John McCain

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I have to say that will be our intention in the event the Thompson amendment is not tabled, and I have discussed this with the author of the amendment and many others, and unless there is some reason for not doing so, I hope that will be agreeable.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. I move to table and ask unanimous consent that that be for all three divisions. I move to table all three.

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I appreciate the hard work and sincere conviction that my friend--my dear friend and comrade--the Senator from Nebraska has invested in his amendment. I would, as always, prefer to be on the same side of the fight with him, as we have been so many times in the past, and as we will be again. He is a man of honor and a patriot. I admire him and consider his friendship to be a treasure of inestimable value to me. And whatever faults I might have as a human being and as a legislator, I hope it could never be fairly said of me that I was ungrateful to men and women of character who have honored me with their friendship. I should also acknowledge that there are provisions of Senator Hagel's amendment that I could support, or that, at least, could provide the basis for bipartisan negotiations. The Senator's broadcast provision, for instance, merits support. And I believe there are ways that Democrats and Republicans could come together to address Senator Hagel's central concern about making sure that our legislation does not weaken the two political parties even more than, what I believe, is the case today. But recognizing both the Senator's hard work and sincere concern, I must oppose this amendment. I must oppose it because it preserves, indeed, it sanctions the soft money loophole that has made a mockery of current campaign finance law, and which has led directly to the many, outrageous campaign finance scandals of recent years that have so badly damaged the public's respect for their government, and for those of us who are responsible for protecting the public trust. As I said in my opening statement, I believe it is self-evident that contributions from a single source that run to the hundreds of thousands of dollars are not healthy to a democracy. And I believe that conviction is broadly shared by the people whose interests we have sworn an oath to defend. My friend's amendment would allow this terribly damaging flaw in our current system to remain. It would, in fact, sanction it. Thus I cannot support it. Even if every other provision of our bill were to be struck down by the opponents of campaign finance reform, along with all the good work done by both sides last week in reaching compromises on related issues, even if it were all to fall, a ban on soft money--the huge unregulated six and seven figure checks that come from corporations and unions, from Democrats and Republicans, from Denise Rich and Roger Tamraz--a ban on soft money, while not perfect reform, or comprehensive reform would still be good service by this body toward alleviating the appearance of corruption that afflicts our work here. A cap of $120,000 per individual per campaign, along with absolutely no limits on soft money used by state parties for the benefit of candidates for federal office, will do little to address this problem. In fact, and I say this with the greatest respect and affection for my friend, it will do nothing but give this much abused system the Senate's stamp of approval. Mr. President, at the end of debate, I will move to table the Hagel amendment, and I urge all my colleagues to join me in opposing it.

Mr. McCAIN. If the Senator will yield for a 10-second comment?

Mr. McCAIN. As usual, the Senator from Kansas illuminated, enlightened, and entertained all at once, and I enjoyed it very much.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, may I ask what the parliamentary procedure will be?

Mr. McCAIN. Yes. I thank the Senator.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I rise to discuss this amendment which I am sorry to oppose. I appreciate the involvement of the Senator from Texas in this issue and on this particular aspect of it because it was the first major breakthrough we were able to make in the area of campaign finance reform requiring full disclosure of 527 activities. Now that full disclosure has been obtained, we find some fascinating things have gone on in the name of campaign activities, such as buying trucks, giving people very generous salaries, renting office space-- very interesting things. Basically, as I read this amendment, it does not require the State and local political committees to notify and report the requirements imposed in 527. As I understand the comments of the Senator from Texas, I guess somehow it gives them burdensome paperwork that would be difficult for them to achieve in the case of 527s. They are making these reports, and all they have to do is make a copy and send it to Washington. So for a 527, it seems to me, it would not be that hard to use a copying machine. In fact, you might want to even go down to Kinko's and get one there. But more importantly, this is a reversal of full disclosure. Everybody, no matter which side they are on in this debate, says an integral and vital part of the problem is full disclosure. This is obviously a reversal thereof. Also, staff informs me that this entire bill would be blue-slipped if this amendment were made part of it because it touches the Tax Code. Changes in the Tax Code originate in the House of Representatives and it would have to come out of the Ways and Means Committee. So I will be opposing this amendment. I appreciate the involvement of the Senator from Texas. But to exempt people from making a copy of their financial disbursements in their campaign activities and sending it on to Washington, where, if Senator Cochran's amendment is going to be agreed to as part of this bill, it would be posted on the Internet and all would be able to see it, is obviously not something that I would really very much favor. I would want Americans to know all this information. I yield the floor.

