference to the Committee on Armed Services of the 
     Senate shall be deemed a reference to the Committee on Rules 
     and Administration of the Senate.
       (2) Any reference to the date on which the President 
     transmits a report shall be deemed a reference to the date on 
     which the recommendation involved is submitted under section 
     605(b).
       (3) Notwithstanding subsection (d)(2) of section 2908 of 
     such Act--
       (A) debate on the legislation in the House of 
     Representatives, and on all debatable motions and appeals in 
     connection with the legislation, shall be limited to not more 
     than 10 hours, divided equally between those favoring and 
     those opposing the legislation;
       (B) debate on the legislation in the Senate, and on all 
     debatable motions and appeals in connection with the 
     legislation, shall be limited to not more than 10 hours, 
     divided equally between those favoring and those opposing the 
     legislation; and
       (C) debate in the Senate on any single debatable motion and 
     appeal in connection with the legislation shall be limited to 
     not more than 1 hour, divided equally between the mover and 
     the manager of the bill (except that in the event the manager 
     of the bill is in favor of any such motion or appeal, the 
     time in opposition thereto shall be controlled by the 
     minority leader or his designee), and the majority and 
     minority leader may each allot additional time from time 
     under such leader's control to any Senator during the 
     consideration of any debatable motion or appeal.

     SEC. 607. TERMINATION.

       The Commission shall cease to exist 90 days after the date 
     of the submission of its report under section 605.

     SEC. 608. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to the Commission 
     such sums as are necessary to carry out its duties under this 
     title.
TITLE VII--PROHIBITING USE OF WHITE HOUSE MEALS AND ACCOMMODATIONS FOR 
                         POLITICAL FUNDRAISING

     SEC. 701. 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.''.
  TITLE VIII--SENSE OF THE CONGRESS REGARDING FUNDRAISING ON FEDERAL 
                          GOVERNMENT PROPERTY

     SEC. 801. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS REGARDING APPLICABILITY OF 
                   CONTROLLING LEGAL AUTHORITY TO FUNDRAISING ON 
                   FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PROPERTY.

       It is the sense of the Congress that Federal law clearly 
     demonstrates that ``controlling legal authority'' under title 
     18, United States Code, prohibits the use of Federal 
     Government property to raise campaign funds.
TITLE IX--PROHIBITING SOLICITATION TO OBTAIN ACCESS TO CERTAIN FEDERAL 
                          GOVERNMENT PROPERTY

     SEC. 901. PROHIBITION AGAINST ACCEPTANCE OR SOLICITATION TO 
                   OBTAIN ACCESS TO CERTAIN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT 
                   PROPERTY.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 11 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 226. Acceptance or solicitation to obtain access to 
       certain Federal Government property

       ``Whoever solicits or receives anything of value in 
     consideration of providing a person with access to Air Force 
     One, Marine One, Air Force Two, Marine Two, the White House, 
     or the Vice President's residence, shall be fined under this 
     title, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 
     11 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at 
     the end the following new item:

``226. Acceptance or solicitation to obtain access to certain Federal 
              Government property.''.

[[Page 21499]]


     TITLE X--REIMBURSEMENT FOR USE OF AIR FORCE ONE FOR POLITICAL 
                              FUNDRAISING

     SEC. 1001. REQUIRING NATIONAL PARTIES TO REIMBURSE AT COST 
                   FOR USE OF AIR FORCE ONE FOR POLITICAL 
                   FUNDRAISING.

       Title III of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 431 et seq.), as amended by sections 101, 401, 507, 
     510, and 515, is further amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:


   ``reimbursement by political parties for use of air force one for 
                         political fundraising

       ``Sec. 328. (a) In General.--If the President, Vice 
     President, or the head of any executive department (as 
     defined in section 101 of title 5, United States Code) uses 
     Air Force One for transportation for any travel which 
     includes a fundraising event for the benefit of any political 
     committee of a national political party, such political 
     committee shall reimburse the Federal Government for the fair 
     market value of the transportation of the individual 
     involved, based on the cost of an equivalent commercial 
     chartered flight.
       ``(b) Air Force One Defined.--In subsection (a), the term 
     `Air Force One' means the airplane operated by the Air Force 
     which has been specially configured to carry out the mission 
     of transporting the President.''.
           TITLE XI--PROHIBITING USE OF WALKING AROUND MONEY

     SEC. 1101. PROHIBITING CAMPAIGNS FROM PROVIDING CURRENCY TO 
                   INDIVIDUALS FOR PURPOSES OF ENCOURAGING TURNOUT 
                   ON DATE OF ELECTION.

       Title III of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 431 et seq.), as amended by sections 101, 401, 507, 
     510, 515, and 1001, is further amended by adding at the end 
     the following new section:


     ``prohibiting use of currency to promote election day turnout

       ``Sec. 329. It shall be unlawful for any political 
     committee to provide currency to any individual (directly or 
     through an agent of the committee) for purposes of 
     encouraging the individual to appear at the polling place for 
     the election.''.
            TITLE XII--ENHANCING ENFORCEMENT OF CAMPAIGN LAW

     SEC. 1201. ENHANCING ENFORCEMENT OF CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAW.

       (a) Mandatory Imprisonment for Criminal Conduct.--Section 
     309(d)(1)(A) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 437g(d)(1)(A)) is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``shall be fined, or 
     imprisoned for not more than one year, or both'' and 
     inserting ``shall be imprisoned for not fewer than 1 year and 
     not more than 10 years''; and
       (2) by striking the second sentence.
       (b) Concurrent Authority of Attorney General To Bring 
     Criminal Actions.--Section 309(d) of such Act (2 U.S.C. 
     437g(d)) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(4) In addition to the authority to bring cases referred 
     pursuant to subsection (a)(5), the Attorney General may at 
     any time bring a criminal action for a violation of this Act 
     or of chapter 95 or chapter 96 of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply with respect to actions brought with respect to 
     elections occurring after January 1999.
 TITLE XIII--BAN ON COORDINATED SOFT MONEY ACTIVITIES BY PRESIDENTIAL 
                               CANDIDATES

     SEC. 1301. 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 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.
    TITLE XIV--POSTING NAMES OF CERTAIN AIR FORCE ONE PASSENGERS ON 
                                INTERNET

     SEC. 1401. REQUIREMENT THAT NAMES OF PASSENGERS ON AIR FORCE 
                   ONE AND AIR FORCE TWO BE MADE AVAILABLE THROUGH 
                   THE INTERNET.

       (a) In General.--The President shall make available through 
     the Internet the name of any non-Government person who is a 
     passenger on an aircraft designated as Air Force One or Air 
     Force Two not later than 30 days after the date that the 
     person is a passenger on such aircraft.
       (b) Exception.--Subsection (a) shall not apply in a case in 
     which the President determines that compliance with such 
     subsection would be contrary to the national security 
     interests of the United States. In any such case, not later 
     than 30 days after the date that the person whose name will 
     not be made available through the Internet was a passenger on 
     the aircraft, the President shall submit to the chairman and 
     ranking member of the Permanent Select Committee on 
     Intelligence of the House of Representatives and of the 
     Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate--
       (1) the name of the person; and
       (2) the justification for not making such name available 
     through the Internet.
       (c) Definition of Person.--As used in this Act, the term 
     ``non-Government person'' means a person who is not an 
     officer or employee of the United States, a member of the 
     Armed Forces, or a Member of Congress.
  TITLE XV--EXPULSION PROCEEDINGS FOR HOUSE MEMBERS RECEIVING FOREIGN 
                             CONTRIBUTIONS

     SEC. 1501. PERMITTING CONSIDERATION OF PRIVILEGED MOTION TO 
                   EXPEL HOUSE MEMBER ACCEPTING ILLEGAL FOREIGN 
                   CONTRIBUTION.

       (a) In General.--If a Member of the House of 
     Representatives is convicted of a violation of section 319 of 
     the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (or any successor 
     provision prohibiting the solicitation, receipt, or 
     acceptance of a contribution from a foreign national), the 
     Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, shall immediately 
     consider the conduct of the Member and shall make a report 
     and recommendations to the House forthwith concerning that 
     Member which may include a recommendation for expulsion.
       (b) Exercise of Rulemaking Authority.--This section is 
     enacted by Congress--
       (1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the House of 
     Representatives, and as such it is deemed a part of the rules 
     of the House of Representatives, and it supersedes other 
     rules only to the extent that it is inconsistent therewith; 
     and
       (2) with full recognition of the constitutional right of 
     the House of Representatives to change the rule at any time, 
     in the same manner and to the same extent as in the case of 
     any other rule of the House of Representatives.
TITLE XVI--SEVERABILITY; CONSTITUTIONALITY; EFFECTIVE DATE; REGULATIONS

     SEC. 1601. SEVERABILITY.

       If any provision of this Act or amendment made by this Act, 
     or the application of a provision or amendment to any person 
     or circumstance, is held to be unconstitutional, the 
     remainder of this Act and amendments made by this Act, and 
     the application of the provisions and amendment to any person 
     or circumstance, shall not be affected by the holding.

     SEC. 1602. REVIEW OF CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES.

       An appeal may be taken directly to the Supreme Court of the 
     United States from any final judgment, decree, or order 
     issued by any court ruling on the constitutionality of any 
     provision of this Act or amendment made by this Act.

     SEC. 1603. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       Except as otherwise provided in this Act, this Act and the 
     amendments made by this Act shall take effect upon the 
     expiration of the 90-day period which begins on the date of 
     the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 1604. REGULATIONS.

       The Federal Election Commission shall prescribe any 
     regulations required to carry out this Act and the amendments 
     made by this Act not later than 45 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

  The CHAIRMAN. No amendment is in order except those printed in House 
Report 106-311. Each amendment may be offered only in the order printed 
in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the 
report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time 
specified in the report, equally divided and controlled by the 
proponent and an opponent, and shall not be subject to amendment.
  The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may postpone a request for 
a recorded vote on any amendment, and may reduce to a minimum of 5 
minutes the time for voting on any postponed question that immediately 
follows another vote, provided that the time for voting on the first 
question shall be a minimum of 15 minutes.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 printed in House 
Report 106-311.

[[Page 21500]]




                Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Whitfield

  Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:
  Amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. Whitfield:

       Page 12, insert after line 8 the following:
       (c) Increase in Individual Contribution Limit.--Section 
     315(a)(1)(A) of such Act (2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(1)(A)) is amended 
     by striking ``$1,000'' and inserting ``$3,000''.


       Modification to Amendment No. 1, Offered by Mr. Whitfield

  Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to make a 
technical correction to the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will report the amendment, as modified.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment No. 1, as modified, offered by Mr. Whitfield:
       The amendment is modified as follows:
       Page 21, insert after line 17 the following:
       (c) Increase in Individual Contribution Limit.--Section 
     315(a)(1)(A) of such Act (2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(1)(A)) is amended 
     by striking ``$1,000'' and inserting ``$3,000''.

