a. . 7&1 ?wax . mp3?? Egan?. . . . ?rersmuwaw A a a sue . girl1.. ?(my . w. {in warm Ru, :5 mm 5.3mf?naugw?irt.lhnr ?x 4. .w .k 11% \ma\ {1 at.? 3 ?ax . $411.4 . . w?w .1 $an ?r?dm .rk? .: 1.(?531! il?nuhh . . .?nr?mmw v1.5 . yr . . Jainnu: ?rl 3 .. Hmrwuw??xlai..? . . . . EDERAL GM LEGISLATIVE HISTORY OF FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1974 The Federal Election Commission 1325 K Street, Northwest Washington, D.C. 20463 August 1977 For sale by the Superintendent 0f DocUmentS, U,S, Government Printing Offtee, Washingtor_, D.C. 20402 (il) The Federal Election Commission 1325 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20,1.63 Telephone (202) 523-4068 Toll Free (800),424-9530 Commissioners Thomas E. Harris, Chairman Joan D. Aikens, Vice Chairman WilliamL.Springer hell Staebler Vernon W. Thomson F,obertO. Tiernan Ex Officio Com rnissioners J. S. Kimmitt, Secretary of the Senate Edmund L. Henshaw, Jr,, Clerk of the House of Reoresentatives P'REFAC:E The Federal Election of the 1974 Amendments Commission is publishing thi[s legislative history to the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide to Commissioners and Commission staff, the Congress, and to candidates and committees affected by tie Federal Election Campaign Act, easy access to the Amendments, the bill; panying reports, and the floor debates. The material hensively is presented from which they derive, accom- in a chronological fashion, and is compre- indexed. The legislative history was compiled, edited and indexed supervision of the Office of General Counsel. A companion lng the legislative history of the 1976 Arnendrnents to the Campaign Act is being issued conc:urrentl,/. The Commission hopes that affected by the Federal Election better understanding and complying volume Federal under the containElection this I]gislative history will aid all those Campaign Act of 1971, as amended, in with the Act. III TABLE OF ,CONTENTS S.3044 3 Report to Accompany S. 3044 (Senate Committee on Rules and Admiinistration) 93 Senate Floor Debates on S. 3044 191 H.R. 16090 547 Report to Accompany H.R. 16090 (House Committee on House Administration) 631 House Floor Debates on H.R. 16090 799 Report of Committee of Conference 945 Senate Floor Debate on Conference Report 1077 House Floor Debate on Conference Report 1103 President Ford's Remarks at Bill Signing Ceremony 1129 Public Law 93-443 1135 Indexes: Subject Index to Legislative History 1179 Index to Days of Congressional Debates 1223 V 5.3044 CalendarNo.665 2D SESSION _ oo_o_ S 3044 [Report No. 93--689] IN TItE SENATE OF TIIE FEBRUAnY 21 (legislative UNITED STATES clay, FEBnUARY 191), 1974 Bir. CANNON, from the Committee on Rules and Administration, reported following bill; which was read twice and placed on the calendar the A BILL To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing of primary and general[ election cam- paigns for Federal elective ofiqce, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating' to the financing and conduct of such campa,igns. 1 Be it enacted by the Senat e and House of Representa- 2 rives of the United Stat¢s of America in Congress assembled, 3 That this Act may be ci.ted as the "Federal 4 paign Act Amendments II of 1974". Election Cam- 2 TABLE TITLE I--FINANCING OF CONTIgNTS OF FEDERAL CAMPAi[GN$ Page Sec. 101. Public financing "Sec. 501. Definitions "Sec. "Sec. "Sec. "See. "Sec. "See. "Sec. "See. "Sac. provisions ................................ .......................................... 502. 503. 504. 505. 596. 507. 508. 509. 510. Eligibility for payments .............................. Entitlement to payments ............................ Expenditure limitations ........................... Certification by Commission ........................ Payments to eligible candidates .................... Examination and audits; repayments ............. Information on proposed expenses ............... Reports to Congress; regulations ................... Participation by Commission in judicial proceedings ....................................... "Sec. 511. Penalty for violations .............................. "Sec. 512. Relationship to other Federal election laws" ....... TITLE II--CHANGES IN CAMPAIGN COMMU)[ICATIONS LAW AND IN REPORTING AND DISCLOSURE PROVISIONS OF FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT OF 1971 Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. 201. 202. 203. 204. 205. "See. See. 206. See. 207. Campaign communications ................................ Changes in definitions for reporting and disclosur,_ ..... Registration of candidates and political eommitte_ ..... Changes in reporting requirements ...................... Campaign advertisements ................................. /_05. Requirements relating to carapaigx_ advertising"__ Waiver of reporting requirements ................ _....... Establishment of Federal Election Comndssion; central campaign committees; campaign deposil_)ries .......... "See. ;_08. Federal Election Commission ........................ "Sec. 309. Powers of Commission .............................. "See_ 810. Central campaign committees ...................... "Sec. 311. Oanipaign depositories" ........................... Sec. 20t_. Indexing and publication of reports ...................... Sec. 209. Judicial review .......................................... "See. 313. Judicial review" .................................... Sec. 210. Financial assistance to States to promote complia]lce___ Sec. 211. Contributions in the name of another pert_n ............ Sec. 212. Role of political party organization in Presidential campaigns; use of excess campaign fUndsl; authorization of appropriations; penalties ............................ "Sec. "Sec. "See. "Sec. Sec. 213. "See. ';16. Approval of Presidential campaign expenditures by national committee ........ _.................... 317. Use of contributed amounts for certain purposes__ 318. Authorization of appropriations ................... 319. Penalty for violations" ............................ Applicable State laws ................................... 403. Effect on State law" ............................... 3 TITLE III--CRIMES RELATING TO ELECTIONS POLITICAL ACTIVITIES AND Page Sec. 301. Changes in definitions ................................. Sec. 302. Expenditure of personal and family funds for Federal campaigns ........................................... Sec. 303. Separate _gregated fund maintenance by Government contractors ........................................... Sec. 304. Limitations on political contributions and expenditures; embezzlement, or conversion of campaign fimds ....... "Sec. 614. Limitation on expenditures generally ............. "Sec. 615.Limitationsoncontributions ...................... "Sec. 616. Form of contributiom_ ........................... "Sec. 617. Embezzlement or conversion of political contributions'' ........................................... TITLE IV--DISCLOSURE BY CERTAIN FEDERAL OF FINANCIAL INTERESTS OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES Sec. 401. Federal employee financial TITLE disclosure requirements ..... V--RELATED INTERNAL AMENDMENTS REVENUE CODE Sec. 501. Increase in political contributions credit and deduction__ Sec. 502. Doubling of dollar check-off; repeal of subtitle H ....... 1 TITLE I--FINANCING 2 3 4 OF FEDERAL CAMPAIGNS PUBLIC FINANCINGPROVISIONS SEC. 101. The Federal Election Catrq_aign Act of 1971 is amended by adding at the end thereof the following 5 new title: 6 "TITLE V--PUBLIC 7 ELECTION 8 9 FINANCING OF FEDERAL CAMPAIGNS "DI_IFINITIONS "SEC. 10 501. "(1) For purposes of this title, the term'candidate', 'Commission', 'contribution', 'ex-- 11 penditure', 'political committee', 'politic_d party', or 12 'State' has the meaning given it in section 301 of this 13 Act; 4 I "(2) 'authorized committee' means the central c_m- 2 paign committee of a candidate 3 this Act) 4 lng by that candidate to make or receive contributions 5 or to make expenditures on his behalf; 6 7 8 9 (undeI' section 310 of or any political committee authorized in writ- "(3) 'Federal office' means the office of President, Senator, or Representative; "(4) House 'Representative _ means of Representatives_ a ]_Iember of the the Resident Commissioner 10 from the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the Dele- 11 gates from the District of Columbia, Guam, and the Vir- 12 gin Islands; 13 "(5) 'general election' means any regularly sched- 14 tiled or special election held for the purpose of electing 15 a candidate 16 lng presidential and vice presidential 17 "(6) to :Federal omce or for the lmrpose of elect- 'primary election' means elecbors; (A) an election, 18 including a runoff election, held for the nomination 19 a political party of a candidate :_or election to Federal 20 office, (B) 21 held for the nomination 22 convention, 23 delegates 24 political 25 expression a convention by or caucus of _ political party of such candidate, (C) a caucus, or election held for the selection of to a national party, and nominating (D) of a preference convention an e!ectiorL held for the nc,re;nation of a for 1;he by a 5 1 political party 2 President; 3 :"(7) 4 5 'eligible of persons for election candidate' means a candidate eligible, under section 502, for payments "(8) to the office ,of who is under this title; 'major party' :means, with respect to an election 6 for any Federal office-- 7 "(A) a political party whose candidate for election 8 to that office in the ]?receding general election for theft 9 office received, as the candidate of that party, 25 per- 10 cent or more of the 'total number of votes cast in that 11 election for all candi&!ttes for that office, or 12 "(B) if only one political party qualifies as a major 13 party under the provisions ,of subparagraph (A), the 14 political party whose candidate for election to that office 15 in that election received, as the candidate of that party, 16 the second greatest number of votes cast in that election 17 for all candidates for 'that office (if such :number is equal 18 to 15 percent or more of the total number of votes cast 19 in that election for all candidates for that office); 20 "(9) 21 for a Federal 22 election to that office in the preceding general election for 23 that office received, as thte candidate 24 5 percent but less than _)5 percent of the total number of 'minor party' :means, with respect to an election office, a political party whose candidate .for of that', party, at least 7 6 I votes cast in that election for all candidates for that office; 2 and 3 4 "(10) Fund established under section 506 (a). 5 6 7 "ELIGIBILITY "Sr_c. 502. 