Mr. McCAIN. Reclaiming my time, with the agreement of the managers, I want to approve of this legislation pending technical corrections that could be made which would not, obviously, change it but would be merely technical in nature to make sure the intent of the legislation is in keeping with the fact the FEC is the expert on this matter. I thank the Senator from Illinois. I strongly support this amendment. I point out, it may be helpful as we conduct this debate over ``hard money'' because some people say you can contribute $1,000 a year; well, that really means $2,000 a cycle and the aggregates which are $20,000-- what are they? What we are talking about is how much can you contribute to an election, which is every 2 years. It is valuable for us to have this information. I wish we were talking in those terms now. It would be clearer to people as to exactly how much hard money could be given in the proposals I am sure inevitably we are going to engage in as to raising of hard money. We would have a clear indication what that means to a candidate in an election. I mention to my friend from Kentucky, we also ought to take into consideration as we debate this issue of hard money--and I see my friend from New York on the floor, too--how much it costs when we are spending this money; how much it costs for a minute of prime time on New York City television on ``Monday Night Football,'' how much it costs for a 30-second commercial on ``Friends.'' We all know in order to legitimize a candidacy, you need to be on television. I am going to try to inject this in this debate as we go forward, as to how much money candidates are able to spend. It is an important part; that we not only consider how much they can raise but how much it costs to run a campaign nowadays. I thank my friend from Illinois. I strongly support the amendment. I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. McCAIN. I say to the Senator from Texas, I thank her for this effort. We do want to work with her. I would like to put my staff to work with hers. And there are several other Senators' staffs who have also been working on this issue. I think we might be able to get something done. I will make a couple points. One, these organizations do get a Federal tax benefit even though they are only involved in State and local races. That is something we have to address. The other point is, as the Senator from Texas did point out, I argued strenuously that our legislation, which was put on the Defense bill, would not be blue- slipped by the House and should not have been. And I still believe that. I agree with the Senator from Texas that this should not be blue- slipped either. But after we passed the bill, and they went to conference, the House was insistent upon their position that it would be blue-slipped. So it was withdrawn from the Defense bill because of that adamant position the other body assumed. I have been discussing this matter with our staffs, and I think there is a way to work it out. I agree with the Senator from Texas, we should not put additional burdens on especially a majority of these relatively small organizations that are engaging in State and local campaigns. So I rather believe we can probably get something worked out and get it modified so it is acceptable to both the Senator from Texas as well as all Senators. I thank the Senator from Texas. We are going to work on it. I thank her for her engagement on this very important issue. I yield the floor. Mrs. HUTCHISON addressed the Chair.

Mr. McCAIN. First, I thank Senator Fitzgerald because I also have heard from people who have to keep track of this paperwork. It is voluminous. It is difficult. It is not only an expenditure of money to make sure that all of these reports are correct, but it is an enormous expenditure of time as well. It seems to me Senator Fitzgerald has an excellent idea. If I understood Senator Fitzgerald, there may be some technical corrections that could be added to the amendment as a result of recommendations by the FEC in order to make sure this is in keeping with the intent of the amendment, I ask my friend.

Mr. McCAIN. Or ``The Treasurers Relief Act.''

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I thank Senator Fitzgerald. I wonder if the title of this is the ``Fitzgerald Campaign Treasurers Protection Act.''

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, may I have 5 minutes.

Mr. McCAIN. If the Senator will yield, I wish to make it clear, if we are not done by Thursday night, it will be done on Friday; if it is not done on Friday, we will be on it Saturday; if we are not done on Saturday, Sunday; if not Sunday, Monday. We will make time for the amendment of the Senator from Texas. We will not leave this legislation as long as I have the ability to keep us on it. If I don't, then all amendments will go, and so it won't matter whether the amendment came up or not. Amendment No. 111, Withdrawn

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, with the staff of the Senator from Texas and our staff, if we work it out, which I am 90 percent sure we will, then there is going to be no debate. We will bring it up and accept it. I don't think it will be too big a problem getting back in the queue on an amendment that is going to be basically accepted. If not, then it is going to be brought up, and we will have the full 3 hours of debate. I suggest the Senator from Texas go ahead and withdraw it. Then we can bring it up after we have an agreement. We can have it done in 30 seconds, since we have already debated the underlying issue.

Mr. McCAIN. Will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I point out, I did have a meeting with the leader of the AFL-CIO in which he expressed his dissatisfaction with several portions of this legislation. I believe it should also be reiterated that taking out the Beck language was something that was agreed to on both sides. Mr. President, I am going to make a motion to table this amendment at the appropriate time.

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I move to table the amendment and ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. McCAIN. I thank the majority leader. I understand the necessity, because of the weekend, that there may be two or three stacked votes on Monday. But the original agreement was we wouldn't stack any votes. So it will be my intention to object for the rest of the week after these stacked votes. These are too critical to wait over the weekend and let them sit out there to then have everybody come running in to vote on them. I thank Senators Dodd and McConnell. We have had an excellent debate and a ventilation of this issue which has been educational not only to Members but to the country. I also emphasize we need to get this done. I understand the urgency of moving to the budget the week after next, but we need to get this issue completed. I hope all Members understand that. We are committed to staying on this until we get a final vote either up or down on the bill. I thank the majority leader for all his help. This has been a debate that I can personally say I have enjoyed and I think other Members have as well.

Mr. McCAIN. Will the majority leader yield?

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I support the amendment. I think it is a good thing to happen. I think maybe we have taken way too much time on it since basically everybody is in agreement. I point out to my colleagues again, we still have a lot of pending amendments. We would like to get through them. There are some of them that will not take a maximum of 3 hours. There are some we can complete in a relatively short period of time. The worst of all worlds is for us to continue to make the steady progress we have been making but run out of time because there are various commitments next week that people have. So I hope we can not only move forward with the amending process--we have spent a heck of a lot of time in quorum calls, and also with, albeit important, speeches and comments that do not have anything to do with the bill, the legislation we are addressing. Again, I urge my colleagues who have amendments, please let Senator McConnell and Senator Dodd know so we can try to set up an orderly process for completion of the legislation at the appropriate time next week. I thank my colleagues.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Is it also the understanding that there will be debate on the amendment starting at noon?

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I thank Senator Cochran. He has worked long and hard. It is a chance for us to take advantage of new technology so that literally 100 million Americans will be able to receive this information in a timely and informative fashion. This is in keeping with what all of us are attempting to do with campaign finance reform; that is, increase disclosure. We are working on an additional amendment to help on the disclosure issue. I thank Senator Cochran for his involvement. I thank Senator Dodd and Senator McConnell as well. I yield the floor.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I move to table the amendment and ask for the yeas and nays.