  Mr. WHITFIELD. (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous 
consent that the amendment, as modified, be considered as read and 
printed in the Record.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Kentucky?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the initial request of the 
gentleman from Kentucky?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the modification is agreed to.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 283, the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. 
Whitfield) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Whitfield).
  Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, first of all, I would like to commend the gentleman 
from Massachusetts (Mr. Meehan) and the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. 
Shays) for their commitment to their cause on this important issue. 
They have worked hard on this bill last year, as well as this year.
  I would like to make it clear as I discuss this amendment that I do 
oppose the bill, but this amendment I do honestly believe will improve 
the bill.
  I would like to say briefly why I oppose this bill. I oppose it 
primarily because it changes the definition of ``express advocacy''. 
The Supreme Court has made it very clear repeatedly that there is a 
bright line test. If an ad does not expressly advocate the defeat of 
the election of a candidate, it is not express advocacy. They change it 
to say that any ad run within 60 days of an election is express 
advocacy, by definition.
  Now, when I ran in 1998, labor unions came into my district and they 
spent about $600,000 or $700,000 running issue advocacy ads about my 
voting record. They did not expressly advocate my defeat or my 
election, but it was clear that they did not support my position. I did 
not like that, and it was done within 60 days of the election, but I do 
believe that they have the right to do that. That is what this debate 
really is all about. That is their first amendment right. The courts 
who have considered this amendment on 18 separate occasions have ruled 
that they do have that right every single time.
  Just yesterday in my hometown paper of Paducah, a group ran an ad 
about my position on campaign finance reform. Had they run that ad 60 
days, within 60 days of an election, they would not have had the right 
to do it under Shays-Meehan unless they met all of the hard money 
requirements and went to the FEC and so forth. That is why the courts 
have said you cannot create these kinds of obstructions to 
participating in political speech.
  That is the reason I primarily object to this legislation. I am 
convinced that if it goes to the courts, that it will be overruled.
  The amendment that I offer today is simply this. It increases from 
$1,000 to $3,000 the amount of money that an individual can contribute 
to a candidate under the hard money requirements. We could make an 
argument that this legislation, instead of being campaign finance 
reform, is really incumbent protection, because it reduces the rights 
of other people to speak but not candidates themselves.
  All of us know that as an incumbent, we can better obtain political 
action committee money than our challengers can. There is not anything 
in this bill, the Shays-Meehan bill, that would affect political action 
committee money.
  So this amendment would simply increase from $1,000 to $3,000 the 
amount that an individual can contribute to a candidate. It has not 
been changed since 1974. Although I am not excited about helping 
challengers raise money, my amendment will help them at least be more 
competitive in raising money. Therefore, I do not really understand how 
anybody could object to this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in 
opposition to the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California (Mr. Farr) is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.
  Mr. Chairman, I hope our Members are listening to this debate, or 
more importantly, are reading what this campaign finance reform bill is 
all about. It is about reform. It is about campaign reform. It is not 
about doing what the American public does not want us to do, getting 
more money into politics.
  We just had a break. Most of us were home. I never had one question, 
somebody coming up and saying, the problem with America right now is 
you are not spending enough money in your campaigns. Why do you not 
spend more money?
  I find it ironic that the party that wants to cut, squeeze, and trim 
government, comes here and says, ladies and gentlemen, we want to cut 
Federal Government, but when it comes to electing Federal Members of 
Congress, just spend all the money you can, just making it obscene. We 
do not need to raise the limit, we need to limit what people are going 
to spend.
  So look at this amendment. Look at what it says. There are people 
that say, well, if we raise more money, we spend less time. We just 
have to make fewer phone calls. That is not true, this is an arms race 
out there. We spend as much time raising money as the process allows. 
Unfortunately, it allows too much. We find that a candidate's spending 
has gone up at a rate of 50 percent greater than the rate of inflation 
since 1974, two to three times the rate of increase in the wages of 
ordinary citizens.
  Large donors in America are, listen to this, are disproportionately 
white, male, and from high status occupations, and more conservative.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, first of all, I would like to point out there are 16 
States that do not have any limits on the amount of money that can be 
given to candidates. The American people seem to be more concerned 
about the soft money issue than they do the hard money issue.
  The money that I am talking about today increasing from $1,000 to 
$3,000 is hard money. Anybody can go get an FEC report. They can read 
who gives us the money, the dates they give the money, their 
occupation, their address. All of that information is available.
  I would just say that the American people have a right to know the 
issues in these political campaigns. We have more money spent on 
America today advertising pizza, Coca-Cola, and toothpaste than we do 
issues in political campaigns.
  So I would urge everyone to vote for this amendment, because I do 
think that it will be a small step in removing the incumbent protection 
that the Shays-Meehan bill provides.
  Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman

[[Page 21501]]

from Colorado (Mr. Udall), the outstanding new Member of Congress.
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague, the 
gentleman from the great State of California, for yielding time to me.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Shays-Meehan bill and in 
opposition to the substitutes.
  Mr. Chairman, earlier this year I urged the House to pass legislation 
before the race for the year 2000 begins. But if we read the newspaper 
and watch the news, it is clear that the 2000 year election has already 
begun. Candidates for president and Congress and Political Action 
Committees are breaking fund-raising records at phenomenal rates. More 
and more time is being spent raising money, and this translates into 
less time being spent doing our duties to support the public and 
represent our citizens.
  The high cost of campaigns is unfairly restricting dedicated, 
qualified people from running for public office, and is putting elected 
officials in a position of having to choose between spending their time 
doing their jobs or raising money. Unlimited soft money contributions 
are continuing to allow special interests to buy political access.
  Mr. Chairman, this must change. To my colleagues, I say, of all the 
issues we address this year, none is more important. Let us pass this 
moderate, reasonable campaign finance reform law now.
  Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Ganske).

                              {time}  1600

  Mr. GANSKE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to these amendments, 
to the two Whitfield amendments, and in support of Shays-Meehan.
  With due respect to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Whitfield), I do 
not think we need to add more money to the system. In 1996, I was the 
target of over $2 million in independent expenditures, sham issue ads. 
In my campaign, I was able to raise with the $1,000 per election limits 
for individuals and the $5,000 per election limits for PACs about $1.8 
million.
  Under these amendments, one would be able then to raise $6,000 
essentially from an individual for one's primary and for one's general 
election, $12,000 per couple in addition to thousands of dollars extra 
from members, adult members of their family. I do not think we need to 
do that. I think that just increases the money in the system.
  Let me give my colleagues one example. Governor George Bush is doing 
a marvelous job as a Republican presidential candidate raising funds. 
He has raised over $50 million, $1,000 at a time per individual, $5,000 
per PAC. Those are under current limits. We do not need more of that.
  Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, how much time is remaining on 
each side?
  The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Whitfield) 
has expired. The gentleman from California (Mr. Farr) has 1\1/2\ 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Maine (Mr. Baldacci).
  Mr. BALDACCI. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Farr) for his leadership on this issue and all that has been 
involved with reform.
  Going from $1,000 to $3,000 is not going to solve the problem. It is 
going in the opposite direction. People who I represent have difficulty 
with $50 and $100, and they feel that they are not part of the 
political process in that, in fact, it is separate and apart from their 
daily lives and the concerns that they have and that they are 
experiencing around the kitchen table every night.
  By bringing the process closer to them is where we should be going, 
not getting further away from them. We must make them part of the 
political process. We must have campaign finance reform.
  In this Congress, we have passed laws that have brought Congress in 
light in reforms of lobbyists' gifts, meals, and trips that were 
offered to Members of Congress and changed the way that Congress has 
operated. We need to make sure that we change the way campaigns are 
financed and the way campaigns are operated so that the American public 
feels part of this political process, that we are here to serve the 
public interest and be here in the public interest as public servants.
  Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this first Whitfield 
amendment, the first amendment we are considering, because this is a 
poison pill. It breaks apart the coalition of support for the Shays-
Meehan by tripling the individual contributions. This same amendment 
was defeated in a bipartisan vote last year on a vote of 102 to 315. I 
ask Members to repeat last year's action and defeat this amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time is expired.
  The question is on the amendment, as modified, offered by the 
gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Whitfield).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Whitfield) 
will be postponed.
  It is now in order to consider Amendment No. 2 printed in House 
Report 106-311.


                Amendment No. 2 Offered By Mr. Doolittle

  Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Chairman, I am the designated presenter of this 
amendment, and I offer amendment No. 2 for the gentleman from Kentucky 
(Mr. Whitfield).
  The CHAIRMAN. Is the gentleman from California (Mr. Doolittle) the 
designee for amendment No. 2?
  Mr. DOOLITTLE. I am, Mr. Chairman.


                         Parliamentary Inquiry

  Mr. HOYER. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Chairman.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) will state his 
parliamentary inquiry.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I do not know that I am going to object, but 
my point of inquiry is, does the rule provide for designees?
  The CHAIRMAN. The rule permits the proponent of an amendment to 
designate another member to offer the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment no. 2 offered by Mr. Doolittle: 
       Page 12, line 8, strike ``$30,000'' and insert ``$75,000''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Doolittle) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Doolittle).
  Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, this is a corollary to the last amendment that we took 
up. This is the aggregate for what large donors can give, adjusting it 
for inflation, as the last amendment adjusted the individual limit.
  This is important. I hear people get up and say, well, gee, there is 
no problem raising the $1.8 million at $1,000 a pop. Well, that is not 
what most people say. In fact, good candidates have thrown up their 
hands in despair. We just had a couple, a Republican in New Jersey for 
the U.S. Senate and a Democrat in Nevada, they both just pulled out in 
part because of this problem of the limits.
  In fact, I will see if I can find quickly the quote here. I am not 
going to find it, so I will have to use it later. She just basically 
felt like the present limits were just demanding so much consumption of 
time. This was the Democrat from Nevada who decided not to run for the 
Senate, that it was not worth making the effort.
  Mr. Chairman, this is what we are increasingly seeing. Why are we 
creating the system and tolerating the system that allows only the 
wealthy or in a sense only the wealthy to run. They spend all of their 
own money they

[[Page 21502]]

want. They do not have to raise a dime. But, boy, if one does not have 
wealth, one has got to go out and grind it out at $1,000 a pop. For 
U.S. Senate races in large States that is $20 million or more.
  So, yes, we are discouraging people of average means from running, 
from exercising their First Amendment rights.
  This amendment here is intended to modify the system, to give effect 
to what even many on the other side say, yes, it is reasonable, we 
ought to allow the adjustment of the limits for inflation. It is 
allowing that to occur and doing it with reference to the aggregate, 
individual contribution limit.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in 
opposition to the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Udall) is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to the Whitfield amendment 
to the Shays-Meehan campaign finance reform bill. This amendment is a 
poison pill that ruins the integrity of campaign finance reform and 
breaks apart the coalition of support for Shays-Meehan.
  Under this amendment, annual individual contribution limits for 
Federal elections would triple from $25,000 to $75,000, increasing the 
influence the wealthiest individuals have on congressional campaigns.
  When only one-quarter of 1 percent of the American people contribute 
in excess of $200 to federal campaigns, raising the contribution limits 
moves reform in exactly the wrong direction. We need to encourage 
smaller contributions below $200, not mandate and encourage larger and 
larger sums.
  Last year's coalition that passed Shays-Meehan proved that there is a 
strong support for campaign finance reform legislation. Today we have 
the opportunity to once again do the right thing for the American 
people.
  A vote for the Whitfield amendment is a poison pill that campaign 
finance reformers and the American public cannot swallow. A vote to 
increase the influence of hard working American families is a vote 
``no'' on this amendment and a vote for final passage of Shays-Meehan.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Vermont 
(Mr. Sanders).
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from New Mexico for 
yielding me this time.
  Mr. Chairman, this is an absurd amendment which would take us in 
precisely the wrong direction. My constituents in Vermont ask me many 
questions, and they raise many concerns. But I can honestly say no 
Vermonter has ever come up to me and said, ``Bernie, the major problem 
I face is that I can only contribute $25,000 to candidates, and you 
have got to raise that ceiling so that I can now contribute $75,000.'' 
No Vermonter has ever asked me that, and I suspect no Vermonter ever 
will ask me that.
  The great crisis in our democracy right now is that the wealthiest 
one-quarter of 1 percent of the population contribute 80 percent of the 
campaign monies that candidates receive. The great crisis of our time 
is that big money dominates both political parties and that ordinary 
Americans are giving up because they believe that their one vote does 
not mean anything compared to the huge contributions that the big 
corporations and wealthy individuals make.
  To raise the level to $75,000 per person is moving us in exactly the 
wrong direction. In fact, what we need to do now is what Shays-Meehan 
says, and that is to end the soft money pollution that currently 
exists, to go even further than that so that ordinary people can regain 
the power that this democracy is supposed to provide them.


