Freshman Senator Learns Why Campaign Reform Isn’t for Faint of Heart

High above the Senate floor, the lights shone brightly for the TV cameras. One by one, the 91 men and 9 women made known their positions on a minor amendment in a roll-call vote.

But the real action was taking place far from the spotlight.

Around the corner, in a 19th century “American Renaissance” parlor, two junior senators huddled conspiratorially on an overstuffed, red leather couch.

If campaign finance reform is enacted by this Congress, the half-hour tete-a-tete between Sens. Russell D. Feingold (D-Wis.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) that March afternoon may prove to be a milestone in the long struggle to overhaul the nation’s election-financing laws.

For that meeting opened a series of discreet negotiations and late-night legislative drafting sessions that led Collins, a senator for all of six months, to publicly defy her bosses while giving campaign finance reform a needed boost.

Even if the reform drive fizzles, Collins’ enlistment in a crusade led by Feingold and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) serves as an object lesson in the triumph of one lawmaker’s concern for clean government over partisan politics.

Her decision to co-sponsor the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill came amid intense pressure from GOP Senate leaders, who have unabashedly made known their intention to punish any Republican who backs the measure.

*

Placing political convictions before career considerations, the 44-year-old Collins put at risk her other pet issues, and even her chances of landing a choice committee assignment any time soon.

“It’s a difficult decision, particularly as a freshman, to go against your leadership when you know they feel strongly on an issue,” Collins said. “It’s difficult because I consider myself to be a good Republican, and I believe in Republican principles. But I don’t see this as a partisan issue. I see it as a good-government issue. And it’s something that I just had to follow my own conscience on.”

Collins’ involvement also reveals the extent to which McCain and Feingold are willing to make strategic compromises--and how the trio now are embarked on a strategy to promote their legislation while plotting toward a September showdown in the Senate.

A onetime Senate aide to William S. Cohen, now Defense secretary, Collins became a student of campaign finance reform long before she took her oath of office.

During her Senate campaign last year, after beating two multimillionaires for the Republican nomination, Collins developed her own campaign finance reform proposal and pledged to make it a top priority if elected. Coincidentally, on the same day Collins won her seat, the voters of Maine approved a major campaign finance reform ballot initiative that would provide candidates with public financing.

In Washington, Collins was still operating out of a temporary basement office when McCain dropped by. Having campaigned for Collins, he was well aware of her interest in the issue.

“I told him that I was very interested in the [McCain-Feingold] bill but that I wanted to introduce my own bill,” Collins recalled.

McCain did not push. “One of the things I’m not very good at is twisting people’s arms,” he explained.

As spring approached, the Senate became embroiled in a dispute over the scope of the upcoming investigation by the Governmental Affairs Committee of campaign fund-raising practices.

Most Republicans, led by Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.), wanted a narrowly focused probe. But the Democrats demanded a broader scope, and McCain and the committee’s chairman, Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.), joined them--believing that the airing of abuses by both parties would lead to campaign finance reform.

Lott backed down after several other GOP senators--Collins among them--argued strongly for a broad investigation.

Shortly after that, Feingold sought out Collins. “All along, she was on our short list,” he said.

As the two sat down in the President’s Room just off the Senate floor, Collins was surprised--and impressed--to see Feingold armed with a pile of her campaign material, including her campaign finance reform proposal.

“We have a lot in common,” he told her. “We have very common goals. Your ideas differ in some ways, but I think we can start negotiating.”

Before developing her own proposal, Collins had studied numerous reform plans, including the McCain-Feingold bill of 1995, which had gone nowhere in the Senate.

Like theirs, Collins’ bill included spending limits, particularly on the amount that wealthy candidates may spend from their own pockets. To her, such a limit must be “the cornerstone” of any legislation.

Collins also strongly agreed with another provision of the McCain-Feingold proposal: the elimination of “soft money”--unregulated contributions to the political parties that she called “the mother of all campaign loopholes.”

But Collins disagreed with some provisions of the McCain-Feingold bill, including a ban on contributions by political action committees (PACs).

So she and Feingold, and their staffs, rolled up their sleeves and went to work. Only occasionally did McCain participate.

“It was Russ who kind of closed the deal,” McCain said.

*

By the time McCain and Feingold proudly identified Collins as a co-sponsor, their bill had changed dramatically.

Instead of a PAC ban, the revised bill would halve the current contribution limit by PACs, to $2,500.

“PACs have been excessively vilified,” Collins said. “People overlook the fact that PACs serve as vehicles for individuals with strongly held and common concerns, but with limited personal resources, to band together to speak with a louder voice.”

As it turned out, much to her surprise, McCain and Feingold had begrudgingly concluded, as had many experts, that a ban on PACs would be unconstitutional. So they readily conceded on that provision.

When Collins asked for more stringent limits on personal wealth, the men agreed as well. The original bill put the maximum allowable personal contribution at $95,000 to $250,000 per election cycle, depending on a state’s size. They agreed to scale the range down to $50,000 and $100,000.

Collins also wanted, and got, a “bright-line” test to distinguish political ads, which are subject to restrictions and reporting requirements, from issue-advocacy ads, which are not.

“As time went on, I started to realize that my ability to influence the process would be much enhanced by working with them and not just putting in yet another bill,” Collins said.

Shortly after that, she informed Lott of her decision to co-sponsor a revised bill. McCain and Feingold were elated.

As Feingold recalled, some Republicans were “almost taunting us” because only one other Republican, Thompson, had signed. Collins, he said, is “a real sign of how the wall is starting to break.”

But even as he goes about wooing other senators, including Republicans, Feingold harbors no illusions.

He has heard, and several senior Republican senators confirmed, that Lott and his leadership team have put great pressure on rank-and-file members to shun the McCain-Feingold bill.

“There’s enormous pressure being exerted on them,” confided one GOP senator, who mimicked the leadership’s message: “Do you want your bills brought up? Do you want good committee assignments?”

While enacting their bill remains the ultimate objective, McCain and Feingold also are trying to garner enough support from their colleagues to ensure a full Senate debate on the issue--even if some of them have no intention of voting for the McCain-Feingold bill itself.

The proposal now has 32 co-sponsors. In the 100-member Senate, it takes 60 votes to end a filibuster, a time-honored tactic of killing a bill; on the other hand, legislation requires only a majority vote for passage.

“It’s a step-by-step, brick-by-brick process,” Feingold said. Collins now has joined in the lobbying effort.

“The bill is certainly not set in stone,” she said. “And McCain’s and Feingold’s willingness to modify their bill for me showed that they are open to further changes.”

Those negotiations, Collins said, “were an example of the way the legislative process ought to work: Three people who had the same goals sat down and really hashed out the issues. All of us compromised.”

*

So far, Collins has detected no hint of retaliation from the GOP leadership. And that, some of her colleagues said, is a tribute to her.

“She’s a very courageous and charming human being. And she’s very honest--all traits that enable her to stand up for her beliefs. And once she makes up her mind, she displays a lot of intestinal fortitude,” said Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah).

“I know that my move was not welcomed,” Collins said. “But I think, and I hope, that they understand that this is something I really feel strongly about and that I’m representing my constituents’ wishes on this.”

To Collins, campaign finance reform is central to the restoration of public confidence in government. “If we can’t do that, we can’t begin to solve all these other problems that we face,” she said.