10 [FOR PAYMEI_[?S To be eligible to receive shall agTee-- evidence it may request about his campaign expenditures and oontribufions; "(2) to keep and'. to furnish to the Commission any records, books, and other ]information ii, may request; 13 "(3) to an audit and examination by the Commis-- 14 sion under section 507 and to pay any _ounts 1.5 under section 507; and 16 "(4) to furnish statements 17 tures and proposed 18 section 508. 19 "(b) 20 21 campaign expe:adi-. expenses required urLder sion that-"(1) the candidate and his authorized will not make campaign 23 limitations in section 504; and 8 of campaign required Every such candidate shall certify to the Commls- 22 24 paym,3nts "( 1 ) to obtain and to furnish to the Commission_ ally' 11 1.2 (a) under this title, a candidate 8 9 'fund' means the Federal Election Campaign "(2) expenditures _eater committees than the no contributions will be accepted by the can- 7 I didate or his authorized committees in violation of sec- 2 tion 615 (b) 3 "(c) (1) To be eligible to receive any payments under of title 18, United States Code. 4 section 506 for use in cc.nnection with his primary 5 campaign, a candidate shall certify to the Co:zmnission that--- 6 "(A) he is seeking noraination by a political party 7 for election as a Representative 8 committees have received contributions 9 paign of more than $10,000; 10 "(B) election and he and his authorized for that cam- he is seeking nomination by a political party 11 for election to the Senate and he and his authorized 12 committees have received contributions 13 palgn equal in amount to the lesser of-- 14 "(i) for that cam- 20 percent of the maximum amount he 15 may spend in connection with his primary election 16 campaign under section 504 (a) (1); or 17 18 "(ii) "(2) $125,000; or To be eligible to receive any payments under 19 section 506 for use in connection with a primary 20 election campaign, 21 sion that he is seeking nomination by a political party for 22 election as a Representative 23 candidate 24 Such a candidate a candidate runoff shall certify to the Commis- or as a Senator, and :that he is a for such nomination irt a runoff primary election. is not requi[red to receive any minimum 8 I amount 2 this title. 3 of contributions "(3) before receiving p,,_yments under he is seeking nomination by a political party 4 for election to the office of President; and he and his authorized 5 committees have 6 throughout the United States in a total[ amount of more th:in 7 $250,000. 8 9 10 "(d) contributions for his campail.m To be eligible to receive any payments under sec- tion 506 in connection with his general election campaign, a candidate 11 12 received must certify to the Commission that-- "(1) he is the nominee of a major or minor party for election to Federal office; or 13 "(2) in the case of any other candidate, he is seek- 14 lng election to Federal office and he and his authorized 15 committees have received contributions fol' that campaign 16 :in a total amount of not less thtm the campaign 17 required under subsection 18 nomination election to 19 _m accordance with the 20 tion 21 tion to' in paragraph 22 stituting the words 'general electi,on' for 'primary 2-3 lion' in paragraphs 24 _'(e) In determining (e) for (disregarding (2) (2) (c) fund of a candidate for theft office, determined provisions of the words 'for subsecnomlrLa. of such subsection and suLb- and (3) eh_c- of su,_h subsection). the axnount of contributions re- 2,5 ceived by a candidate and his aul;horized committees for pttr- lO 9 I poses of subsection (c) and for purposes of subsection 2 (d)(2) 3 "(1) no contribution reeelved by the candidate 4 any of his au,thorized committees as a subscription, 5 advance, or deposit, or as a contribution 6 services, shall be taken into account; 7 "(2) in thecase of a candidate or loan, of products or for nomination 8 election to the office of President, 9 any person shall be taken into account to tlhe extent that 10 it exceeds $250 when added to the amount of all other 11 contributions 12 of that candidate in connection with his primary 13 tion campaign; and 14 "(3) no contribution for from made by that person to or for the benefit elec- in the case of any other candidate., no con- 15 tribution from any person 16 to _the extent ,that it exceeds $100 when added to the 17 amount of all other contributions made by that person 18 to .or for the benefit of!that candidate in connection with 19 his primary election campaign. 20 "(f) Agreements shall be taken into account and certifications under this section 21 shall be filed with the Commission at the time required by 22 the Commission. 23 24 25 "EN_ITLEMIi_NT "SEc. 503. TO PAYMENTS (a) (1) ]Every eligible candidate is entitled to payments in connection with his primary election campaign S. 3044 ..... 2 11 10 1 in an amount which is equal to the amount of contributions 2 accepts for that campaign. 3 "(2) 4 For purposes of paragraph "(A) he (1) --- in the case of a candidate for nomination 5 election 6 from any person shall be taken into account to the 7 extent that it exceeds 8250 when added to the amount 8 of all other contributions made by that person to or 9 for the benefit of that candidate for his primary election 10 to .the office of President, for no contribution campaign; and 11 "(B) in the case of any other candidate for nomi:aa- 1'.) tion for election to Federal 13 any person shall be taken into account tc the extent ti.hat 14 it exceeds $100 when added to the amount of all other 15 contributions 16 that. candidate for his primary 17 "(b) (1) oft:ice, no contribution from made by that person to or for the benefit of election campaign. Every eligible candidate who is nominated by 18 a m'ajor party is entitled to payments for use in his general 19 election campaign in an amount which is equal to the amount 20 of expenditures the candidate may make in connection with 21. that campa2ign under section 504. 