        Modification To Amendment No. 2 Offered By Mr. Doolittle

  Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the 
modification I placed at the desk be adopted.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will report the modification.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment No. 2, as modified, offered by Mr. Doolittle:
       The amendment is modified as follows:
       Page 12, line 17, strike ``$30,000'' and insert 
     ``$75,000''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
California.
  Mr. CAMPBELL. Reserving the right to object, Mr. Chairman, under my 
reservation, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Doolittle).
  Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Chairman, unfortunately when these amendments were 
drafted, and there will be, I believe, other requests, the page numbers 
and line numbers do not match up with what in fact is the base bill. So 
that is the purpose of asking to make this modification.
  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman is entitled to have his 
amendment debated in the form that he wishes.
  Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment is modified.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to how much time 
remains on each side.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California (Mr. Doolittle) has 3 
minutes remaining. The gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Udall) has 1\1/2\ 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Chairman, I believe I have the right to close.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California (Mr. Doolittle) has the 
right to close.
  Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Ganske).
  Mr. GANSKE. Mr. Chairman, this amendment seeks to triple the 
aggregate contribution or limit to $75,000. I mean, how many 
contributors in this country give $75,000? The average House race today 
costs probably about $700,000. I can guarantee my colleagues that if 
they made it Federal law to approve amendment No. 1 and amendment No. 2 
that they would be doubling or tripling the average cost for a House 
race.
  Now, some would give the full amount. But this, in my opinion, would 
actually increase the amount of time that Members spend on the phone 
and candidates or challengers spend on the phone. It is a poorly 
thought out amendment. We ought to reject it. We should not increase 
the amount of money in this political fund-raising chase.
  We should actually stick with the limits that we have now. I would 
consider both of these amendments to be amendments which would benefit 
a very, very small percentage of the population in terms of increasing 
their access in the political system at the expense of the majority, 
the vast majority of givers who give $50 or $100.
  Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.
  Mr. Chairman, this is why debating this issue with these folks is so 
maddening. They tell us about all the problems of soft money. It is 
clear that we have these problems because of the limits that they 
refuse to adjust on hard money. Then when we attempt to adjust them for 
hard money, they talk about how unreasonable it is that we triple the 
limits. Well, inflation tripled.

                              {time}  1615

  If that was reasonable, why can we not adjust the limitation? We vote 
to do that every year for Social Security recipients, federal retirees, 
everybody. Why is that unreasonable when it comes to campaigns?
  Look at this. Lamar Alexander, when he ran for president in 1996: 
``Contribution and spending limits forced me to spend 70 percent of my 
time raising money in amounts no greater than $1,000.''
  That is outrageous. That is what the guy in Vermont does not 
understand. Let me tell my colleagues, he expects us, knowing what we 
know, to make the right changes. That is why we need to pass this 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page 21503]]


  Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of 
my time.
  Mr. Chairman, this is an issue of campaign finance reform. It is not 
a Democratic issue. It is not a Republican issue. It is a bipartisan 
problem that requires a bipartisan solution.
  I would ask all of us to look at it in that way Democrats, 
Republicans, Independent, and see that we do the right thing for 
America.
  Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Chairman, I have how much time remaining?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California (Mr. Doolittle) has 2 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I agree with the gentleman that the campaign finance 
reform system is a mess. But they want to make it even more of a mess 
by piling on more regulation.
  This amendment at least tries to remove some of the pressure from 
money to go elsewhere other than from the contributor to the candidate 
by allowing an adjustment for inflation for the limits. And then even 
some of our Republican speakers stand up here and mouth the idea that 
it is outrageous for us to triple the limits.
  Well, what about inflation? Why is it outrageous to maintain the 
purchasing power of the limit? After all, if it was reasonable in 1976, 
then at least that level ought to be maintained today, and that 
requires this adjustment.
  I mean, if we could just get people to think about this issue and 
quit mouthing these mantras about the evils of money and politics. 
Money is going to be in politics as long as we have a properly elected 
government. So instead of trying to pretend it does not exist or to 
command a control of regulations, why do we not let the voters decide? 
Why do we not let them contribute to the candidate and simply disclose 
it?
  The amendment that I am offering is a reasonable amendment. If it is 
going to be revisited by the supposed stewards of pure campaign finance 
reform, one has got to question their sincerity. And I do question 
their sincerity.
  I guess I would just observe the Washington Times refers to this as 
campaign finance charade. Earlier I quoted from the Nevada candidate. 
The Nevada candidate was a lady named Sue Del Papa, and this is what 
she said as she was withdrawing from running for the Democrat 
nomination for Senate in Nevada. She quoted from the Wall Street 
Journal. They called the political process a game that ``rewards those 
who will spend hours and hours each day raising money rather than 
seeking solutions.'' That is what the Republicans talk about raising 
money.
  Please vote for this amendment.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Doolittle 
amendment and in support of the Shays-Meehan campaign finance reform 
bill. The Doolittle amendment would undermine the important reforms in 
Shays-Meehan which would bring greater accountability to campaign 
spending.
  Shays-Meehan would let public know who is running ads and allow them 
to decide for themselves whether or not the ad is credible. Brining all 
campaign activity out in to the open through increased disclosure is 
beneficial to the election process and does not harm any organizations. 
The public should know who is beyond any advertising in order to 
evaluate the credibility and reliability of the opinions being 
presented, especially when they are presented as ``facts,'' not 
opinions. What is wrong with disclosure and openness? Why does 
requiring disclosure prevent people from running ads?
  The Shays-Meehan bill does not prevent any organization from saying 
whatever it wants about any candidate for office in a TV ad, voter 
guide or anywhere else at any time. It simply states that campaign 
activities of political parties and independent organizations should be 
subject to the same rules that apply to candidates for office.
  The Doolittle amendment is disguised as a ``voter guide exemption,'' 
but in reality, it would undermine the reforms in the bill. Under the 
Doolittle amendment, individuals and groups could run unlimited print 
or Internet ads with no regard to election law simply by including 
information on a candidate's voting record. This is a gigantic 
loophole.
  The Shays-Meehan bill already contains a true voter guide exemption. 
Legitimate voter guides that state a candidate's position on an issue 
and how that compares to the groups position in a neutral manner are 
explicitly exempted. The only way that a voter guide would be covered 
is if it is designed to clearly benefit one candidate over another. We 
have all seen these ``voter guides'' which pick and choose votes and 
characterize positions in a way that is clearly intended to express 
opposition to or support for a candidate.
  As a Member with a strong pro-life record throughout my career, I 
strongly disagree with the argument made by some folks that Shays-
Meehan would hurt the pro-life cause. I cannot understand who pro-life 
groups are not willing to be completely open and up front about where 
they raise their money and how they spend their money to promote the 
pro-life position in political campaigns. That is all Shays-Meehan 
would require these organizations to do.
  I urge you to vote ``no'' on the Doolittle amendment and for the 
Shays-Meehan bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time has expired.
  The question is on the amendment, as modified, offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Doolittle).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Doolittle) will be postponed.
  It is now in order to consider Amendment No. 3 printed in House 
Report 106-311.


                Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Doolittle

  Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:
  Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Doolittle:
       Page 16, strike line 5 and all that follows through page 
     17, line 17 and insert the following:
       ``(B) Nonapplication to publications on voting records.--
     The term `express advocacy' shall not apply with respect to 
     any communication which is in printed form or posted on the 
     Internet and 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.''.


        Modification to Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Doolittle

  Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Chairman, we have the same situation with the line 
and page numbers not matching up, and I ask unanimous consent that the 
amendment be modified in the form at the desk.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will report the modification.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Modification to Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Doolittle:
       The amendment is modified as follows:
       Page 16, strike line 9 and all that follows through page 
     17, line 22 and insert the following:
       ``(B) Nonapplication to publications on voting records.--
     The term `express advocacy' shall not apply with respect to 
     any communication which is in printed form or posted on the 
     Internet and 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 communications 
     contains explicit words expressly urging a vote for or 
     against any identified candidate or political party.''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment is modified.
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Doolittle) and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Davis) 
each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Doolittle).

[[Page 21504]]


  Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment to make certain that the voter 
guides can be published without fear of hedging or the chilling of any 
speech, which I believe will occur if we enact the law as it is 
proposed in the Shays-Meehan bill. The Shays-Meehan bill takes a 
situation where it is a bright-line test; it is very clear what is and 
is not permitted, and blurs it.
  They say that is not their intent to prevent the voter guides. I 
believe that we should enact my amendment so that there is no doubt 
about what can happen. Otherwise, the person making the speech is not 
really going to know and is subject to sanction by the Federal Election 
Commission bureaucrats if he unknowingly steps over the line.
  Let me just quote from the Buckley decision. I think this goes right 
to the heart of it. This is back in 1976 in the Buckley versus Valeo 
decision, which has been repeatedly upheld by the courts in subsequent 
decisions.
  ``So long as persons and groups eschew expenditures that in express 
terms advocate the election or defeat of a clearly identified 
candidate, they are free to spend as much as they want to promote the 
candidate and his views.''
  I would like to ensure that that freedom continues unfettered.
  Now, the authors of Shays-Meehan will tell us that, more or less, it 
is okay to do but they just have got to be viewed as a totality and 
there are some qualifications and so forth that they make the test 
subjective, whereas now it is clear.
  And, as anybody knows, do they really want to get out there and 
engage in speech and maybe be compelled to hire an attorney, go through 
3 years of discovery and litigation and spend a $100,000 or more on 
attorney's fees because some bureaucrat in Washington might argue that, 
in the totality, arguably they violated the regulation?
  I just want a clear test. Let me offer this from Buckley versus 
Valeo: ``Whether words intended and designed to fall short of 
invitation would miss the mark is a question both of intent and effect. 
No speaker in such circumstances safely could assume that anything he 
might say upon the general subject would not be understood by some as 
an invitation. In short, the supposedly clear-cut distinction between 
discussion, laudation, general advocacy, and solicitation puts the 
speaker in these circumstances wholly at the mercy of the varied 
understanding of his harriers and consequently of whatever inference 
may be drawn as to his intent and meaning. Such a distinction offers no 
security for free discussion. In these conditions, it blankets with 
uncertainty whatever may be said. It compels the speaker to ``hedge and 
trim'' and, therefore, chills speech and, therefore, is 
unconstitutional.
  Therefore, I ask for the adoption of this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from Tennessee (Mr. Wamp), a leading expert in bipartisan opposition to 
this amendment.
  Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, Yogi Berra once said, ``It is deja vu all over again.'' 
And that is where I feel like we are today. We have been down this 
road.
  Under the leadership of a former Member, Ms. Smith of Washington, 
this legislation pending before the floor is very clear in exempting 
voter guides from any of these provisions.
  But the big concern here is about these political ads in the last 60 
days of the campaign. The warning that I would raise is candidates are 
losing and will lose control of the messages in their own campaigns if 
the outside groups that run these ads in the final 60 days do not 
declare who they are and if they do not come under the same rules as 
candidates.
  Candidates, all of their money, income and expenses, are regulated. 
These groups should be regulated in the exact same way, no restriction 
on speech any different than a candidate.
  I would be the last one to support any restrictions in the ability to 
speak in the final 60 days of the campaign, but the candidates must 
prevail.
  Mr. DOOLITTLE. May I inquire, Mr. Chairman, how much time does each 
side have remaining.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California (Mr. Doolittle) has 2 
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Davis) has 4 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).
  Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, in our legislation we do nothing to impact 
voter guides at all. But because there was a concern that we might, we 
put in language that makes it a certainty that voter guides are 
allowed. They do not come under the campaign law at all. All these 
printed documents do not come under it. They are allowed.
  What the gentleman from California (Mr. Doolittle) is doing is using 
this as an opportunity to then eliminate the provision on sham issue 
ads. And we cannot do that. Sham issue ads are the vehicle in which 
corporations and labor unions bring big money into the ads. We call 
them ``campaign ads,'' as they are, and they can still make their voice 
heard through their campaign ads.
  Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire who has the right 
to close.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Davis) has the right to 
close, being a member of the committee.
  Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Chairman, I just love the circuitous reasoning 
here.
  The gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays) just said they have no 
impact whatsoever on these voter guides, and then he went on to talk 
about sham issue ads and how those are bad and, of course, we have got 
to ban sham issue ads. Well, the point is are they sham issue ads or is 
this the constitutional right of people to speak?
  Under Buckley versus Valeo and all the cases that have followed, this 
is people having their constitutional right to speak. They are not 
subject to regulation by the FEC. And yet this bill makes them subject 
to regulation arguably by causing them to hedge and trim and fashion 
their language in such a way that the federal czar cannot intervene and 
sanction them for things that they said.
  All I am saying is let us have a bright-line test so that nobody is 
in doubt as to what the standard is. If they say vote for or vote 
against or if in some way they convey that clearly to vote for or vote 
against, that is prohibited and subject to regulation under the present 
law.

