Feinstein Takes Bite Out of Reform Debate

Senators usually like to frame their legislative exertions in the noblest of terms, but Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California acknowledged on the chamber floor Wednesday that the fate of campaign finance reform had come down to “our ability to sit down, have a turkey sandwich and get an agreement.”

The plainly worded summary of a critical meeting between Republicans and Democrats underscored the hard pragmatism behind a day of debate far more disorganized and contentious than the final 84-16 vote indicated.

Raising limits on direct contributions to candidates had come to seem inevitable in recent days. But deciding the amount was the source of such intense disagreement that both sides said the fate of the reform bill--offered by Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Russell D. Feingold (D-Wis.)--was in jeopardy for much of Wednesday.

At the center of the struggle were Feinstein, a Democrat admired more for her negotiating savvy than rhetorical flair, and Fred Thompson, a Tennessee Republican best known for frequently playing a senator in movies before he was actually elected as one.

Moderates with independent streaks, each offered a competing proposal Wednesday. Each attracted an identical vote of support. And each was involved in more huddles and timeouts on the Senate floor than a quarterback in a football game.

In the end, the issue was defused when Thompson, after hours of negotiation, suddenly “called an audible,” in the words of one of McCain’s staffers. Thompson agreed to lower contribution limits in several categories in exchange for Democrats agreeing to allow certain caps to be adjusted for inflation.

But that concession came only after tense negotiations during an impromptu midday meeting in the ornate Lyndon B. Johnson room just yards from the Senate chambers. Feinstein ordered sandwiches, chips and sodas, and--true to form--immediately delved into the details of the disagreement.

The main sticking points were how much to raise limits on contributions to national parties and how much to raise the total amount donors can give to all candidates and party wings. Thompson was pushing for a $40,000-a-year limit on donations to national parties, double the amount spelled out in existing law and in Feinstein’s proposal.

When Thompson dug in on that point, McCain threatened to blame him for the collapse of the talks, according to a congressional aide who attended the meeting. Striding from one side of the table to the other in apparent irritation, McCain noted that reporters would want to know why there was no agreement and said he would be obliged to tell them Thompson wouldn’t compromise, the aide said.

Spokesmen for McCain and Thompson, who have been allies throughout the campaign finance debate, both denied the exchange took place.

The Democrats’ bargaining position was less than solid. Thompson had proposed his amendment first, and it was clear he had enough votes for it to pass, an outcome that “would have threatened the bill itself” because many Democrats would have withdrawn support, Feinstein said.

Even after the midday meeting, Feinstein said, negotiations continued on the floor until minutes before the compromise was introduced and put to a vote. At one point, Feinstein and her staffers huddled around the chart she brought to the floor, scribbling in new figures with a felt-tip marker.

Feinstein has advocated raising contribution limits for years, arguing that existing limits only impair candidates’ ability to fend off attacks from independent groups in states such as California, where advertising costs are enormous. During her remarks Wednesday, she noted that her four statewide campaigns in California since 1990 had cost $55 million.

Her role in Wednesday’s negotiations underscored her clout as a Senate deal-maker. Since her election to the Senate in 1992, Feinstein has established an image for herself as “one of the best bridges in the Senate between Democrats and the majority GOP,” as Congressional Quarterly’s “Politics in America” put it.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

How Much Donors Can Give

The Senate voted Wednesday to raise the limits on how much individual donors can contribute to candidates and parties. Here are key changes in maximum amounts donors would be allowed to give under the amendment:

*

CONTRIBUTIONS TO...

Candidates*

Current law: $1,000 per election

Proposed: $2,000** per election

*

State / Local Party Committees

Current law: $5,000 per calendar year

Proposed: $10,000 per calendar year

*

National Party Committees

Current law: $20,000 per calendar year

Proposed: $25,000** per calendar year

*

Total Limit Per Donor

Current law: $25,000 per calendar year

Proposed: $37,500** per calendar year

*

* Donors are allowed to give the maximum amount to candidates twice in each election cycle--once before a primary and again before the general election.

** Figures would be adjusted annually for inflation.

Source: Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s office