Campaign finance reform still has a
chance ... but action is needed
[7-16-01]
The Presbyterian Washington Office has sent this urgent note: Contact
your member of the House and ask that they not allow procedural
maneuvering to keep them from a vote on this crucial issue. The
switchboard number is 202-224-3121.
A press release from Common Cause gives details on the maneuvers of
the past few days in the House of Representatives.
July 13, 2001
Hastert breaks promise on campaign finance
reform & loses key parliamentary vote as Shays & Meehan demand
fair consideration
Discharge petition possible if leadership stalls
Campaign finance reform advocates inside and outside
Congress are calling on House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) and the
House Republican leadership to make good on their pledge to bring reform
legislation to the House floor under fair rules for debate. An unfair
rule which would have denied sponsors Chris Shays (R-CT) and Marty
Meehan (D-MA) the opportunity to offer amendments to their bill in one
legislative package was defeated by a bipartisan majority on Thursday -
in the first key test vote in the House this year on the issue.
The rule was defeated by a vote of 228 to 203.
Nineteen Republicans voted against the rule.
The House Rules Committee, in a late-night meeting
Wednesday night, rigged the rule for floor consideration of the
Shays-Meehan bill so that key compromises accepted by Representatives
Meehan and Shays would have to be presented to the House in 14 separate
a la carte amendments, rather than as one package. These compromises,
which Shays and Meehan sought to present in one "manager's
amendment" to the bill, were a key part of reform leaders'
"pre-conferencing" strategy, paving the way for a quick
up-or-down re-vote in the Senate. (The Senate passed very similar reform
legislation, the McCain-Feingold bill, in April.) By requiring separate
votes on each amendment, opponents of the bill were using procedural
tricks to split apart the delicately balanced bipartisan coalition for
reform in the House.
"Speaker Hastert should listen to the nineteen
members of his caucus who took the extraordinary and courageous step of
voting against the leadership's unfair rule," Common Cause
President Scott Harshbarger said. "Speaker Hastert had promised a
fair fight on reform, but he broke his word in the jerry-rigged rule
that the leadership crafted in a midnight meeting and then brought to
the floor. After having his trick rejected by the House, Speaker Hastert
should now make good on his promise for a fair rule, so the American
people don't see this as just another example of a powerful politician
saying one thing and doing another."
Leadership tactics similar to '98, '99
The House Republican leadership has a long history of
using parliamentary tactics to deny a fair debate and vote on campaign
finance reform, according to Common Cause. In both 1998 and 1999, a
bipartisan majority, including most Democrats and about a quarter of
House Republicans, rejected these tactics and extracted commitments to
have the issue put before the House under fair rules.
In April 1998, for example, then-Speaker Newt Gingrich
(R-GA) backed down on scheduling campaign finance reform only after some
200 Members of the House signed a discharge petition - a rare
parliamentary tactic which forces legislation out of committee and onto
the floor once a majority of Members - 218 - have signed. Similarly, in
May 1999, House Speaker Hastert was forced to back down on campaign
finance reform when House Republicans began signing on to a discharge
petition circulated by the Blue Dog coalition of conservative Democrats.
"House Speaker Hastert does not need to suffer
the same kind of embarrassment he received in 1999, and that
then-Speaker Gingrich faced in 1998," Harshbarger said. "All
he has to do is let Shays and Meehan bring their bill to the floor with
a fair rule, after which he and the other Republican leaders are free to
try to vote it down or kill it by amendment."
In the wake of the Thursday defeat for the House
leadership's rule, Speaker Hastert told reporters in a news conference
that he had "no plans" to reschedule campaign finance reform.
Key reform supporters in the Republican caucus however - including
Members who have signed or threatened to sign a discharge petition in
the past - are expected to make clear to Speaker Hastert that further
delay is not a viable option.
Although some Members of the leadership, like Majority
Leader Dick Armey (R-TX), have tried to portray Representative Shays'
and Meehan's demand for a single package of amendments as unfair, the
kind of rule that would be acceptable to them would still allow votes on
competing campaign finance bills, such as the bill offered by
Representative Bob Ney (R-OH). Furthermore, a fair rule would still
allow the GOP leadership or others to vote on amendments - even
amendments that would have the effect of weakening or killing the bill.
All reformers want is an opportunity to offer a package of amendments
for the Shays-Meehan bill - not to split those amendments up into 14
separate parts, as the Republican leadership's proposed rule would have
done.
Encouraging signs in first test vote
Reformers see encouraging signs for the reform debate
in the vote count which defeated the leadership's rule. First of all, it
is an impressive showing of strength by Minority Leader Richard Gephardt,
whose leadership was critical to delivering all but one Democratic vote
on the defeat of the rule (only the marginalized Representative James
Traficant (D-OH) voted for the unfair rule.) Common Cause also credits
Gephardt with making an impassioned plea to members of the Congressional
Black Caucus and the Hispanic Caucus to support the bill and defeat the
rule - making the case that their party should be united in favor of
banning soft money.
Plus, Common Cause interprets the fact that 19
Republicans defied their leadership - on a procedural vote that is
virtually always a party-line affair - as a good sign that moderate
Republicans are willing to put real pressure on Speaker Hastert to bring
up the bill fairly.
"No one would prefer a discharge petition as the
route by which reform comes to the floor of the House," Harshbarger
said. "But it looms in the background as a credible alternative
unless the House leadership reverses course, and decides to make good on
their promise."
In the meantime, organizations comprising the
Americans for Reform coalition are committed to turning up the heat at
the grassroots and applying pressure on the leadership and at key
pressure points across the House.
"This issue isn't going away. In fact, with their
arrogance and their treachery, Hastert, Armey, and DeLay have emboldened
the reformers in their own party and have helped forge greater unity
within the Democrats," Harshbarger said. "They should keep
their promise to campaign finance reformers in the House - or
else."
