Campaign Reform Gets an Early Push

Senate backers of campaign finance reform called for a rapid vote on legislation introduced Monday that would ban unlimited donations to parties and crack down on certain political advertisements.

The move by two leading reform advocates, Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Russell D. Feingold (D-Wis.), represented the opening shot in what figures to be a showdown with opponents who acknowledge that they will be unable to block Senate action on such legislation this year.

Rather than block McCain and Feingold, opponents now apparently want to thwart them by amending their bill--or, perhaps, by relying on the veto power of President Bush.

At issue is a system in which so-called soft money donations, the unlimited and largely unregulated gifts to national political parties, have ballooned in recent years as Republicans and Democrats have engaged in a fierce political arms race.

Common Cause, a pro-reform group, estimates that soft-money donations in the most recent presidential campaign totaled $457 million over two years. That is nearly double the $231 million raised in a comparable period before the 1996 election and more than five times what was raised in 1991-92.

For more than five years, McCain and Feingold have sought and failed to obtain an up-or-down vote in the Senate on campaign finance reform. Now, with fresh support from newly elected Democrats and a senior Republican previously opposed to their cause--Sen. Thad Cochran of Mississippi--the two senators seem to be closing in on that goal.

As they do, McCain and Feingold stress they do not want to sidetrack the agenda of the Bush administration.

“This is not a challenge to our new president,” Feingold said.

Among the key provisions in the bill McCain and Feingold introduced Monday:

* The soft money ban, the centerpiece of their legislation since it was first introduced in September 1995.

* A measure to ban corporate and union spending on advertisements within the final 60 days of a campaign that purport to focus on issues but mention a federal candidate by name.

* Measures that strengthen a ban on foreign nationals from making any sort of political donations--a response to 1996 election controversies--and bar candidates from using funds for personal benefit or raising money on federal property.

* Raising the yearly limit on the amount individuals may contribute in federal elections to $30,000 per year from $25,000.

Some senators who are part of the McCain-Feingold coalition said that they are likely to push for other changes. Cochran said that he wants to force greater financial disclosure by candidates and interest groups. Sen. Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.) said that he wants to triple the current $1,000 limit on individual donations to a federal candidate in a given election.

In recent years--most recently in October 1999--McCain and Feingold have drawn majority support but not the 60 senators needed to cut off debate and force a vote. They believe that total is now within their grasp.

The House, which has passed campaign finance reform twice in recent years, is likely to weigh in as well. Companion legislation written by Reps. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.) and Martin T. Meehan (D-Mass.) contains limits on so-called issue advertising, for instance, that are stricter than what McCain and Feingold propose.

Even if the Senate and House are able to agree on campaign reform legislation, it is unclear what would be acceptable to Bush. During his campaign, Bush offered his own reforms, including a ban on soft-money donations by unions and corporations but not by individuals. Bush at the time criticized the McCain-Feingold approach as a giveaway to Democrats and, particularly, labor unions.

Senate Republican Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.), who has fought McCain and Feingold in previous years, told Cable News Network that their new bill is likely to be considered soon by the Senate. “Hopefully,” he added, “it will not be the first issue.”

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who has spearheaded the opposition, attacked the latest version of the bill Monday as unfair and unworkable but said: “I look forward to a robust, wide-open debate.”

And Ari Fleischer, the new White House press secretary, declined Monday to criticize McCain’s assertion that he has a mandate for his approach.

“We’re not that far apart on campaign finance reform,” Fleischer told reporters. “There are some differences between our approach and Sen. McCain’s approach, but that is the business of legislating.”

Bush and McCain are expected to discuss the topic Wednesday.

Such statements indicate that the terrain of the battle is shifting from whether the Senate will consider legislation to what form a final bill would take. The measure could yet be loaded with amendments that water it down beyond recognition. Or it could become so unwieldy that Congress fails to enact anything.

Lott has suggested that a reform bill should include proposals to overhaul election procedures in the aftermath of the disputed presidential vote count in Florida. He also suggested curbs on spending by millionaire candidates who are able to overwhelm opposition with their own bulging wallets, a phenomenon last year that benefited a handful of victorious Democratic Senate candidates.

But backers of the McCain-Feingold bill said that such amendments could kill the legislation by putting off a final vote for many months.

“Delay is the enemy of reform,” said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, a pro-campaign reform group. “Every day you get away from the last election and closer to the next election, the focus on raising huge amounts of money for the next election gets bigger and bigger, and the abuses get further and further away.”