Alternative to Public Financing Urged for House Races : Bill Provides Discounts on TV Ads, Postage for Candidates Who Accept Spending Limits

Key House members, citing major obstacles to the public financing of congressional campaigns, are sponsoring a novel alternative that includes discounts on TV ads and direct-mail postage for candidates who accept spending limits.

Also proposed are sharp curbs on special-interest contributions made to candidates by political action committees, known as PACs.

The new campaign revision bill was introduced last week by Rep. Al Swift (D-Wash.), chairman of the House Administration subcommittee on elections, with the support of several influential House leaders, including Reps. Morris K. Udall (D-Ariz.), Lee H. Hamilton (D-Ind.) and Leon E. Panetta (D-Monterey).

Hearings Scheduled

Hearings on the comprehensive legislation are scheduled for next Tuesday and June 16 and 30 before Swift’s panel.

The bill is emerging at a time when a proposal for partial public financing of congressional campaigns faces a formidable roadblock in the Senate. The Senate measure is a top priority of Majority Leader Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.) and Common Cause, the citizens lobby, but proponents apparently lack the votes to break a filibuster being threatened by Republicans.

Moreover, there is stiff opposition in the House to extending the current system of taxpayer funding of presidential campaigns to House and Senate elections.

“While proposals for public financing suggest an approach that has worked reasonably well for presidential elections, both their cost and the associated administrative burden would make it difficult, if not impossible, to enact at this time,” Panetta said.

‘More Modest’ Bill

Although the Swift bill is “more modest,” he added, it “has a good chance of passing and providing spending limits for the first time to encourage candidates to focus their attention on the public, not the special interests.”

The Swift proposal would allow House candidates who agree to overall spending limits to receive reduced rates on two of the most expensive items in a competitive campaign: TV-radio advertising and postage. Participating candidates would be entitled to a 30% discount on broadcasting rates and would be permitted to mail at either one-half the first-class rate or the nonprofit third-class rate. TV-radio political advertising rates are regulated by the government.

Candidates who refused to accept spending limits would have to pay the full advertising and postage rates.

Participating candidates would face a spending limit of $200,000 per election, totaling $400,000 for the primary and general elections. The ceiling would be lifted if a non-participating opponent reached a certain spending level. Last year, 25% of House races exceeded $400,000. Rep. Jack Kemp (R-N.Y.) topped all spenders at $2.6 million.

Limit on PAC Receipts

The bill would also limit how much a candidate could receive from special-interest PACs: $75,000 per election, or $150,00 for primary and general elections. Last year, 211 House candidates exceeded $150,000 in PAC receipts, topped by $564,052 for House Speaker Jim Wright (D-Tex.).

The bill does not spell out limits and discounts for Senate candidates, leaving it up to the Senate to decide if the legislation should reach that chamber.

The Senate proposal, sponsored by Sens. Byrd and David L. Boren (D-Okla.), also would crack down on PAC donations but, unlike the Swift bill, would provide direct federal payments to candidates who accepted spending limits and raised a certain amount of campaign funds privately.

Fred Wertheimer, president of Common Cause, said public financing is “still preferable,” although he has made “no specific assessment” of the Swift proposal.

“We’ve got a tough fight, but we think we have a shot at getting the 60 votes” required under Senate rules to break a filibuster against the Boren-Byrd bill, he said. However, on a recent test vote, only 50 senators supported earmarking $90 million in the congressional budget to pay for public financing of Senate races next year.