                              {time}  1630

  We do not want the situation, though, where the author of the voter 
guide is subjectively determined, after the fact, to have crossed that 
line. We just think, why put people who are American citizens 
exercising their constitutional rights, why put them in jeopardy? For 
that reason, I object to the present language.
  Mr. Chairman, I am going to close simply by saying, if, as is 
represented, there is no intent to affect voter guides, what is the 
matter with this amendment? It just makes clear that people can 
continue to do the voter guides and not be subject to the Federal 
bureaucratic czar, to his whim, to make it clear, as is present law, 
that they can continue to speak during these campaigns.
  I ask for an ``aye'' vote.
  Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the 
distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin).
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Chairman, Shays-Meehan is clear about voter guides. 
What the Doolittle amendment does is to essentially gut Shays-Meehan in 
terms of sham issue ads.
  The gentleman from California says he wants a bright line so only 
certain words would be covered. In first amendment instances, there are 
no bright lines in terms of free speech, that you can only use such 
words or you cannot. In terms of censorship, the Supreme Court standard 
does not have a bright line, allowing only this word or that word. What 
the gentleman from California would do would be to gut the heart of 
this bill. Vote ``no.''

[[Page 21505]]


  Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to 
the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Campbell).
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California (Mr. Campbell) is 
recognized for 3 minutes.
  Mr. CAMPBELL. I thank my good friend for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Chairman, my good friend from California's amendment recognizes 
that an ad that says ``vote against Congressman Smith'' is subject to 
regulation. Suppose the following ad is run by Congressman Smith's 
Republican opponent in coordination with the Republican National 
Committee. It says, ``Congressman Smith is a real bad Congressman 
because he voted against prayer in school.'' Now, that is not using an 
explicit word expressly urging a vote against Congressman Smith. It 
just says, ``Congressman Smith is a real bad Congressman because he 
voted against prayer in school.''
  I yield to the gentleman to tell me whether that would be permitted 
under his amendment.
  Mr. DOOLITTLE. Your remedy is not to bridge the freedom of speech but 
is to raise the limits on hard dollars so we do not have all this 
pressure for soft money issue ads.
  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. Chairman, could we have a clearer admission of the 
loophole nature of the Doolittle amendment? I yielded to the gentleman 
to explain how he would handle this hypothetical and he does not handle 
this hypothetical.
  In other words, I can run ads, coordinated with my Republican Party, 
against a Democrat, a Democrat can run ads, coordinated with his or her 
Democratic Party, against a Republican that say, my opponent is a 
horrible person, my opponent is a terrible Congressman, Congresswoman, 
look at his or her record, it is awful, but so long as you do not say 
``vote against,'' it is okay.
  I could not imagine a more clear example of a loophole, and that is 
the intention of the amendment by my colleague from northern 
California.
  As to the question of the Constitution, the test is essentiality. It 
is not whether an actual word ``vote for'' or ``vote against'' is used 
which is what is in the Doolittle amendment. It is what is the heart 
and soul of what you are doing. If you are actually, in effect, urging 
that one should vote for or against a candidate, well, then that should 
be subject to the same regulations as are applicable, under existing 
law, to hard dollar expenditures. Indeed, 10 years after Buckley versus 
Valeo, the Supreme Court said, in the FEC versus Massachusetts case, 
the test was essentiality and not just the words. This was 10 years 
after Buckley versus Valeo.
  I conclude by observing that restrictions on speech are permissible 
so that others may speak. You can prohibit a bullhorn if it drowns out 
everybody else. There are constitutional decisions allowing limits on 
fighting words, slander, commercial speech, obscenity, antitrust 
communicating price information, group libel, speech causing a clear 
and present danger of violence, or shouting so loud that you do not 
allow anybody else to be heard. That is what we are trying to do by 
saying that there should be reasonable limits on funding of ads, as 
there are in Shays-Meehan.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Doolittle), as modified.
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Doolittle), as modified, will be postponed.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 printed in House 
Report 106-311.


                Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Bereuter

  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Admendment No. 4 offered by Mr. Bereuter:
       Page 54, insert after line 22 the following:
       (c) Prohibition Applicable to All Individuals Who Are Not 
     Citizens or Nationals of the United States.--Section 
     319(b)(2) of such Act (2 U.S.C. 441e(b)(2)) is amended by 
     striking the period at the end and inserting the following: 
     ``, or in the case of an election for Federal office, an 
     individual who is not a citizen of the United States or a 
     national of the United States (as defined in section 
     101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality Act).''.


        Modification to Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Bereuter

  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that a substitute 
amendment be made in order to deal with the pagination and line problem 
created by a change in pagination by the Committee on Rules.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will report the modification.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment No. 4, as modified, offered by Mr. Bereuter:
       The amendment is modified as follows:
       Page 55, insert after line 6 the following:
       (e) Prohibition Applicable to All Individuals Who Are Not 
     Citizens or Nationals of the United States.--Section 
     319(b)(2) of such Act (2 U.S.C. 441e(b)(2)) is amended by 
     striking the period at the end and inserting the following: 
     ``, or in the case of an election for Federal office, an 
     individual who is not a citizen of the United States or a 
     national of the United States (as defined in section 
     101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality Act).''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the modification?
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object, I just want 
to ask the gentleman from Nebraska, as I understand, this is simply a 
technical change and not a substantive change; am I correct?
  Mr. BEREUTER. If the gentleman will yield, that is correct. Simply 
page and line number changes.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the modification is accepted.
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, the gentleman from 
Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) and the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. 
Morella) each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter).
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, the foreign contributions prohibition amendment that 
this Member is offering along with the distinguished gentleman from 
Mississippi (Mr. Wicker) will prohibit foreign individual campaign 
contributions. It will, in other words, permit them for U.S. citizens 
and U.S. nationals. This legislation essentially was passed by the 
House on two occasions in the previous Congress, once as a separate 
bill, H.R. 34, and again, in precisely the same form as offered today, 
as an amendment to the Shays-Meehan bill in the last Congress by a 
recorded vote.
  This Member reintroduced this legislation because the situation 
remains the same. Many Americans believe that it is already illegal for 
foreigners to make Federal campaign contributions. What happened 
allegedly in the last presidential campaign related to contributions 
from supposedly resident foreign aliens raised this subject. The 
problem for Americans who believe that campaign contributions from 
foreign contributers is already illegal is that they are both right and 
wrong about our current Federal election laws. The fact of the matter 
is that under our current Federal election laws, an individual does not 
have to be a U.S. citizen to make campaign contributions to Federal 
candidates. He or she does not even have to be a U.S. national. Under 
our current Federal election laws, a person can make a campaign 
contribution to candidates running for Federal office if that 
individual is a permanent legal resident alien and is, in fact, 
residing in the United States. This is not only an improper provision, 
in my judgment, it is not only what this Member would call a loophole 
in American law, it creates such huge enforcement problems that there 
really is no effective way to detect and stop contributions from 
foreigners who are not resident aliens by status or who do not in fact 
reside in the United States.

[[Page 21506]]

  This Member believes that this situation is wrong, where foreigners 
affect our elections, he believes that most Americans would agree that 
it is wrong, and he believes that this is a problem begging for 
correction.
  To this Member it is a very simple proposition. If an individual 
wants to be fully involved in the American political process, then he 
or she must become a citizen of the United States or be a U.S. 
national. If that person does not make the full commitment to this 
country by becoming a U.S. citizen or a U.S. national, then he or she 
should not have the right to participate in our political system by 
making a campaign contribution and affecting the lives of American 
citizens.
  Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Passage of this amendment that has just been offered would prevent 
lawful permanent residents from making campaign contributions and 
expenditures to Federal elections. I want to explain, Mr. Chairman, 
what defines a legal permanent resident. These individuals represent 
approximately 4 percent of the U.S. population. In fiscal year 1998, 
660,000 legal immigrants came to the United States, according to the 
INS. The vast majority of legal immigrants came to the United States to 
join close family members, to fill jobs that no qualified U.S. citizen 
has taken after the job was advertised by the employer, and to escape 
persecution based on political opinion, race, religion, national origin 
or membership in a particular social group.
  I want to point out that these individuals are integral stakeholders 
in our society. They invest in, and they contribute to, our communities 
in countless ways just as citizens do. Permanent residents, or 
citizens-in-waiting, pay Federal taxes on their worldwide income as 
well as State and local taxes. And, moreover, permanent residents are 
required to register for the draft, and many of them in fact are 
veterans. Nearly 20,000 legal residents are now serving voluntarily in 
our armed forces. Moreover, more than 20 percent of the Congressional 
Medal of Honor recipients in U.S. wars have been legal immigrants or 
naturalized Americans.
  Many permanent residents operate businesses that contribute 
enormously to our economy. Others send their citizen children to our 
schools. These individuals are concerned, involved members of each and 
every community in which they live. This amendment would have a 
chilling effect on their political participation by severely hindering 
their ability to support a candidate of their choice, which is a basic 
freedom that is constitutionally guaranteed.
  The Supreme Court has ruled that spending on campaigns is a form of 
speech protected by the first amendment. Let us vote against this 
amendment and allow these people their rights to participate in 
political campaigns by contributing.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker), the cosponsor of 
the amendment.
  Mr. WICKER. I thank the gentleman from Nebraska for yielding me this 
time.
  Mr. Chairman, we have heard a little discussion earlier today about 
so-called ``poison pill'' amendments. Certainly this is not one of 
those poison pill amendments. The House of Representatives has voted on 
this issue twice in the past year, each time approving it 
overwhelmingly. The first time it passed by a vote of 369-43 and the 
second time, during last year's campaign regulation debate, the House 
approved this measure by a margin of 282-126. As these votes suggest, 
this is a common sense reform which has bipartisan support.
  If you are not a United States citizen, or a United States national, 
you should not be able to influence the electoral process. It is wrong 
and dangerous to allow a potential to exist for undue foreign influence 
in electing Federal officials. That is what the debate on this 
amendment is about, undue foreign influence in our election process.
  The American people have witnessed in the last two Clinton-Gore 
campaigns a breathtaking willingness to solicit money from non-
citizens. We have all seen the video of Vice President Gore soliciting 
money from Buddhist monks who had taken a vow of poverty.

