Finance Reform Gains a Convert

George W. Bush’s proposal Tuesday to ban unregulated political contributions by labor unions and corporations elevates the profile of campaign finance reform to a new high, encouraging many longtime proponents of overhauling the laws that govern political giving.

Campaign finance reformers were quick to criticize the specifics of Bush’s proposal--his Republican rival, John McCain, called it “a joke”--stressing that it ignores the huge problem of so-called soft money contributions to political parties by wealthy individuals.

Nonetheless, they cheered the unparalleled attention the issue is receiving in the presidential campaign.

“This has heightened the profile of the issue and destroyed the argument that American people don’t care about it,” said Sen. Russell D. Feingold (D-Wis.) a reform leader in Congress.

In the short term, the specifics of the various candidates’ reform proposals may be less important than the attention they focus on the issue of special-interest influence in Washington.

“To have all four major presidential candidates claiming the mantle of the true campaign finance reformer is a big breakthrough,” said Scott Harshbarger, president of Common Cause, a reform advocacy group.

Campaign finance reform is not a new issue in this year’s campaign.

Democratic candidates Al Gore and Bill Bradley both have pledged to call on their party to use no soft money on their behalf in the general election if the Republican nominee will do the same. Sen. McCain of Arizona has gone further, making campaign reform a centerpiece of his campaign and promising to forsake soft money--the huge, largely unregulated contributions given to the parties by corporations, unions and wealthy individuals--under any circumstances.

In the 1996 presidential campaign, the national political parties raised roughly $260 million in soft money and most experts expect the parties to collect more than double that amount this year.

It was Bush’s introduction of his plan to diminish the influence of money in politics Tuesday that reform advocates considered particularly significant; until now, they have viewed the Texas governor as the unabashed defender of the status quo.

Others, however, charged that Bush’s announcement was bald political expediency, coming just four days before the crucial South Carolina primary and with polls showing him in a dead heat with McCain.

Bush also proposed a restriction on political contributions from lobbyists to members of Congress, saying they should not be allowed when Congress is in session. That would be “a useful reform,” Bush said at a news conference in Irmo, S.C.

Asked for clarification, Bush aides said the governor’s plan would allow lobbyists to give checks during congressional recesses, which happen several times throughout the year.

“It’s designed to reduce access and, therefore, reduce influence,” said Ari Fleisher, spokesman for the Bush campaign. “The point of it is to stop the practice of lobbyists directly handing members of Congress checks at all those receptions.”

Reform advocates charged that such a proposal would merely change the calendar dates of fund-raising events and would not stop lobbyists from trying to influence the process with their checks.

Bush’s plan also includes a so-called paycheck protection provision to keep unions from spending members’ dues on political campaigns or causes without their permission.

Although McCain agrees with Bush on this provision, he voted against such an amendment two years ago to keep alive a broader campaign finance reform bill, which would have banned all soft money.

Bush, who had raised a record-breaking near-$70 million by the end of last year, rejected the notion that he was trying to steal McCain’s thunder.

“I’m a reformer when it comes to how we fund our campaigns,” he said. “I’m the first person in the campaign who put all my information on the Internet.”

Bradley spokesman Eric Hauser called Bush’s plan “too little too late.” Bradley has called for a ban on all soft money.

Bush’s ban, while limited to corporations and unions, would address the source of most soft money contributions, said Larry Makinson, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics. During the current political cycle, only 28% of the soft-money contributions to the Democratic Party and 21% to the Republican Party have come from individuals, he said.

But “people find new ways of giving money,” Makinson said, suggesting Bush’s proposal was unlikely to result in a dramatic overall reduction in soft-money donations.

La Ganga reported from South Carolina and Shogren from Washington. Times staff writer Matea Gold also contributed to this story from South Carolina.