22 23 "(2) Every eligible candidate minor partly is entitled to pgyments who is nominated by e[ for use in his gene:cai 24: election campaign in an amount whie]a bears the same ratio 25 12 to the amount of payments to which a candidate of a major 11 1 party for the same office is entitled under this subsection 9. as-the total number of popular votes received by the candi3 date of that minor party ]!orthat office in the preceding gert- 4 eral election bears to thc average number of popular votes 5 received by the candidates of major parties for that office in 6 the preceding general election. 7 8 "(3) (A) A candidate wl:tois eligible under section 502 (d) (2) to receive payments under section 506 is entitled 9 to payments for use in his general election campaign in an 10 amount equal to the .amount determined under subparagraph 11 (B). 12 "(B) If a candidate whose entitlement is determined 13 under this paragraph received, in the preceding general 14 election held for the office to which he seeks election, 5 per15 cent or more .of the total number o.f votes east for all can- 16 didates for that .office,he is entitled to receive payments for 17 use in his general electien campaign in an .amount (not in 18 excess of the applicable ]imitation under section 504) equal 19 to an amount which bears the same ratio to the amount of 20 the payment under section 506 to which the nominee of a 21 major party is entitled for use in his general election cam22 paign for that office as the nmnber of votes received by that 23 candidate in the preceding general election for that office 24 bears to the average number of votes cast in the preceding 13 12 I general election for all ma_or party candidates for that office. 2 The entitlement 3 office who, in the preceding 4 office, was the candidate of a major or minor party shall not 5 be determined under this paragraph. 6 "(4) of a candidate for election to any _Federal general election held for that An eligible candidate who is the nominee of a 7 minor party or whose entitlement is determined under sec- 8 tion 502 (d) (2) 9 total number of votes cast in the current election, is entitled 10 to payments under section 506 'after the election for expen,ti- 11 tures made or incurred in connection with his i_eneral election 12 campaign in an amount i3 limitation under section 504) 1.4 "(A) and who receives 5 ]percent or more of the (not in excess of the applicable ,equal to-- an amount which bear,,; the same ratio to tlhe 15 amount of the payment under sec';ion 50(1 to which ti_e 16 nominee of a major party w_[s or would have been en- 17 titled for use in his campaign for electioa to that office 18 as the number of votes received by the candidate in that 19 election bears to the average number of votes cast for 20 all major party candidates for that office ia that election, 21 reduced by 22 "(B) any amount paid to the candidate under 23 section 506 before the election. 24 "(5) 25 14 In applying the provisions of this section to a candidate for election to the 'office of President-- 13 1 "(A) votes cast for electors affiliated with a poli- 2 tical party shall be considered to be cast for the Presi- 3 dent-lal candidate 4 "(B) of that p_trty, and votes cast for electors publicly pledged to 5 cast their electoral votes for a candidate shall be con- 6 sidered to be cast for that candidate. 7 "(c) Notwithstanding (b), no candidate the provisions of subsections (a) 8 and !iisentitled 9 amount under this section which, when added to the total 10 amount of contributions 11 committees and any other payments 12 ti,tlc for his primary 13 the amount of the expenditure 14 for that campa_gm under section 504. 15 "SEc. 504. (a)(1) amounts 18 date 19 the office of President) 20 title for use in Ms primary 21 penditures 22 the greater o_-- 24 limitation applicable (f) (2), (other than a cand!idate for nomination "(A) to him to the :extent that under subsection in connection exceeds LI!VIITATIONS Except 17 23 made to him under this or general election campaign, are changed .of ally :received by him and his authorized "-EXPEI_D:[TUttE 16 to the payment such no candi- for election to who receives payments under this election campaign may make exwith that campaign in excess of 10 cents multiplied by the voting age popu- lation (as certified lander subsection (g)) of the geo- 15 14 1 graphical area in which the election for such nomination 2 is held, or 3 "(B) (i) $125,000, if tlhe ]J'ederal office sought is 4 that of Senator, or Representative from a, State which is 5 entitled to only one Representative, or 6 "(il) $90,000, if the 'Fecleral office sought is that 7 of Representative from a State which is entitled to more 8 than one Representative. 