Campaign Reform Suffers Setback

Proponents of a campaign finance reform bill suffered a setback Monday when the Senate passed an amendment that toughens restrictions on certain television ads but faces serious constitutional doubts.

The measure, sponsored by Sen. Paul Wellstone (D-Minn.), would ban not-for-profit organizations, including the National Rifle Assn. and the Sierra Club, from funding television “issue” ads that essentially endorse or attack a candidate shortly before an election.

Though conceptually consistent with reformers’ goals of reducing the influence of big money in politics, the measure was a political curveball--garnering much of its support from Republicans who oppose reform and may see the amendment as a way to undermine the broader legislation’s legal viability.

The 51-46 vote was the first to go against the sponsors of the reform legislation, Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Russell D. Feingold (D-Wis.), since debate of their bill began last week. Both said they saw merits in the intent of the Wellstone amendment, but urged colleagues to vote against it because it could violate the 1st Amendment.

“Although I like the idea, I had significant questions about the constitutionality of it,” McCain said. He added that he doesn’t believe the amendment threatens the passage of his bill, but acknowledged that it creates new obstacles for the measure’s long-term survival.

The Wellstone amendment could prompt groups that had been behind the reform effort, including the Sierra Club, to oppose it. More important, it raises the stakes of a fight expected later in the week over whether the entire bill should be thrown out if even a small piece of it is overturned in court. Many believe the Wellstone amendment could provide reform foes with a particularly vulnerable piece.

Wellstone, a senator known more for his liberal crusades than for his allegiance to party orthodoxy, argued that his amendment closed a gaping loophole in the McCain-Feingold bill.

The main provision of the legislation bans so-called soft money, the unlimited contributions that political parties are allowed to collect from corporations, unions and other well-heeled donors.

But the legislation also contains language that would prevent corporations and unions from funding ads designed to affect the outcome of a race within 60 days of the election. Wellstone’s amendment expands that restriction to include nonprofits.

“What good will it do if we have a prohibition on soft money when it comes to unions and corporations,” Wellstone said, “but then all sorts of other interest groups and organizations will be able to shift that soft money to run sham issue ads on television?”

But many in the Senate believe the Wellstone provision is vulnerable to 1st Amendment challenge because it would restrict organizations’ ability to communicate their views to the public.

“I think it’s unconstitutional and most people think that it is,” said Sen. Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.), an ally of McCain and Feingold. Restrictions aimed at unions and corporations have previously been allowed by courts, and are therefore seen as less vulnerable to legal challenge.

The Wellstone amendment attracted 27 votes from Democrats and 24 from Republicans, including such senators as Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.), who have otherwise opposed soft money restrictions on any groups.

“I find that very interesting,” McCain said. “They will have to explain how they can justify the contradiction [between their vote on Wellstone] and their votes on other issues.”

McConnell and other Republican leaders are expected to lead the fight for the inclusion of a so-called “nonseverability” clause, which would tie the fate of the entire reform measure to the outcome of every legal challenge it faces. In other words, if the courts throw out any part of it, the whole measure would be doomed.

The passage of the Wellstone amendment also makes it more likely that whatever legislation emerges from the Senate will have to be reconciled with a competing version in the House. McCain said it’s possible the Wellstone amendment could be dropped in those negotiations.

With the passage of the Wellstone measure, McCain and Feingold lost their first Senate floor battle in what is expected to be a trying week. Their coalition faces another stiff test today when the Senate is expected to vote on an amendment from Sen. Charles Hagel (R-Neb.) that would limit, instead of ban, soft money contributions to political parties. That measure will likely be followed by amendments that would raise limits on direct contributions to candidates.

“Nobody said it was going to be a day at the beach,” McCain said.

California’s Democratic senators split their votes on the Wellstone amendment, with Dianne Feinstein voting against the measure, and Barbara Boxer for it.