                              {time}  1645

  The Bereuter-Wicker amendment would address this problem by removing 
any ambiguity in the law, ambiguities which today allow foreign money 
to be funneled through U.S. addresses.
  If a foreign national is dedicated to the ideals of the American 
democratic system of government, then I encourage him to become a 
United States citizen. With the adoption of the Bereuter-Wicker 
amendment, not only could that person then invest their money in a 
candidate he believes in, but he could actually vote for the candidate 
he was contributing to.
  We have heard much today about the importance of money in our 
political system. We should remove the loophole in the current law 
which allows for the possibility of foreign money funding our political 
discourse.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of this common sense amendment.
  Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Dingell) to speak against this amendment which would deny 
citizens in-waiting the opportunity to participate.
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, I commend the gentlewoman, and I thank her 
for yielding me this time. I want to express affection and respect for 
the authors of the amendment and just simply say some years ago I was 
in favor of this, but I have gotten wiser, and this amendment is wrong. 
If my colleagues are concerned about Americans or rather permanent 
residents who have come here to live and to join us, and they do not 
want them to have free speech, and they do not want to let them have 
the other rights, then say so.
  I have heard a lot on the other side of the aisle about how this is 
about free speech and how gifts of money for campaign purposes are the 
exercise of free speech. Correct. These people do almost everything 
that every American citizen does. They serve in the Armed Forces. As 
the gentlewoman mentioned, 20 percent of the Congressional Medal of 
Honor recipients have been legal immigrants or naturalized citizens. 
They serve in our Army. They are permitted to participate in our 
elective process, and they should be permitted to give money if they 
are legally resident.
  Mr. Chairman, they should not be permitted to do things which are 
improper, but I say give them the right to participate in the system in 
the degree that is full and proper.
  Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman 
from Hawaii (Mrs. Mink).
  Mrs. MINK of Hawaii. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this 
amendment that is an unconscionable limitation of the freedom of 
persons legally admitted as permanent residents to participate in the 
political process. What do we fear from these people? Are they a threat 
to our democracy? If this provision becomes law, it will be challenged 
in the courts. A hundred law professors have written to all of us. It 
must be a case of simply not knowing that persons in this country are 
protected under the Constitution. Nowhere in the Constitution does it 
say that protections are only for citizens.
  This amendment is absolutely a violation of the Constitution.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Bereuter-Wicker amendment 
to H.R. 417.
  Rules Committee Chair argued the need to open up the electoral 
process and to restore confidence in our democracy. This amendment 
shuts out from participating in our democracy over 10 million persons 
who have been legally allowed to enter our country as permanent 
residents, 20,000 of whom are currently in the military. How is their 
money tainted? How will the hardearned money of millions of taxpaying 
legal resident taint the electoral process?
  One hundred law professors have written to the Congress to advise 
that this prohibition against contributions by legal residents is an 
unconstitutional violation of the rights of free speech as defined by 
the Supreme Court.

[[Page 21507]]

  This unconscionable amendment places on the candidate the burden of 
ascertaining the citizenship status of the person from whom you are 
soliciting a contribution, and selling a campaign fundraiser ticket. 
Picture a $10 Chili-rice event. Whose money can you accept? Who will 
you ask whether they are citizens? Will you ask a Mrs. Smith who sent 
in a check? No? Why not? Because you assume that Mrs. Smith is white 
and a citizen. If this same Mrs. Smith handed you a check at a 
fundraiser, and is a Chinese woman married to a Smith, will you ask 
her? The rule of the law would require you to ask. If the contributor 
turns out to be a legal resident, you could be fined up to $5000 or go 
to jail for a year.
  This is an unconscionable limitation of the freedom of persons 
legally admitted as permanent residents to participate in the political 
process. What do we fear from these persons? Are they a threat to our 
democracy?
  If this provision becomes law it will be challenged in the Courts and 
it will be expunged as a violation of the Bill of Rights. Our 
Constitution guarantees all persons legally living in the United States 
all of the civil rights as inalienable in a free and open democracy.
  I am devastated that the leaders of this debate did not see fit to 
designate this amendment as a ``poison pill''. For me it is a Poison 
Pill. If this amendment passes, I will vote against the bill as a 
whole.
  Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 45 seconds to the gentleman from 
New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment. I 
am concerned by the characterizations of foreigner that supporters of 
this amendment have used, and I would stress legal permanent residents 
are in this country legally. They have followed all the proper 
procedures and have played by the rules. For LPRs, campaign 
contributions are the only form of political participation available to 
them.
  Proponents of this amendment call on immigrants to make the 
commitment to the United States by becoming citizens. In fact, a 
significant number of LPRs eager to take their places as citizens are 
frustrated in their effort by long backlogs at the INS. Their desire to 
get involved in the political process as they await their citizenship 
should be welcomed.
  Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from 
Guam (Mr. Underwood).
  Mr. UNDERWOOD. Mr. Chairman, basically there have been unfair 
characterizations about undue foreign influence. This is not about 
undue foreign influence. This is about the violation of constitutional 
rights for permanent residents in order for them to participate more 
fully in the American process when many of their families are already 
citizens.
  Mr. Chairman, I am in full support of H.R. 417, the Shays-Meehan 
Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act, which is a true campaign 
finance reform bill. This legislation bans soft money and bars foreign 
nationals from contributing funds towards U.S. campaigns.
  I would like to express my strong opposition to the Bereuter/Wicker 
amendment, which prohibits legal permanent residents from making 
financial contributions toward our political campaigns.
  First, and most importantly, this particular amendment is an attack 
on the First Amendment right of legal permanent residents. These 
residents, also known as ``citizens in training,'' are entitled to many 
of the same rights as American-born or naturalized American citizens. 
After all, unlike foreign nationals, legal permanent residents pay 
taxes and are drafted into the military. These permanent residents are 
stakeholders in our society; they invest in our community. Their 
children are and will become citizens of the United States.
  By voting for this amendment, we are taking an unfair and 
unconstitutional step towards campaign finance reform. In Buckley 
versus Valeo the Supreme Court ruled that campaign contributions are a 
form of speech protected under the First Amendment and subject to the 
highest levels of judicial scrutiny. This ruling held that campaign 
contributions are a form of protected speech. The Constitution applies 
not only to U.S. citizens, but to all legal permanent residents of the 
United States. Ruling affirmed the same right for legal permanent 
residents. The Supreme Court has held that legal residents have the 
same rights accorded to citizens under Yick Ho versus Hopkins in 1886. 
In 1945, the Court reaffirmed its position in Briggs versus Wixon by 
stating that ``[f]reedom of speech and press is accorded to aliens 
residing in this country.'' Hence barring donations from legal 
immigrants would be in violation of their constitutional rights. The 
Supreme Court has never approved a total ban on political expenditures 
or contributions from legal permanent residents.
  By banning the legal permanent residents from making campaign 
contributions, we are also preventing these residents from 
participating in the political process. Legal permanent residents 
should be able to voice their support for candidates whom they believe 
will make the United States a better place for them and their children, 
who are generally U.S. citizens.
  Furthermore, this amendment will not only affect the rights of these 
residents, they will also affect the rights of other U.S. citizens. 
Ethnicity will once again become an issue. Those American citizens with 
ethnic minority backgrounds will be compelled to show proof of 
citizenship when offering campaign contributions. This kind of action 
is discriminatory and will make people of color more reluctant about 
participating in our political process. Passage of this amendment is in 
itself an insult to the Asian Pacific American community, as well as 
other minorities who are legal permanent residents. The Bereuter/Wicker 
not only shuts out legal permanent residents out of the political 
process but threatens to silence the voice of minority citizens all 
over the United States.
  There are numerous reasons why legal permanent residents immigrated 
to the United States. Many come to the United States to join close 
family members; others immigrate to fill jobs that no qualified 
American citizen has filled after the job was advertised. Presently, we 
have about two million legal immigrants who are trying to become U.S. 
citizens. Unfortunately, as a result of the two-year backlog at the 
Immigration and Naturalization Service, this effort will take some 
time. Legal permanent residents should not be punished for this fact.
  The Bereuter/Wicker amendment would subvert our political system by 
trying to prohibit legal permanent residents from contributing to the 
campaigns of candidates, many of whom promise to better the educational 
standards of our children and to better our lives altogether.
  Banning the legal immigrants' contribution will do nothing in helping 
to stifle foreign governments from funneling money into political 
campaigns. Foreign governments or other disqualified donors need only 
use a citizen as a conduit, an action already prohibited under current 
law. Therefore the banning of legal immigrants' campaign contributions 
to stop foreign governments' influence in our political process does 
not make sense. Instead, it insinuates, in a discriminatory matter, 
that legal permanent residents are more likely to make illegal 
contributions than U.S. citizens. We have no proof of that assumption.
  Last, but not least, I would like to urge my colleagues not to be 
diverted by the amendments to H.R. 417 that have emerged. Many of these 
amendments will only work against all the reforms we wish to make. We 
need to focus, instead, on the important issue at hand, which is to 
make sure that all persons contributing to political campaigns be legal 
residents. We need to limit the amount of soft money that people 
contribute under ``independent expenditure.'' Let us do the right thing 
by voting for the Shays-Meehan Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform. By 
voting for H.R. 417, let us make sure that all legal permanent 
residents and American citizens be allowed to contribute within the law 
and participate fully in our political process.
  Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 15 seconds to the gentlewoman 
from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, if legal permanent residents are good 
enough to pay taxes, to work in our country and to serve in our 
military service, then we are certainly also made better by their 
voice, and I would urge defeat of this amendment.
  I rise to urge my colleagues to oppose the Bereuter/Wicker amendment. 
Cutting legal permanent residents access to the political process is 
absolutely the wrong thing to do
  Legal permanent residents are immigrants who have made the commitment 
to become citizens of the United States and are in the middle of the 
process towards full citizenship. They have made the commitment, not 
only to come to this country and make a better life for themselves and 
their family but, through the goods and services, jobs and taxes that 
their labors produce, they have made the commitment to make this 
country better for all of us. And they have given more than that. Legal 
permanent residents are eligible for the draft, have served in the U.S. 
military and served with great distinction in defense of the rights 
that every American holds dear. Like immigrants for generations, they 
came to this country and participated and this country is much better 
for it.