9 "(2) (A) zN'ocandidate for nomination for election to the 10 office of President may make expenditures itl any State iii 11 which he is a candidate in a primary election in excess of 12 two times the amount which a candidate for nomination ii'or 13 election to the office of Senator _f:romtlLat .Stat_ (or for nor,fi- 14 nation for election to the office of Delegate in the case of the 15 District of Columbia, the Virgin I.slands, or C_uam,or to the 16 office of Resident Commissioner in the case o[ Puerto Rico) 17 may expend in that State in connection wkh bls primary lS 19 20 election campaign. "(B) _otwithstanding the provision's of .subparagraph (A), no such candidate may m&:e expenditures throughout 21 the United States in connection with Ms ca_tpaign for that 22 nomination in excess of an amount equal to ten cents' muM23 plied by the voting age population of the Unhed States. For 24 purposes of this 'subparagraph, the term 'United tStates' means 25 the several States of the United States, the District of Cohtm.-. 16 15 I bid, and the Commonwealth 2 Virgin Islands and any area from which a delegate 3 national nominating 4 "(b) Except under of Puerto Rico, 'Guam, and the convention of a political party is selectedo to the extent changed 6 ceives payments 7 tion campaign 8 that campaign in excess of the greater of-"(1) subsection tha,t such amounts 5 9 (f)(2), no candidate may make expenditures who re- in connection with 15 cents multiplied by the voting age popula-. tion (as certified under subsection (g)) 11 graphical 12 "(2) of the geo- area in which the election is held, or (A) $175,000, if the ;Federal office sought is 13 that of Senator, or Representative 14 enti,tled to only one Represen,tafive, "(ZB) $90,000, from a State which is or if the ]Federal office sought is that 16 of Representative 17 than one Representative. 18 "(c) 19 O,l,e under tZhis title fol' use in his general elec- 10 15 to the from a S'tate which is entitled to more No candidate who is unopposed in a primary or general election may make expenditures in connection with 20 his primary or general election campaign in excess of 10 21 percent of the limitation in subsection (a)_ or (b). 22 "(d) The Commlsslionshall[prescribe regulations under 23 which any expenditure by a candidate 24 election to the office of President 25 States shall be attributed for nomination :for for use in two or more to such candidate's expenditure 17 16 1 limitation in each such State, based on the voting age popu2 latiorL in such State which can reasonably be expected t:o 3 be influenced by such expenditure. 4 "(e) (1) Expenditures made on b,ehalf ot!any candidate 5 are, for the purposes of this section, consider[_d to be ma,lc 6 by such candidate. 7 "(2) ]Expenditures made by or on behal:! of any candi-. 8 date for the office of Vice President of the United States 9 are, for the purposes of this section, considered to be made 10 by the candidate for the office of President of the Unit,,_d 11 States with whom he is running. 12 "(3) For purposes of this subsection, an expenditure 13 is made on behalf of a candidate, including a Vice Presiden14t rial candidate, if it is made by15 "(A) an authorized co:mmitt,3eor any other agent 16 of the candidate for the pm_)oses of makirLg,any expend- 17 iture,or 18 "(B) any person authorized or requested by the 19 candidate, an authorized conmnittee of 'th,_ candidate, or 20 an agent .ofthe candidate to make the expenditure. 21 "(4) For purposes of this section an expenditure made 22 l_y the national committee of a political party, or by the 23 State committee of a political party, in connection wi[h 24 the general election campaign o!fa candidate affiliated with 25 that party which is not:in excess of the limita_:ionscontained 18 17 I in section 614 (b) of title 18, 'United States Code, is not 2 considered to be an expenditure made on behalf of that 3 candidate. 4 "(f) (1) For purposes o.f paragraph 5 "(A) (2)-- 'price index' means the average over a 6 calendar year of the Consumer Price Index (all items--- 7 United States city average) published monthly by tile 8 Bureau of Labor Statistics, and 9 10 "(B) "(2) 'base period' means the calendar year 1973. At the beginning of each calendar year (com- 11 mencing in 1975), as necessary data 1)ecome available from 12 the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department 13 of Labor, the Secretary of Labor shall certify to the Commission and 14 publish in the Federal ]Register the percentage difference 15 between the price index for the twelve months preceding 16 the beginning of such calendar year and the price index 17 for the base period. Each amount determined under subsec18 tions (a) and (b) shall be changed by such percentage 19 difference. Each amount so changed shall be the amount iin 20 effect for such calendar year. 21 "(g) During the first week of January, 1975, and every 22 subsequent year, the Secretary of Commerce shall certify to 23 the Commission and publish in the Federal Register an 24 estimate of the voting age population of the United States, 25 of each State, and of each congressional district, _s of the first S. 3044 3 19 18 1 day of July next preceding the date of certification. 2 'voting age population' means resident population, The te:cm eighteen 3 years of age or older. 4 "(h) Upon receiving the certification o[ the Secret_bry 5 of Connnerce 6 shall publish in the Federal Register 7 ture limitations in effect for the calendar 3;ear for the 1Suited 8 States, and for each State and congressional 9 this section. 