Odd Partners in Finance Bill Debate
WASHINGTON (AP) - The gun lobby is in league with civil libertarians, while environmentalists and businessmen have joined forces on the other side. Curious alliances are developing as Congress nears a crucial vote on revamping the campaign spending system.
This week the House is taking up campaign finance legislation with a real shot at bringing the first substantial change in spending rules since the Watergate era a quarter-century ago.
The stakes are huge, the issue complicated; hence the unusual diversity of groups gathering either to defeat the legislation or to pass it.
The strangest bedfellows are the coalition out to defeat the top contender, a bill by Reps. Christopher Shays, R-Conn., and Marty Meehan, D-Mass. That bill would ban the unregulated ``soft money'' contributions that corporations, unions and individuals now make to national political parties for party-building and voter activities. It also would restrict certain types of political ads in the final weeks before a primary or general election.
The National Rifle Association is working with the American Civil Liberties Union to defeat Shays-Meehan, which is close to the Senate-passed bill sponsored by Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Russ Feingold, D-Wis. Their coalition also includes the anti-abortion National Right to Life Committee, the Christian Coalition, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers.
The coalition's main contention is that Shay-Meehan, by limiting spending on political advocacy, is violating First Amendment free speech rights. The NRA says in an ad that it ``will mobilize an unprecedented grass-roots response against this unprecedented assault on the First Amendment.''
Susan Muskett, director of legislative affairs at the Christian Coalition, said Shays-Meehan ``could cripple our ability to disseminate voter guides and other voter education materials.''
Lobbying for Shays-Meehan are such public interest groups as Common Cause, Americans for Reform, and Public Citizen. Their coalition runs from the Sierra Club and other environmental groups to the Committee for Economic Development, a group of more than 300 business leaders including top executives from Sara Lee, Nortel Networks, State Farm and Motorola.
Support from the business community shows that ``you don't have to be a woolly-headed liberal to think it's time to ban soft money,'' said Celia Viggo Wexler, senior policy analyst for Common Cause.
Other groups that are strong proponents of limiting campaign spending are not supporting Shays-Meehan because of specific provisions in the bill.
U.S. Public Interest Research Group's Julia Hutchins says they came out against McCain-Feingold because it doubles the ``hard money,'' or regulated contributions individuals make directly to candidates, to $2,000 per election.
Shays-Meehan keeps the current $1,000 limit for House candidates while accepting the $2,000 cap for more expensive Senate races. ``We remain endlessly optimistic we may influence the final bill'' to prevent any rise in hard money, Hutchins said.
Nick Nyhart, executive director of Public Campaign, said his group has also withdrawn its support over the hard money issue. ``It just took the edge off our enthusiasm for it,'' he said. His group advocates public financing and other steps to significantly reduce election spending.
The House Democrats who are the main backers of Shays-Meehan are also out of synch with their traditional allies in organized labor. Bill Samuel of the AFL-CIO said restrictions on political ads will make it difficult to communicate with their members on legislative issues.
He said his union is supporting neither Shays-Meehan nor a rival bill sponsored by Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio, and backed by the Republican leadership. But he said the Ney bill, which limits soft money donations to $75,000 for national parties, was a reasonable compromise.
Charles Loveless, director of legislation for the 1.3 million-member American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, also wrote a letter to lawmakers Monday announcing opposition to Shays-Meehan because he said it would impede state and local parties from using soft money for grass-roots activities.
He said such restrictions ``will make the low rate of voter participation even worse.''
On the Net: House members' Web sites: http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html
Originally published July 10, 2001.