[[Page 21508]]

  The Bereuter/Wicker amendment, however, would limit their 
participation. The Bereuter/Wicker amendment says that legal permanent 
residents--people who we ask to put their life on the line--aren't good 
enough to support the people who would put them on that line. That's 
wrong. If we are made better by their work, their taxes and their 
military service, then we are also made better by their voice.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and allow legal 
permanent residents to enjoy much needed reform of campaign finance 
reform just like we enjoy all that they bring to our country.
  Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  In my remaining 15 seconds I just want to urge this body to recognize 
that these are lawful, permanent residents who are part of our 
communities. They are our neighbors; they are part of our work force. 
They engage in producing jobs for others, and I hope that we will vote 
against this amendment.
  Legal residents should have the same rights to make political 
contributions and expenditures as do American citizens. To bar legal 
immigrants from showing support for the candidates of their choice 
would be like requiring them to sit out during a demonstration, or 
denying them the right to hold a rally in a park, or banning them from 
running a political ad in a newspaper. This is hardly the message about 
our first amendment freedoms we should send to all ``citizens in 
training.'' Legal immigrants, like U.S. citizens, want to support 
candidates who they believe make America a better place to live. Though 
legal immigrants cannot vote in the United States, they have a 
substantial stake in our country, and should be allowed their full 
first amendment rights to express their views.
  A vote for this amendment is nothing more than an attack on the first 
amendment rights of legal immigrants--I urge my colleagues to vote 
``no'' on the Bereuter-Wicker amendment.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the remainder of the time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Nebraska is recognized for the 
remaining 1 minute.
  Mr. BEREUTER. First of all, there is nothing negative about the word 
``foreigner'' as used here, and I would remind the gentleman from New 
Jersey that I have used the term ``permanent resident alien'' 
frequently in my comments.
  I would also say the constitutionality of this matter has not been 
ruled on by the courts; and I think there is at least that many law 
professors that would say that this kind of statutory limitation which 
we would act upon here would be perfectly constitutional. This 
amendment goes to our basic sovereignty, the ability to rule ourselves, 
to protect our basic rights.
  And I will also ask do my colleagues remember on the campaign 
contribution cards that colleagues and I and others have to fill out in 
our campaigns, it asks occupation? This amendment does not discriminate 
against the minorities as alleged in a Dear Colleague letter. All we 
have to do is have two blanks on a contribution card which asks the 
following: Are you a U.S. citizen? Are you a U.S. national? Then the 
burden of enforcement falls upon the complaint process against the 
campaign under the FEC.
  This amendment constitutes a perfectly reasonable approach. I urge my 
colleagues to reserve the right to affect our elections to U.S. 
citizens and U.S. nationals.
  Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the 
Bereuter-Wicker amendment which prevents legal permanent residents from 
making campaign contributions.
  At first glance, this amendment seems innocuous. Why would we want 
anyone other than U.S. citizens to participate in our political 
process?
  Legal permanent residents can't vote; why should they be able to 
contribute to elections?
  Hasn't it been proven through prosecutions during the last several 
years that foreign nationals can't be trusted to participate in the 
election process?
  First, legal permanent residents are tax-paying residents of the 
United States. They are also subject to the draft; in fact, more than 
20,000 legal permanent residents are serving honorably at the present 
time in the U.S. Armed Forces. Many legal permanent residents have 
filed for U.S. citizenship and are merely waiting for a lengthy 
naturalization process to be completed.
  Second, legal permanent residents are already part of our political 
process. We count them in the census. They determine congressional 
representation, and, in representing a state or a congressional 
district, a Member of Congress is entrusted with representing them as 
well as U.S. citizens residing there.
  Finally, the prosecutions of a few foreign nationals during the last 
few years prove nothing. In fact, they emphasize that we make an 
enormous mistake if we leap to such judgments about entire ethnic 
groups based on the illegal and reprehensible deeds of a few.
  But discrimination is an important issue. How would the proponents of 
this amendment enforce such a stipulation? We have to assume that each 
and every campaign contributor would need to be queried about the 
status of their U.S. citizenship.
  And who is most likely to be queried at a fund-raising event? 
Obviously, those with ethnic looks or those who speak broken English or 
have an ethnic accent.
  Ultimately, this amendment could inhibit the participation of ethnic 
Americans. What candidate or campaign worker would risk accepting or 
soliciting a contribution from a person who looks foreign, speaks with 
an accent, or has an ethnic name?
  The Supreme Court has ruled that spending on campaigns is a form of 
speech and is protected by the first amendment. The first amendment 
applies to everyone living in the United States, not just U.S. 
citizens.
  It is therefore ironic that those who want to defeat the Shays-Meehan 
bill today and oppose efforts to reform campaign finance laws based on 
the argument that restrictions inhibit the exercise of free speech, are 
the first ones to lineup in favor of this amendment that will take away 
one form of free speech from legal permanent residents.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose this attempt to undermine the first 
amendment.
  I urge my colleagues to fight against the type of ethnic 
discrimination that would surely arise from adoption of such a 
provision.
  I urge my colleagues to support the full participation of legal 
permanent residents in our political system, as we demonstrate what 
U.S. democracy truly means.
  Mr. WU. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong opposition to the 
amendment offered by Mr. Bereuter and Mr. Wicker.
  The gentleman from Nebraska seeks to silence voices in America trying 
to speak out on their own behalf, and on behalf of those who can not 
speak for themselves.
  The amendment would slam the door to political participation and free 
speech right in the face of millions of legal residents.
  Let us be perfectly clear: Legal permanent residents are invited by 
the U.S. Government to live permanently within our borders. They pay 
taxes, they are subject to the draft, and they serve in the military.
  There are over 10 million permanent legal residents in the United 
States. Many have come to this country fleeing persecution in their 
homeland.
  Others have come to this country for the same reasons my own family 
did almost forty years ago, seeking opportunity in a new land, and 
hoping to be reunited with their families.
  Banning contributions by legal permanent residents would have a 
chilling effect. It would send a message to many communities--
particularly those rich with first generation Americans--that we do not 
value ``citizens in training.''
  We here in this democratic body should work to bring more people into 
our political system and encourage their full participation, not 
discourage civic engagement.
  I am also concerned that enforcing such a ban would cause other 
unintended problems. Imagine candidates and campaign workers trying to 
enforce such a ban by discouraging participation from people who look 
``foreign'' or have ``foreign'' sounding names.
  Banning contributions from legal permanent residents does nothing to 
address the real problem with our campaign finance system: the 
limitless flow of special interest money into political campaigns.
  Denying the right of legal permanent residents to participate in 
campaigns in equivalent to selectively reducing their free speech 
rights.
  Shays-Meehan already prohibits contributions from foreign nationals. 
Going beyond the language in Shays-Meehan only punishes tax paying, law 
abiding people in our communities and prohibits them from participating 
in the political process.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the Bereuter-Wicker amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time has expired.
  The question is on the amendment, as modified, offered by the 
gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.

[[Page 21509]]


  Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, further proceedings 
on the amendment, as modified, offered by the gentleman from Nebraska 
(Mr. Bereuter) will be postponed.
  It is now in order to consider Amendment No. 5 printed in House 
Report 106-311.


              Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Faleomavaega

  Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 5 offered by Mr. Faleomavaega:
       Add at the end of title V the following new section (and 
     conform the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 517. CLARIFICATION OF RIGHT OF NATIONALS OF THE UNITED 
                   STATES TO MAKE POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS.

       Section 319(d)(2) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 
     1971 (2 U.S.C. 441e(d)(2)), as amended by sections 506(b) and 
     511(a), is further amended by inserting after ``United 
     States'' the following: ``or a national of the United States 
     (as defined in section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act)''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, the gentleman from 
American Samoa (Mr. Faleomavaega) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from American Samoa (Mr. 
Faleomavaega).
  Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of my amendment No. 5 to the 
Shays-Meehan campaign finance reform bill, H.R. 417. I want to thank 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), chairman of the Committee 
on Rules, and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley), the 
ranking Democrat from the Committee on Rules, for making my amendment 
in order and for the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays) and the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Meehan) for their support of this 
amendment, which will ensure that the right of U.S. nationals to make 
contributions in federal elections is fully protected.
  Mr. Chairman, I represent the territory of American Samoa, the only 
U.S. soil in the Southern Hemisphere. Persons born in American Samoa of 
U.S. parents are given the status of U.S. nationals. These individuals 
are nationals of the United States but are not U.S. citizens. They hold 
permanent allegiance to the United States, serving the U.S. military, 
carry U.S. passports, and have the same access to the United States as 
do U.S. citizens; but they are not foreign nationals or aliens.
  Approximately 80 percent of the residents of American Samoa are U.S. 
nationals. The status can be acquired only by birth in American Samoa 
or by birth in a foreign country from parents, one or both of whom are 
U.S. nationals.
  Mr. Chairman, federal campaign law currently specifies that U.S. 
citizens are permanent resident foreign nationals, may make 
contributions to candidates for federal office. This section of law was 
enacted into law before American Samoa had a congressional delegate in 
the U.S. House of Representatives. My concern is that if Congress 
changes this section of the law now while we know of the U.S. national 
problem, our action could be interpreted to mean that Congress intended 
to prohibit U.S. nationals from contributing to federal elections.
  Mr. Chairman, this would cause a major problem in my district 
because, as I mentioned earlier, the vast majority of the residents of 
my congressional district will be prohibited from contributing to 
candidates running for federal office, particularly the office of 
delegate to the U.S. House of Representatives. Moreover, the U.S. 
nationals residing in the States and other territories in the United 
States, estimated to be approximately 200,000 patriotic Americans, 
would also be prohibited from contributing.
  Few U.S. nationals are aware of this problem and this distinction 
made in federal campaign laws that many contribute to candidates of the 
U.S. House, the U.S. Senate, and also those who run for the U.S. 
presidency; and this interpretation of the law could find these 
candidates in violation of campaign laws for having received 
contributions from persons not authorized under the law.
  Mr. Chairman, I believe this is a technical correction to the law; 
and I know of no opposition, at least hopefully, and I do urge my 
colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. I yield to the gentleman from Nebraska.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I think the gentleman has initially found 
this to be an appropriate problem to solve. He has the solution. I 
think this should be unanimously supported, and I appreciate his 
representation of U.S. nationals.
  Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from Guam (Mr. Underwood).
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, absent anyone claiming time in opposition, I 
ask unanimous consent to claim the time.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Maryland?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. UNDERWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague from American Samoa 
for yielding me the time. It is rather obvious that where current 
restrictions remain in place that his own constituents, the gentleman 
from American Samoa (Mr. Faleomavaega's) own constituents, could not 
contribute to his own campaign. This great anomaly is something that we 
share because those of us from Guam were American nationals, U.S. 
nationals, before 1950, and at that time the people of Guam became U.S. 
citizens.
  As a U.S. territory, American Samoa and its people deserve the same 
constitutional rights and privileges afforded to U.S. citizens, and 
although it may seem like this is an inherent right of U.S. nationals 
which remains unchallenged, sometimes those of us who represent 
territories know some things always fall through the cracks. Of these 
in American Samoa there are some 60,000 residents. Of these residents 
80 percent are U.S. nationals. Moreover, there may be an additional 150 
to 200,000 U.S. nationals living in the U.S. mainland and throughout 
the world.
  Mr. Chairman, I cannot stress enough the significance of adding U.S. 
nationals to this bill, and I hope there is really no opposition.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, as the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), the 
sponsor of the last amendment, indicated on this amendment, I think we 
all agree that the gentleman from American Samoa (Mr. Faleomavaega) has 
offered an amendment which all of us can and should support. Clearly we 
want to express in the strongest possible terms that the residents of 
American Samoa are in fact included as U.S. citizens. They are a full 
part of our country, and although they do not have every right of 
citizenship extended to them, Mr. Faleomavaega represents them 
extraordinarily well here on the floor of this House. And we share his 
view that we ought to make it very clear that his constituents can in 
fact contribute, exercise their speech rights by contributing to his 
campaign, and to such other campaigns as they choose, and I certainly 
know that I think on our side there is unanimous support for his 
amendment, and I thank him for his leadership on this very important 
point.
  Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentleman from California.

                              {time}  1700

  Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to point out as somebody 
who was almost born in Guam by a matter of days, I hear, frankly I want 
to strongly support the amendment.
  Let me point out, I appreciate my colleague, the gentleman from 
American Samoa (Mr. Faleomavaega), articulating the position of 
birthright

[[Page 21510]]

citizenship for United States citizens that parents who were obligated 
to loyalty and allegiance earn the right of automatic status as 
American nationals for people born in American Samoa or in other areas. 
This is something that I think we need to articulate and need to point 
out, that his constituents in American Samoa have permanent allegiant 
responsibilities to the United States not temporary, like resident 
aliens.
  Resident aliens still have obligations of loyalty and allegiance. 
They can be tried for treason, but the residents of American Samoa that 
fall under this category have permanent allegiance and can be tried for 
treason, can be drafted, and have obligations and with those 
obligations I think we all agree comes the rights and the rights that 
are articulated, at least from our point of view, and I think in this 
Congress, is the right to be able to contribute to their 
representatives.
  Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I certainly want to thank my good friend, the gentleman 
from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) and the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Bilbray) for their support and their comments concerning my proposed 
amendment.
  It might be of note to my colleagues that under the current law, the 
current immigration law of the United States, if I could be more 
specific, a United States national is defined as someone who owes 
permanent allegiance to the United States but who is neither a citizen 
nor an alien. That is exactly the status of U.S. nationals as it 
currently stands, and I do appreciate my good friend from Nebraska (Mr. 
Bereuter) and all of the Members for their bipartisan support of this 
proposed amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from American Samoa (Mr. Faleomavaega).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6 printed 
in House Report 106-311.