10 "(h) and of the Secretary of Labor, the Commission the applicable expen,:li- district under In the case of a ca-t]tdidate who !s campaigning 11 for election to the House of Representatives 12 which has been established, 13 been altered, 14 office,, the determination 15 of whether 16 minor party 17 under or the boundaries of which have since the preceding general election for s_]ch of the a:mount and t hc_determination the candidate candidate is a major party or is otherwise this title shall be made 18 upon the number from a district candidate or a. entitled to payments by tine C,onmfission based of votes cast in the prer_eding general 19 election for such office by voters residing within the area 20 21 22 encompassed in the new or altered '_CERTIFICATIONS "SEC. 505. (a) district." BY CO3{MISSION 0n the basis of the evidence, books, 23 records, and information 24 to receive payments 25 nation and audit under section 507, the Cemmission 2O furnished :by each caadidate eligible under section 506, and iDrior to exaralshall 19 1 certify from time to time to the Secretary of the Treasury 2 for payment 3 didate is entitled. 4 "(b) to each candidate the amount to which that can- Initial certifications by the Commission under sub- 5 section (a), and all determinations 6 title, shall be final and conclusiw_, except to the extent that 7 they are subject t,o examination 8 under and audit by the Commission section 507 and judicial review 9 "PAYMENTS 10 made by it under this "SEc. 506. TO ELIGIBLE under section 31'3. CANDIDATES (a) There is established within the Treas- 11 ury a fund to be known as the l?ederal Election 12 ]Jund. There are authorized 13 amounts equal to the sum of the amounts 14 taxpayers under section 6096 of the Internal 15 of 1954 not previously 16 of this subsection, 17 necessary 18 any reduction 19 fund shall ,'1 20 Campaign _o "(b) to be appropriated taken to the fund designated Revenue Code ]into account and such additional by amounts for purposes as may be to carry ou,t the provJisions of this title without under subsection remain available (c). without The moneys in the fiscal year limitation. Upon receipt of a certification from the Commls- 21 sion under section 505, the Secretary 22 p_y the amount certified by the Commission to the candidate 23 bo whom the certification relates. 24 25 ,, (c) (1) If the Secretary of the Treasury of the Treasury shall determines that the monies in the fund are not, or may not be, sufiqi- 21 20 I cient to pay the full amount of entitlement 2 eligible to receive payments, 3 which 4 percentage 5 the amount of money remaining in the fun([ at the time of 6 such determination 7 didates eligible to receive payments 8 under section 503. If additional 9 under section 502 after the Secretary each candidate he shall reduce the amount to is entitled under equal to the percentage by (2) to all candi&ttes section 503 by a obtained by dividing (1) the total amount; which all canare entitled to receive candidates become eligible determines there are 10 insufficient monies in the fund, he shall make any further 11 reductions in the amounts 12 necessary to carryout 13 Secretary shall notify the Commission and each eligible can- 14 didate by registered 15 which that candidate 16 "(2) payable tx, all eligible candidates the purposes of this subsection, rPhe mail of the reduction in the amount; to is entitled under sectk,n 503. If, as a result of a reduction under this subsec- 17 tion in the amount to which an eli[gible candidate 18 titled under section 503, payments 19 this section in excess of the amount; to w]ctich such candi- 20 date is entitled, 21 the :fund of the excess under procedures the (lommisslon shall 22 prescribe 23 24 25 22 that candidate is eh- ]have been made under is liable for repayment to by regulation. "EXAMINATION "SEc. 507. AND AUDITS, (a) After each Federal mission shall conduct a thorough REPi_.YMENTS el¢ctlon, the Com- examination and audi_; of 2l 1 the 2 office who received payments 3 paigns relating to that election. 4 campaign "(b)(1) expenditures of all candidates for Federal under this title for use in cam- If the Commission determines that 5 portion of the payments 6 section 506 was in excess of the: aggregate 7 payments 8 so notify that candidate, and he shall pay to the Secretary 9 of the Treasury to which made to an eligible candidate any the candidate under amount of the was entitled, it shall an amount equal to the exces's amount. If 10 the Commission determines that any portion of the payments 11 made to a candidate under section 506 for use ill his primary 12 election campaign 13 used to make expenditures 14 the Commission shall so notify the candidate and he shall pay 15 an amount 16 to the Secretary. 17 ceding sentence, the Commission or his general election campaign 19 20 in connection with that campaign, equal to the amount of the unexpended In making its determination :18 received as contributions portion under the pre- shall consider all amounts to have been expended before any amounts received under this title are expended. "(2) If the Commission determines 21 of any payment 22 used for any purpose other than-- lnade to a candidate that any amount under section 506 was 23 "(A) to defray campaign 24 "(B) to repay loans the proceeds 25 was not expenditures, or o_ which were used, or otherwise to restore fimds (other than contribu.- 23 22 1 fions to defray campaign expenditures 2 eeived 3 campaign and expended) which it shall notify the candidate 5 candidate 6 amount equal to such amount. 