House Passes Limit on
Cash
for Groups in
Campaigns
By SHERYL GAY
STOLBERG, NYTimes on the Web, April 6, 2006
WASHINGTON, Apr. 5 -- The
House narrowly passed a bill on Wednesday that would sharply limit contributions
to nonprofit advocacy groups like MoveOn.org and Swift Boat Veterans for Truth,
which revolutionized politics during the 2004 elections with their ability to
escape campaign finance rules by raising unlimited cash from private donors.
The vote was 218 to 209, with 18 Republicans and 7 Democrats defecting from
their respective party positions. The measure would cap individual
contributions to so-called 527 groups, which draw their name from a provision in
the tax code, to $25,000 a year for activities intended to mobilize voters
behind issues, as opposed to specific candidates.
The bill now goes to the Senate, where John McCain, the Arizona Republican who
is the author of campaign finance legislation passed in 2002, is offering a
similar measure. The measure is not on the Senate calendar, and Democrats
would have an easier time blocking it there.
The vote was a victory for Republicans in an otherwise difficult week, marked by
the announcement that Representative Tom DeLay of Texas, the former Republican
leader, would resign from Congress.
The new majority leader, Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, was terse after
the vote. Asked for a comment, Mr. Boehner said, "We won."
But even if the bill becomes law, it is unclear how much will change.
Already, groups like MoveOn.org are operating under another section of the tax
code, 501(c)4, which is not covered by the legislation passed Wednesday.
A Republican opponent of the bill, Representative Mike Pence of Indiana, has
compared the exercise to whack-a-mole, a carnival game in which a player hits
one mole with a hammer and another pops up.
The 527 groups emerged as a political force during the 2004 election campaign.
The Democratic presidential candidate, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts,
suffered from attacks on his war record by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth,
and George Soros funneled tens of millions into liberal groups like MoveOn.org.
The House Republican leadership said the bill was necessary to close a loophole
in the 2002 campaign finance bill, which prohibited federal candidates and
national parties from accepting unlimited soft money donations from individuals,
unions and corporations. The bill passed Wednesday requires 527's to
follow the same rules as party committees.
The 2002 bill "left an obvious and easy loophole to exploit," said
Representative David Dreier, chairman of the House Rules Committee and a major
champion of the 527 bill.
Another Republican, Representative Candice S. Miller of Michigan, said the 527's
were doing work that Democratic political committees were no longer permitted to
do. "Essentially, what happened here is the political parties were
outsourced," Ms. Miller said, adding, "527's ran TV ads, they operated Web
sites, they ran phone banks, mobilized the get-out-the-vote efforts."
But Democrats said the measure was an effort to disadvantage them in the
November mid-term elections. They said if Republicans were serious about
campaign finance reform, the bill would curb other types of nonprofit groups as
well.
"This is not reform, it's retaliation," said Representative Steny H. Hoyer of
Maryland, the Democratic whip. Referring to Republicans, he added, "They
are trying to gag their opponents and further empower their supporters."
The debate marked a sharp turnaround for both parties from 2002, when Democrats
pushed legislation to restrict campaign spending and many Republicans opposed
it, arguing that limiting contributions was tantamount to interfering with the
First Amendment.
"You've changed your principles," Mr. Hoyer told Mr. Dreier at one point.
"In my opinion, you've changed your point of view."
But Representative Christopher Shays, Republican of Connecticut and a chief
sponsor of the bill, said it was Democrats who had changed their principles.
"This is a surreal debate," Mr. Shays said. "This is a debate that has
consequences, and yet it seems to almost be like a game."
The measure drew a strange coalition. Groups like the Alliance for
Justice, a liberal organization that has worked to defeat President Bush's
judicial nominees, joined with the Club for Growth, a conservative anti-tax
group, to oppose the measure.
Bob Bauer, a Democratic election lawyer who worked with the coalition opposing
the measure, said little would change if the measure is passed, and predicted
another outcry after the 2006 races. "You will see legislative efforts in
the next round directed against these 501(c) organizations," he said. "It
is going to simply be endlessly applied to chase after more speech."
|