                Amendment No. 6 offered by Mr. Goodling

  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Chairman, I offer amendment No. 6.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 6 offered by Mr. Goodling.
       Strike section 501 and insert the following (and conform 
     the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 501. WORKER PAYCHECK FAIRNESS.

       (a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
       (1) Workers who pay dues or fees to a labor organization 
     may not, as a matter of law, be required to pay to that 
     organization any dues or fees supporting activities that are 
     not necessary to performing the duties of the exclusive 
     representative of the employees in dealing with the employer 
     on labor-management issues.
       (2) Many labor organizations use portions of the dues or 
     fees they collect from the workers they represent for 
     activities that are not necessary to performing the duties of 
     the exclusive representative of the employees in dealing with 
     the employer on labor-management issues. These dues may be 
     used to support political, social, or charitable causes or 
     many other noncollective bargaining activities. 
     Unfortunately, many workers who pay such dues or fees have 
     insufficient information both about their rights regarding 
     the payment of dues or fees to a labor organization and about 
     how labor organizations spend employee dues or fees.
       (3) It is a fundamental tenet of this Nation that all men 
     and women have a right to make individual and informed 
     choices about the political, social, or charitable causes 
     they support, and the law should protect that right to the 
     greatest extent possible.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to ensure that 
     all workers have sufficient information about their rights 
     regarding the payment of dues or fees to labor organizations 
     and the uses of employee dues and fees by labor organizations 
     and that the right of all workers to make individual and 
     informed choices about the political, social, or charitable 
     causes they support is protected to the greatest extent 
     possible.
       (c) Written Consent.--
       (1) In general.--
       (A) Authorization.--A labor organization accepting payment 
     of any dues or fees from an employee as a condition of 
     employment pursuant to an agreement authorized by Federal law 
     must secure from each employee prior, voluntary, written 
     authorization for any portion of such dues or fees which will 
     be used for activities not necessary to performing the duties 
     of the exclusive representative of the employees in dealing 
     with the employer on labor-management issues.
       (B) Requirements.--Such written authorization shall clearly 
     state that an employee may not be required to provide such 
     authorization and that if such authorization is provided, the 
     employee agrees to allow any dues or fees paid to the labor 
     organization to be used for activities which are not 
     necessary to performing the duties of exclusive 
     representation and which may be political, social, or 
     charitable in nature.
       (2) Revocation.--An authorization described in paragraph 
     (1) shall remain in effect until revoked. Such revocation 
     shall be effective upon 30 days written notice.
       (3) Civil action by employees.--
       (A) Liability.--Any labor organization which violates this 
     subsection or subsection (f) shall be liable to the affected 
     employee--
       (i) for damages equal to--

       (I) the amount of the dues or fees accepted in violation of 
     this section;
       (II) the interest on the amount described in subclause (I) 
     calculated at the prevailing rate; and
       (III) an additional amount as liquidated damages equal to 
     the sum of the amount described in subclause (I) and the 
     interest described in subclause (II); and

       (ii) for such equitable relief as may be appropriate.
       (B) Right of action.--An action to recover the damages or 
     equitable relief prescribed in subparagraph (A) may be 
     maintained against any labor organization in any Federal or 
     State court of competent jurisdiction by any one or more 
     employees for and in behalf of--
       (i) the employees; or
       (ii) the employees and other employees similarly situated.
       (C) Fees and costs.--The court in such action shall, in 
     addition to any judgment awarded to the plaintiff, allow a 
     reasonable attorney's fee, reasonable expert witness fees, 
     and other costs of the action to be paid by the defendant.
       (D) Limitation.--An action may be brought under this 
     paragraph not later than 2 years after the date the employee 
     knew or should have known that dues or fees were accepted or 
     spent by a labor organization in violation of this section, 
     except that such period shall be extended to 3 years in the 
     case of a willful violation.
       (d) Notice.--An employer whose employees are represented by 
     a collective bargaining representative shall be required to 
     post a notice, of such size and in such form as the 
     Department of Labor shall prescribe, in conspicuous places in 
     and about its plants and offices, including all places where 
     notices to employees are customarily posted, informing 
     employees that any labor organization accepting payment of 
     any dues or fees from an employee as a condition of 
     employment pursuant to an agreement authorized by Federal law 
     must secure from each employee prior, written authorization 
     if any portion of such dues or fees will be used for 
     activities not necessary to performing the duties of the 
     exclusive representative of the employees in dealing with the 
     employer on labor-management issues.
       (e) Disclosure to Workers.--
       (1) Expenses reporting.--Section 201(b) of the Labor-
     Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new sentence: ``Every labor 
     organization shall be required to attribute and report 
     expenses in such detail as necessary to allow members to 
     determine whether such expenses were necessary to performing 
     the duties of the exclusive representative of the employees 
     in dealing with the employer on labor-management issues.''
       (2) Disclosure.--Section 201(c) of the Labor-Management 
     Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 is amended--
       (A) by inserting ``and employees required to pay any dues 
     or fees to such organization'' after ``members''; and
       (B) inserting ``or employee required to pay any dues or 
     fees to such organization'' after ``member'' each place it 
     appears.
       (3) Written requests.--Section 205(b) of the Labor-
     Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new sentence: ``Upon written 
     request, the Secretary shall make available complete copies 
     of any report or other document filed pursuant to section 
     201.''.
       (f) Retaliation and Coercion Prohibited.--It shall be 
     unlawful for any labor organization to coerce, intimidate, 
     threaten, interfere with, or retaliate against any employee 
     in the exercise of, or on account of having exercised, any 
     right granted or protected by this section.
       (g) Regulations.--The Secretary of Labor shall prescribe 
     such regulations as are necessary to carry out subsection (d) 
     not later than 60 days after the enactment of this Act and 
     shall prescribe such regulations as are necessary to carry 
     out the amendments made by subsection (e) not later than 120 
     days after the enactment of this Act.

[[Page 21511]]

       (h) Effective Date and Application.--This section shall be 
     effective immediately upon enactment, except that subsections 
     (c) and (d) pertaining to worker consent and notice shall 
     take effect 90 days after enactment and subsection (e) 
     pertaining to disclosure shall take effect 150 days after 
     enactment.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling).
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 4 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, one author in general debate said that we must treat 
all in the same manner. That is exactly why I made this amendment in 
order.
  This bill purports to codify an important Supreme Court case dealing 
with workers' rights; but unfortunately the bill, in fact, takes a step 
backward and would hammer into law an NLRB interpretation which has 
created a system that is abusive to union members and would, in effect, 
nullify the Supreme Court's decision.
  My committee held six hearings on the Beck decision, and what we 
heard over and over again from union workers was that they strongly 
support their union but they believe that the union owes them the 
respect of asking for their permission to spend money beyond the 
purposes allowed in Beck.
  My amendment creates a mechanism where one can truly implement the 
Supreme Court's decision.
  In Beck, the court held that workers cannot be required to pay for 
activities beyond legitimate union functions. But our hearings showed 
that the Beck rights remain illusory, and that is because of NLRB 
interpretation.
  Witnesses described the problems, including not getting notice of 
their Beck rights, procedural hurdles, notably the requirement that one 
must first resign from the union before disputing any dues expenditure.
  Now it is important to understand that in Beck the Supreme Court said 
that one does not have to pay those dues for anything other than the 
negotiating process.
  Again, the interpretation, as has come down through the NLRB, says to 
these very people in 29 States, who must belong or can be required to 
belong to the union, must pay their union dues, that they first must 
resign from the union in order to challenge the use of their dues. At 
the same time, they must continue to pay those dues; and at the same 
time, the very people who took their dues and used them as they wished 
to use them now become the jury and the judge to determine whether they 
get them back or whether they do not get them back.
  Now, obviously there is something wrong with that; and we are 
trampling on the rights of union workers in 29 States.
  Section 501 in this bill says it applies only to nonmembers. That is 
right. Workers must resign from the union in order to be covered.
  Section 501 defines the dues payments that may be objected to, and 
this is dangerous because what they do, they say expenditures in 
connection with a Federal, State, or local election or in connection 
with efforts to influence legislation unrelated to collective 
bargaining.
  Now, the definition infers that there could be other ways that one 
could take their money and use their money without their permission. So 
it becomes a perversion.
  Well, somebody in the press said to me that would not be fair because 
that is not true of stockholders and corporations, and I said to that 
person, one has to have an IQ of minus 10 to ever try to mix those 
apples and oranges. Obviously as a stockholder, one has every right 
under the sun. They do not have to buy the stock. They can sell it 
whenever they want to sell it. And they can object to what is being 
done, and they can vote in relationship to what those who are using 
their money are doing in relationship to that corporation. So that is a 
silly, factitious argument.
  It is very obvious to me, having listened to the debate, that we have 
an awful lot of people here who want to go back home and say: I voted 
for campaign reform. I do not care about the rights of union workers in 
29 States. I just voted, and I want everyone to know I voted for 
campaign reform. It does not matter whether it is good, bad, or 
indifferent. I voted for it.
  Well, I do not want union rights to be trampled in that manner and 
under that mentality. So I am going to, at the appropriate time, ask to 
withdraw my amendment and bring it to the floor as a stand-alone issue 
so that we can, as a matter of fact, protect those union workers in 29 
States and make sure that they have the right to determine how their 
dues are used beyond what the Supreme Court said it could be used for.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment, and I 
yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), 
the distinguished ranking member of the Committee of Jurisdiction.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong 
opposition to this amendment, and I am glad to hear that the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) will withdraw the amendment after the 
debate.
  I think that this amendment is patently unfair to union members. It 
does deny them one of the benefits of organization. It does deny them 
the ability to collectively organize and decide for the purposes they 
are going to engage in the electoral process within this country; and, 
in fact, it does not treat them the same. It treats them very 
differently than corporations.
  It also recognizes that corporations all the time vote either by a 
majority or the boards of directors or the CEO and others make 
decisions about campaigns and political speech and issues that they are 
going to get involved in or they are not going to get involved in. And 
they do it without the consent of all of their members, all of their 
shareholders, all of their workers, and all of the rest of that. And 
yet somehow we are going to put that effectively on the backs of 
working men and women.
  I think what this really is, this has stuck in the craw of the other 
side of the aisle since a very effective campaign by organized labor to 
tell the truth about what Republicans were doing when they first took 
over the House, and as a result of that this is a payback not a 
paycheck protection. It has been rejected in the State of California by 
voters. It has been rejected in the State of Oregon by voters, and it 
should be rejected in the House of Representatives.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, still controlling the time in opposition to 
this bill, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Clay) 
the individual, I would say the chairman in exile. I referred to the 
gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) as the ranking member, 
but actually the ranking member is my chairman in exile, as I said, one 
of the senior Members of this House, who has done such extraordinary 
service to the Congress.
  Mr. CLAY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling). By imposing 
unfair restrictions on labor unions, this amendment denies workers an 
effective voice in public affairs. This amendment deliberately destroys 
the right of workers to determine for themselves the activities of 
their own organizations.
  The amendment makes a further mockery of democratic principles by 
imposing these restrictions only on groups, only one group, the unions. 
A similar effort in the last Congress to gag the voice of workers was 
soundly defeated by a vote of 166 to 246. Fifty-two Republicans voted 
against this provision.
  Current law fully protects the rights of workers to refrain from 
joining the union or underwriting any union political activity. This 
amendment adds nothing to these protections. Instead, it punishes 
workers by crippling their ability to participate in politics and 
jeopardizing their ability to organize to litigate on their own behalf 
and even to make charitable contributions.
  I urge Members to once again defeat this ill-conceived, anti-
democratic attack on workers.