8 "(3) 10 of tlhe amount shall pay to tile Secretary No payment under this subsection 9 payments _o used, and thc, of the Treasury an shall be required f::om a candidate in excess of the total amount received by the candidate of ali under section 50(; in: connection with the campaign with respect tc which the event 111 occurred which caused the candidate 12 _:_sed, to deJ:ray expenditures, 4 7 were which were re- to hav_ to make a pay-. ment under this subsection. 13 "(c) No notification shall be made by the Commis_;ion 14 under subsection 15 eighteen months after the day of the election to which the 16 campaign 17 18 19 "(d) (b) with respect to a cam]?aign more than related. All payments "INFORMATION m:tder ON ]_XPENDITUIIES AND PROPOSED EXPE _N_I) ITUlqES 21 "S_c. 568. (a) Every candidate shall, fi'om time to time 22 as the Commission 23 detailed statement, 24 of--- 24 by the Secretary subsection (b) shall be deposited by him in the fund. 20 25 received "(1) requires, furnish to the Commisslo:a a in the fornl the Commission prescribes_ the campaign expenditures incurred by ihim :23 I and his authorized committees prior to the date of the 2 statement 3 penditures has been furnished for purposes of section. 4 505), and 5 "(2) (whether or not evidence of campaign ex: the campaign expenditures which he and his 6 authorized committees propose to incur on or after the 7 date of the statement. 8 "(b) The Commission sMll, as soon as possible after it 9 receives a statement under subsection (a), prel?are and make 10 available for public inspection and copying a summary of the 11 statement, together with any other dat_ or information which 12 it deems advisable. 13 14 15 "I1,EPORTS "SEc. 509. (a) TO COIN-GRESS The Commission shall, as soon as practicable after the close of each calendar year, submit a 16 full report to the Senate and House of Representatives 17 setting forth-18 "(1) the expenditures incurred by each candidate, 19 and hi.s authorized committees,, who received any pay- 20 ment under section 506 in connection with an election; 21 22 23 "(2) the amounts certified by it under section 505 for payment to that candidate; and "(3) the amount of payments, if any, required 24 from that candidate under section 507, and the reasons 25 for each payment required_ 25 24 1 Each report 2 printed'is 3 "(b) submitted pursttant to this section shall be a Senate document. The Commission is authorized to conduct exami- 4 nations and audits (itl addition to the examinations 5 umler sections 505 and 507), 6 to require tile keeping and submission of any books, records, 7 or other information 8 and duties imposed on it by this title. 9 10 :11 to conduct irLvestigations, and necessary "PARTICIPATION and andits to carry BY COMMISSION out the fune:ions IN JUDICIAL PR OCE'EI)INGS "SEc. 510. The Commission may initiate :12 ings in any district courl: of thc United civil proceed- States to seek re- 13 covery of any amounts determined 14 retary of thc Treasury by a candidate under this title. 15 16 "PENALTY FOR to be p_yable to the Sec- VIOLATIO5'S "SEc. 511. Violation of any provisicn of this title is 17 punishable 18 ment for not more than five years, or both. 19 20 by a fine of not more than $50,000, "i_ELATIONSHIP "S_c. TO OTHER FEDERAL or imprison- EbECTION LAWS 512. The Comlnission shall corsult from time 1Lo 21 time with the Secretary of the Senate, the Clerk of the ti[ouse 22 of Representatives, 23 sion, and with other Federal officers charged 24 ministration to Federal 25 to develop as much consistency 26 the Federal of laws relating Communications Commis- with thc ad-. elections, in order and coordination with the 25 I administration of those other laws as the provisions of this 2 title permit. The Commission shall use the same or compara- 3 ble data. as that used in the administration of such other 4 election laws whenever possible.".. 5 TITLE II--CHANGES IN CAMPAIGN COMMUNICA- 6 TIONS LAW AND IN REPORTING AND DIS- 7 CLOSUI_E PROVISIONS 8 TION CAMPAIGN ACT 0F 1971 9 10 OF FEDEIIAL ELEC- CA_PA_G_rCO_:MU_mATTO_S Snc. 201. (a) Section 315 (ia) of the Communications 11 Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 315 ('t)) is amended by inserting 12 after "public office" in the first sentence thereof the follow-.13 lng: ", other than Federal elective office (including the 14 office of Vice President)" 15 (b) Section 315(b) of such Act (47 U'.S.C. 315(b) ) 16 is amended by striking out "by any person" and insertinL, 17 "by or on behalf of any person". 18 19 (c) (1) Section 315(c) of such Act ('.47 U.S.C. 315 (c)) is amended to read as follows: 20 "(c) No station licensee may make any charge for the 21 use of any such station by or on behalf of any legally quail.- 22 ;fled candidate for nomination fo,r election, or for election, 23 to Federal elective office unless such candidate (or a person 24 specifically authorized by such candidate in writing to do 25 so) certifies to such licensee in wr i'tmg that the payment of. S.3044. 