[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 1]
[Senate]
[Page 930]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                           CALL THE BANKROLL

  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, during today's debate on the nuclear 
waste legislation, I want to take my first opportunity to Call the 
Bankroll in the new year.
  As we all know, nuclear waste has been a very contentious issue in 
past years.
  I'm not here today to recap the arguments on either side, but instead 
to offer the public and my colleagues a picture of the money that has 
been spent by interests on both sides of the issue.
  Of course the Nuclear Energy Institute is the chief lobbyist on 
behalf of companies that operate nuclear power plants in the U.S., and 
has led the fight for the nuclear waste legislation, in its various 
forms, that is now before us.
  NEI gave more than $135,000 in soft money to the parties and more 
than $70,000 in PAC money to candidates in the 1998 election cycle.
  In addition to NEI, a number of utilities which operate nuclear 
plants were also significant PAC and soft money donors in the '98 
cycle, including:
  Commonwealth Edison, which gave $110,000 in soft money and more than 
$106,000 in PAC money, and Florida Power and Light, which gave nearly 
$300,000 in soft money to the parties and more than $182,000 in PAC 
money to candidates.
  Many of these donors didn't waste any time before donating in the 
current cycle either--NEI already reported donating more than $66,000 
in soft money, and Commonwealth Edison already reported $90,000 in soft 
money donations in 1999.
  On the other side of this fight is a coalition of environmental 
groups that has opposed this bill in its various forms, writing to 
members of the Senate last September to urge us to protect our country 
and our environment by voting against the Nuclear Waste Policy 
Amendments Act of 1999.
  Among these groups is the Sierra Club, which gave more than $236,000 
in PAC money to candidates in the '98 cycle, and Friends of the Earth, 
which gave just under $4,000 during that same period.
  I also think it's important here to make a larger point that reaches 
well beyond the nuclear waste debate--that interests can exercise their 
clout not just through PAC and soft money donations but through yet 
another loophole in the law--phony issue ads.
  Now it is very difficult to determine how much money is spent on 
phony issue ads. They are not reported under current law, and they 
should be. Nonetheless, some estimates have been made by news 
organizations and independent analysts. The Sierra Club spent an 
estimated $1.5 million on issue ads in the '98 election cycle, and the 
Nuclear Energy Institute reportedly spent $600,000 on issue ads in just 
two Senate races in the last cycle.
  Now I can't say that even this is a complete picture of all the 
interests lobbying on this bill, but it does give my colleagues and the 
public some idea of what interests are trying to influence the 
passage--or the defeat--of this bill, and a picture of the huge sums of 
money they are using to pursue their goals.

                          ____________________