First Amendment topicsAbout the First Amendment
News Story
 
print this   Print

McCain gains ally in drive to block big campaign money

By The Associated Press
02.03.05

WASHINGTON — Sen. John McCain and others pushing for tougher campaign-finance rules won a surprising ally yesterday as they announced a renewed effort to block partisan interest groups from spending millions of dollars in big donations in congressional and presidential races.

Sen. Trent Lott, chairman of the Senate Rules Committee, said he voted against sweeping campaign fund-raising restrictions won by McCain, Sen. Russ Feingold and others in 2002 but now agreed with the law's supporters that further legislation would be needed to stop groups from circumventing the new rules.

Lott called six- and seven-figure checks that independent political groups poured into last year's presidential election "sewer money" that must be stopped. The Mississippi Republican said his committee would vote next month on legislation that would put strict new limits on fund-raising and spending by partisan tax-exempt groups active in congressional or presidential races.

The proliferation of new groups that spent millions in the presidential race was an unintended consequence of the 2002 law that banned national party committees and congressional and presidential candidates from accepting big checks, Lott said. Money that used to go to the political parties simply moved to other partisan groups, he said.

"It's been used by both sides and it's going to be abused by both sides," Lott said at a news conference with the bill's sponsors.

The legislation proposed by McCain, R-Ariz., Feingold, D-Wis., Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn., and Rep. Martin Meehan, D-Mass., targets partisan tax-exempt groups known as 527s because of the section of the tax code that covers them.

President Bush supports the proposal, McCain said.

The legislation must win approval from Lott's committee before the Senate can vote on it. In the House, Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., has expressed interest in limiting 527 groups' activities but hasn't endorsed a specific proposal, Shays said.

Under the measure introduced yesterday, 527s that raise more than $25,000 a year and spend money in congressional or presidential elections:

  • Would have to register with the Federal Election Commission as political-action committees, disclose details of their fund raising and spending, and abide by the same contribution and spending limits as other PACs. That means they could only accept donations of up to $5,000 each from individuals or other PACs for their federal election activities, contributions known as hard money.
  • Could accept up to $25,000 from each individual donor to help finance efforts that affect both federal and nonfederal candidates, such as get-out-the-vote drives or ads. They would be barred from accepting money from corporations or labor unions for such spending, and would have to cover at least half the cost of their activities with the smaller "hard money" contributions.

The new proposal is similar to one made in the last Congress. It comes as a judge considers lawsuits by Shays, Meehan and the Bush campaign seeking to force the Federal Election Commission to use existing laws to limit activities of 527s.

Bush sued the FEC last year after well-financed pro-Kerry 527s targeted him in ads. By election time, however, GOP activists had persuaded big donors to give millions for anti-Kerry ads, beginning to even the playing field among the groups.

McCain acknowledged the new bill wouldn't cover another type of interest group: lobbying and issue-advocacy organizations known as "501cs" under the tax code. He said such groups already had a big incentive to avoid partisan election activities: Getting too involved in them could jeopardize their tax-exempt status.

The bill also wouldn't block wealthy activists from spending their money independently to air ads supporting or opposing candidates. The Supreme Court has long held that individuals have the right to spend as much as they wish on their own to express their views.

From January 2003 through late November last year, the Democratic National Committee raised $402 million for the elections and the Republican National Committee took in $385 million.


Previous
Campaign-finance watchdogs plan attack on 527s
Backers of 2002 law are trying to get courts to force FEC to take tougher positions against free-spending independent groups. 11.09.04

Related

Bush campaign asks court to force action on soft-money groups

Attorney for campaign contends 527s are violating federal election laws, says FEC is failing to do its job. 09.02.04

Court ruling may force FEC to regulate Web political activity

Exemptions allowing for online ads, fund raising viewed by federal judge as undermining campaign-finance law. 10.13.04

House, Senate split on dealing with 527s
Divergent strategies — from restoring some financial muscle to political parties to restricting what outside groups can do — add up to general dissatisfaction with way 2002 campaign-finance law has worked. 04.24.05

D.C. Circuit: FEC wrongly opened loopholes in campaign-finance law
Three-judge panel upholds lower court ruling that ordered regulators to write tougher rules interpreting Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act. 07.15.05

House GOP leaders drop bid to limit 527s
Lawmakers had sought to attach campaign-finance measure to defense bill in attempt to curtail election-cycle influence of nonparty political groups. 12.19.05

FEC knocked for nonprofits' heavy spending in '04 election
Federal judge sends issue back to agency, orders it to 'articulate its reasoning,' or come up with a rule for 527 groups 'if necessary.' 03.31.06

Campaign finance overview


News summary page
View the latest news stories throughout the First Amendment Center Online.



Last system update: Saturday, November 21, 2009 | 08:14:05
 SEARCH  MORE
About this site
About the First Amendment
About the First Amendment Center
How to contribute
Video/RSS/podcasts
First Amendment programs
State of the First Amendment
reports

Religious liberty in public schools
First Reports
Supreme Court
Columnists
Experts
First Amendment publications
First Amendment Center history
Glossary
Freedom Sings™
Events
First Amendment
Schools

Congressional Research Service reports
Guest editorials
FOI material
The First Amendment
Library

Lesson plans
freedomforum.org
Newseum
Contact us
Privacy statement
Related links