Facebook Twitter Email
MARCH 19, 2001

He fought in the Vietnam War and ended up in a POW camp, sought a Presidential nomination and lost, but Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) this week faces the biggest battle in his life.

Yet the fight over campaign finance reform is bigger than just one person. With the memories of the closest election in recent history still fresh in the minds of the country, the debate over campaign finance reform will change how Americans view politics even if McCain doesn't prevail.

Today, the Senate begins considering a bill sponsored by McCain, Russell Feingold (D-Wis.), and Thad Cochran (R-Ms.). Its primary purpose is banning "soft money," the type of campaign contributions which corporations, organizations, labor unions, and wealthy individuals make to political parties.

Soft money has its roots in campaign finance reform instituted in the 1970s. Reacting to the Watergate political scandal, Congress established hard limits on how much money individuals could spend on candidates: $1,000 per election year to a candidate and $20,000 annually to a political party.

Creative fundraisers, however, found a loophole and were able to funnel money to national political parties since the funds don't finance a federal candidate directly. Instead, they pay for the costs of running a party but are most often used to help educate voters about political issues.

The latter practice is known as "issue advertising." Issue ads don't call on voters to support a particular candidate but they function in a way McCain and his supporters say goes too far: they attack or praise a federal candidate for his or her stance on a particular issue.

The McCain-Feingold bill would help reduce issue advertising because political parties wouldn't have as much money needed to produced them. But the bill also goes a step further and places limits on ads paid by corporations, organizations, and labor unions.

The bill would bar labor unions or for-profits from placing radio or television ads that mention federal political candidates within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election. It does not, however, ban print, mail, or Internet advertising.

It also does not ban issue advertising by non-profit organizations. Such organizations can do so only if they use individual, not corporate, contributions and make disclosures about the source of the funds.

Last election cycle alone, soft money accounted for nearly a half a billion dollars of campaign money. The biggest soft money contributors as of March 1, according to the Center for Responsible Politics were:

• New York Senate 2000 who spent $8.6 billion on a campaign which saw the triumph Senator Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) over former Congressman Rick Lazio (R-N.Y.). It was one of the most expensive campaigns in New York history.
• The American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees who spent $5.9 million on Democratic party interests.
• The Service Employees International Union who spent $4.3 million, mostly on Democratic interests.
• AT&T who spent $3.9 million, $2.4 million of which went to Republican interests.

Making the top 1000 of soft-money contributors who gave more than $100,000 were a number of tribes:

• The Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation of Connecticut, who spent $350,548 mostly on Democratic interests. Some $200,000 went to the Democratic National Committee alone.
• The Seminole Tribe of Florida, who spent $325,000 mostly on Democratic party interests. Some $100,000 went to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
• The Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians of North Carolina, who spent $140,000 on Democrats, with $100,000 to the $125,000 to the Democratic National Committee.
• The Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of California, who gave $130,000 to Democratic party interests.
• The Mississippi Band of Choctaw who gave $110,000 to Republican party interests.
• The Viejas Band of Mission Indians of California, who gave $105,000 to Democratic party interests.

Get the McCain-Feingold Bill:
To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide bipartisancampaign reform (Draft of S.27)

Relevant Links:
Open Secrets, the Center for Responsible Politics - http://www.opensecrets.org