[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 17]
[Senate]
[Pages 22932-22933]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          LEADERSHIP PAC RIDER

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, this morning I would like to speak for a 
short time about a provision of the bill before the Senate, the 
Transportation bill, that was removed by Republican leaders when the 
bill was taken up yesterday. I commend my colleagues, Senators Feingold 
and McCain, for their leadership in advocating to the Republican 
leaders to take this step. The provision should not pass quietly in the 
night. It was in this bill. It should not have been. More importantly, 
it should not emerge in any way in the future in some type of a must-
pass conference report.
  The leadership PAC rider would have created a giant loophole in our 
campaign finance laws and would have permitted unseemly money transfers 
among incumbents and national parties.
  Today, leadership PACs are bound by the same campaign finance rules 
as are regular campaign PACs, known as political action committees; 
that is, leadership PACs can't give more than $15,000 annually to the 
national parties. The rider inserted in this bill during markup by the 
Republican leadership removed this limit on leadership PACs so they 
could transfer unlimited funds to national parties.
  My colleagues, Senators Feingold and McCain, rightly decried this 
move as a major circumvention of our campaign finance laws. The 
provision would have directly undermined the point of those laws: 
preventing corruption in fact and in appearance. I joined with them to 
oppose this provision and assured them that the Democrats would stand 
united with them on a motion to strike this rider or to prevent the 
bill from moving forward.
  Through the efforts of Senators Feingold and McCain, we had the votes 
to strip this provision from the bill, and everyone knew that. 
Recognizing that, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle agreed 
to remove it from the bill. I made it clear to my colleague and friend, 
the majority leader, that we would not accept a conference report with 
reemergence of this provision.


                  Compensation for Members of Congress

  I also want to say another word about my friend, Russ Feingold. Russ 
Feingold is a person who is very talented. He is a unique advocate for 
many issues that affect this country. I have just talked about campaign 
finance reform. He is and has been a leader on campaign finance reform. 
There are times that I disagree with Russ Feingold but not often. He is 
a person who brings unique attributes to the Senate. Academically, he 
is without peer. He graduated from Harvard Law School and is a Rhodes 
scholar.
  Today, he will speak on behalf of this side of the aisle on a 
provision dealing with compensation for Members of Congress. There are 
times when a COLA is certainly in keeping with the needs of this body 
and the country, but there are times when it is not. As I

[[Page 22933]]

have indicated, Russ Feingold has never shied away from offering 
contentious, difficult amendments. Today, I am happy to see the other 
side of the aisle recognize that this amendment would pass, the 
Feingold amendment that has been offered by him alone in years past. 
The majority decided they would step in the shoes of Senator Feingold 
because they knew this was a time--with Katrina, with the many other 
problems facing our country--when a pay raise was not appropriate.
  I want the record to be spread with the fact that Russ Feingold is a 
person whose good work I so appreciate. I admire him and the work that 
he does and want everyone within the sound of my voice to understand 
that this amendment we will dispose of prior to 12:30 today has been 
the Feingold amendment year after year after year. Now I am happy to 
see that others have joined with him.
  While I have disagreed with him on this issue in the past, no one can 
take away from the fact that this has always been Russ Feingold's 
mantra: that he would offer the amendment to make sure that the 
congressional pay raise did not go forward.
  He certainly was not successful in years past, but everyone 
recognized that he would be this year. Therefore, the majority, in an 
effort to take away a little recognition from him, decided they would 
do it. But recognition will always be there because Russ Feingold has 
always been out front on this issue.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. OBAMA. I ask that I be able to proceed out of order. It is my 
understanding the Republicans actually control the time at the moment. 
I ask unanimous consent that I be able to proceed and the time to be 
taken out of the Democratic time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________