[[Page 21512]]


  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).
  Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. 
Hoyer) for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Chairman, when we drafted this bill, we wanted to be true to 
Beck. We did not want it to be less. We did not want it to be more. We 
wanted it to be just what the Court said.
  What we had was a situation where Harry Beck, who was an employee of 
AT&T but was not a member of the Communications Workers of America, the 
CWA, objected to his agency fee also including political activity, and 
this ultimately was brought to the Supreme Court. And they said his 
political activity, since he was not a member of the union, should not 
be covered and he should only pay for true collective bargaining. That 
is what the Beck decision decided, and that is what we did in our bill.
  This is not paycheck protection, but we also didn't think we needed 
paycheck protection because we eliminate the sham issue ads and call 
them campaign ads so one cannot use union dues money. We eliminate soft 
money, which is the other way union monies get into campaigns. So we 
thought that was even more powerful than even paycheck protection.
  I have personal experience in this legislation. My wife was a member 
of a union, and her money was going to support a Democrat candidate for 
governor and she supported the Republican candidate. And she objected. 
They said, well, you are a member of the union; and this is what we are 
doing. So she then said, well, then I resign from the union; I do not 
want this money to go for candidates I do not support.
  She ended up only paying the agency fee for collective bargaining, 
and her political contributions were refunded to her.
  This is true to the Beck decision, and I encourage my colleagues to 
recognize that.
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
North Carolina (Mr. Ballenger), a member of the committee.
  Mr. BALLENGER. Mr. Chairman, no American can be forced to contribute 
to political causes or campaigns with which he or she disagrees except 
one group, members of labor unions.
  Our committee had a hearing and heard from members of the U.S. 
Airways union in Charlotte, North Carolina. These men testified how 
that portion of their union dues went to fund the campaigns of 
candidates who were pro-abortion, a stance that they considered deeply 
was against their Christian beliefs.
  We ought to stop it now, and we ought to vote for the Goodling 
amendment.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the distinguished 
gentlewoman from Missouri (Ms. McCARTHY).
  Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling). The amendment is 
deceptively entitled the Worker Paycheck Fairness Act but is more 
appropriately named the Worker Gag Act.
  The Shays-Meehan bill, of which I am a cosponsor, would ban soft 
money, regulate phony issue ads on television, and toughen disclosure 
requirements.
  Above all, Shays-Meehan is fair, bipartisan, even-handed reform 
legislation.
  In the guise of reform, the Goodling amendment undoes the balance 
achieved by Shays-Meehan, which seeks meaningful campaign finance 
reform to rid the process of the abuse of soft money and restore the 
people's voice in the electoral process.
  I urge my colleagues to vote no on Goodling and support Shays-Meehan.
  The Goodling amendment represents an unprecedented governmental 
intrusion into the internal operations of labor organizations, without 
a concomitant restriction on the communications of a corporation and 
its shareholders.

                              {time}  1715

  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) has 1 minute 
remaining.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  I rise in opposition to the Goodling amendment. I would like to think 
my IQ is above minus 10. I think there is an analogy. Yes, I can buy 
the stock and yes, I can take the job, or yes, I can join the union or 
not join the union. If I do not need the job, I can go someplace else.
  The fact of the matter is, Beck is included in this legislation, as 
the gentleman from Connecticut has said, exactly as the court ruled. 
The fact of the matter is, this legislation is an attempt to make 
impotent the ability of unions to effectively represent the interests 
of their members and those whom they represent, members or not.
  I would suggest that we defeat this amendment, but I am pleased that 
the gentleman has decided to withdraw the amendment and that will not 
be necessary. I know the gentleman feels strongly about his amendment, 
but we feel equally strongly that this is not an amendment in the best 
interest of this bill or in the best interest of America's workers.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) has 30 
seconds remaining.
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  I want to make sure that we clarify what was just said. The gentleman 
said we have the right to join the union or not. In 29 States, one does 
not have the right. In 29 States, to keep your job one must belong to 
the union, one must pay the dues; but if one wants to challenge them 
under the Beck decision, one must resign from the union, continue to 
pay one's dues, and then one is judged by the very people who took 
their money. They are the judge and they are the jury if you get 
anything back, but the harassment has been terrible.
  Let me tell my colleagues again, this is too important. This is too 
important as far as union workers in 29 States are concerned. Their 
rights need to be protected, and we will bring that legislation to the 
floor; and everybody will have an opportunity to deal with it at that 
particular time.
  Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Chairman, I rise in the strongest possible 
opposition to the Goodling amendment to H.R. 417.
  This amendment is yet another attempt to cripple the ability of 
unions to effectively participate in the political affairs of the 
nation and advocate on behalf of our working families.
  Mr. Goodling's amendment, which is identical to the bill H.R. 2434, 
would require labor unions to obtain written authorization from all 
union members before using any portion of union dues for political 
activities. This legislation infringes on the right of workers to 
establish their own rules regarding union membership. In addition, the 
amendment imposes costly, crippling paperwork requirements and 
effectively imposes a punitive tax on all union members. At the same 
time, however, the amendment does not require corporations to go 
through this cumbersome and costly process in order to obtain 
authorization from their shareholders before using corporate funds for 
political activities. This is hypocrisy at its best.
  Further, Mr. Chairman, this amendment is unnecessary. The U.S. 
Supreme Court has ruled that workers have the right to refuse to 
contribute to their union's political activities. This ruling is 
already incorporated into the text of the Shays-Meehan campaign finance 
reform bill.
  Finally, not only is the Goodling amendment bad policy, it is also a 
poison pill that, if passed, would ensure that this much-needed 
campaign finance bill would fail.
   Mr. Chairman, it is clear that this amendment is not about 
``paycheck protection for workers.'' It is about the systematic 
disenfranchisement of American workers such as our teachers, nurses, 
police officers and factory workers.
  I urge my colleagues to defeat this harmful, hypocritical, and 
unnecessary amendment.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, the Goodling amendment is a clear attempt 
to silence the voices of working women and men, to stop their 
participation in the political process.
  Labor unions are voluntary democratic organizations in which the 
members vote on the union's political activities--as in a democracy, 
the majority rules.
  But, what about private corporations which, by the way, outspent 
unions in the 1996 elections by 17 to 1?

[[Page 21513]]

  I notice that no one is suggesting that corporations need to get 
written permission from their shareholders before they participate in 
the political process.
  The Goodling amendment will give corporations an open line to the 
candidates while disconnecting the teachers, nurses, carpenters, truck 
drivers, firefighters, and other American workers who count on their 
labor unions to speak for them.
  This amendment must be defeated.
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania?
  There was no objection.


          Sequential Votes Postponed in Committee of the Whole

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, proceedings will now 
resume on those amendments on which further proceedings were postponed 
in the following order:
  Amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. Whitfield of Kentucky; Amendment No. 2 
offered by Mr. Doolittle of California; Amendment No. 3 offered by Mr. 
Doolittle of California; Amendment No. 4 offered by Mr. Bereuter of 
Nebraska.
  The Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


         Amendment No. 1, as Modified, Offered by Mr. Whitfield

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on Amendment No. 1, as modified, offered by the gentleman from Kentucky 
(Mr. Whitfield) on which further proceedings were postponed and on 
which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will designate the amendment, as modified.
  The Clerk designated the amendment, as modified.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 127, 
noes 300, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 411]

                               AYES--127

     Armey
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Barton
     Bateman
     Bereuter
     Biggert
     Bliley
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Brady (TX)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Canady
     Cannon
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Cox
     Crane
     Cubin
     Davis (VA)
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Dickey
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehrlich
     Everett
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Gibbons
     Gutknecht
     Hansen
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Herger
     Hill (IN)
     Hill (MT)
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kasich
     King (NY)
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Largent
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Norwood
     Oxley
     Packard
     Paul
     Pease
     Peterson (PA)
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Radanovich
     Riley
     Rogan
     Rohrabacher
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scarborough
     Schaffer
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sisisky
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (TX)
     Stearns
     Stump
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Talent
     Tancredo
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Toomey
     Vitter
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Young (AK)

                               NOES--300

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Archer
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Barcia
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Boehlert
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Camp
     Campbell
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson
     Castle
     Chabot
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Ewing
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hefley
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hoeffel
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kelly
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Kucinich
     Kuykendall
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Larson
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller, George
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Ney
     Northup
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Ose
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickett
     Pomeroy
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Quinn
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogers
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Scott
     Serrano
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shows
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tierney
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watkins
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weller
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Hastings (FL)
     Kingston
     Porter
     Pryce (OH)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Shaw

                              {time}  1739

  Messrs. GEJDENSON, ADERHOLT, LATHAM, and CUNNINGHAM changed their 
vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Messrs. DUNCAN, BLUNT, and TAYLOR of North Carolina, Mrs. MYRICK, and 
Mr. DICKEY changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment, as modified, was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                      Announcement by the Chairman

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, the Chair announces 
that he will reduce to a minimum of 5 minutes the period of time within 
which a vote by electronic device will be taken on each amendment on 
which the Chair has postponed further proceedings.


         Amendment No. 2, as Modified, Offered by Mr. Doolittle

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on amendment No. 2, as modified, offered by the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Doolittle) on which further proceedings were postponed 
and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will designate the amendment, as modified.
  The Clerk designated the amendment, as modified.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN. This is a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 123, 
noes 302, not voting 8, as follows:

[[Page 21514]]



                             [Roll No. 412]

                               AYES--123

     Armey
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Barton
     Bateman
     Bereuter
     Biggert
     Bliley
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Brady (TX)
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Canady
     Cannon
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Cooksey
     Cox
     Crane
     Cubin
     Davis (VA)
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Dickey
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     English
     Everett
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Goodlatte
     Gutknecht
     Hansen
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill (IN)
     Hill (MT)
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hostettler
     Hulshof
     Hutchinson
     Istook
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kasich
     King (NY)
     Knollenberg
     Largent
     Latham
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     Metcalf
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Nethercutt
     Norwood
     Oxley
     Packard
     Paul
     Pease
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pombo
     Radanovich
     Riley
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Scarborough
     Schaffer
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Spence
     Stump
     Sununu
     Tancredo
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Tiahrt
     Toomey
     Vitter
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Young (AK)

                               NOES--302

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Archer
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Barcia
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Boehlert
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Camp
     Campbell
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson
     Castle
     Chabot
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cook
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doyle
     Duncan
     Edwards
     Emerson
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Ewing
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hayes
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hoeffel
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Horn
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kelly
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     Kuykendall
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Larson
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller, George
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Ney
     Northup
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Ose
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Phelps
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Pomeroy
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Quinn
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sanford
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Scott
     Serrano
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shows
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Sweeney
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tierney
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watkins
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weller
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Delahunt
     Hastings (FL)
     Kingston
     Porter
     Pryce (OH)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Salmon
     Shaw

                              {time}  1747

  Mr. SCOTT changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no''.
  So the amendment, as modified, was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


         Amendment No. 3, As Modified, Offered By Mr. Doolittle

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment No. 3, as modified, offered by the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Doolittle), on which further proceedings were postponed 
and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will designate the amendment, as modified.
  The Clerk designated the amendment, as modified.

                          ____________________