4 27 26 I such. charge will not exceed the limit on expenditures 2 applicable to that candidate under section 504 of the ]l?ed- 3 era][ Election Campaign Act of 1971, or under section 614 4 5 of title 18, United States Code.". (2) Section 315 (d) of such AcL (47 IT.S.C. 315 (el)) 6 is amended to read as follows: 7 "(d) If a State by law imposes a limitation upon the 8 amount which a legally qualified candidate for nomina9 tion for election, or for election, to public oftice (other l:han 10 Federal elective off%e) within that State may spend in 11 connection with his campaign :for such nomination or his 12 campaign for election, then no station licensee may make 13 any charge for the use of such station by or on behalf of 14 such candidate unless such candidate 15 (or a person spe- cifically authorized in writing by him to do so) certifies to 16 such licensee in writing that the payment of such charge 17 will not violate that limita'tion.". ]_8 (d) Section 317 of such Act (47 U.S.C. 317), is 19 amended by20 (1) striking out in paragraph 21 (a) 22 thereof the following: "person. If st_ch matter is a 23 political advertisemen't soliciting funds for a candidate 24 or a political committee, there shall be announced al; 25 the time of such broadcast a statement; that a copy' 28 "person: (:'_) of subsection Provided, T'hat" and inserting in lieu 27 i of reports filed by that person wi'th the l?ederal Election 2 Commission is available from the ]_ederal Election C_)rn- 3 mission, Wash,ington, D.C., 4 no,t make any charge for any part of the costs of mak- 5 ing the announcement. The term"; and 6 (2) and the licensee shall by redesignatingsubsection (e) as (f), 7 and by inserting after subsection (d) the following 8 new subsection: 9 "(e) Each station licensee shall maintain a record of 10 any political advertisement broadcast, together with the 11 identification of the person who caused it to be broadcasl'J, 12 for a period of two years. The record shall be available for 13 public inspection at reasonable hours.". 14 The Campaign Communications Reform Act is (e) 15 repealed. 16 CHA_GF.SI_ DEFI_I_rlO_Sro_ lmPOI_TDZG ANDDlSCLOSUR:¢ 17 SEC. 202. (a) Section 301 of the Federal Election 18 Campaign Act of 1971 (relating to definitions) is amended 19 by20 (1) striking out ", and (5) the election of dele- 21 gates to a con.stitutional convention for proposing amend- 22 ments to the Constitution of tlhe United States" in para- 23 graph 24 such paragraph, (a), and by inserting "and" before "(4)" in 29 28 1 2 3 (2) striking out paragraph (d) _md inserting in lieu thereof the following: "(d) 4 'political committee' means-"(1) any committee, club, association, or other 5 group 6 makes expendilures dm'lng a caler dar year in an 7 aggregate amount exceedhtg $1,000; 8 9 of persons' which receives "(2) organization contributions ally nation'd committee, association, or of a political party, any State ami[ate 10 or subsidiary of a national political party, 11 any State central 12 and 13 "(3) or committee any committee, of a political association, md party; or organiza-. 14 tion engaged in the administration of a sepa?ate 15 segregated fund described in section 610 of title 18, 16 United States Code;"; 17 (3) inserting in paragraph 18 tion" the following: 19 or membership dues) "; 20 (4) (e) (1) after "snbscrip- "(including striking out in paragraph (e) (1) fee,, "or for the 21 purpose 22 constitutional 23 to the Constitution of the United States" 24 ing irt lieu thereof the fo][lowini_: "or for the purpose 25 of financing any operations 30 of influencing any assessment, the elec,tion of delegates convention for proposiag to t;L amendments and insert.- of a po]itlcal comm!ittee 29 i (other than a payment made or an obligation incurred 2 by a corporation ,or labor organization which, under the 3 provisions of the last paragraph of section 610 of title 4 18, United States Code, does not constitute ,a contribu- 5 tion by that corporati,on or labor organization), or for (i the purpose of paying, at any time, any debt or obliga- 7 tion incurred by a candidate or a political committee in, 8 connection with any campaign for nomination for elec- 9 tion, or for election, to Federal office"; 10 (5) striking out subparagraph (2) of paragraph 11 (e), and amending subparagraph 12 graph to read as foll,ows: 13 (3) of such para-. funds received by'a political committee which "(3) 14 are transferred to that cmnmittee front another political 15 committee;"; 16 (6) redesignatingsubparagraphs (4) and (5) of 17 paragraph 18 tively; 19 20 21 22 (e)as paragraphs (3) and (4), respec- (7) striking out paragraph (f) and inserting in lieu thereof the following: "(f) 'expenditure'-"(1) means a purchase, payment, distribution, 23 loan, advance, deposit, or gift of money or anything 24: of value, made for the purpose of-- 25 "(A) influencingthe nominationfor elec- 31 30 1 tion, or the election, of any ?rson to Federal 2 office, or to the office of presidential and vice- 3 presidentialelector; 4 "(B) influencingthe re:mitof a ptimary 5 election held for the selection of delegates to a 6 national nominating convention of a political 7 party or for the expression of a preference for 8 tile nominationof persons for election tc, ttte 9 omceof President; 10 11 "(C) financing any operations of a political committee;or 12 "(D) paying, at any time, any debt or 13 obligation incurred by a candiJate or a political :14 committee in connection with any campaign for ]5 nomination for election, or for election, to Fed- :!6 eral office; and 17 "(2) 18 committee to another political committee; but 19 20 means the transfer of funds by a poltic_d "(3) docsnotinclude-"(A) the value of services rendered by'individuals 21 who volunteer to work without compensation on behalf 22 of a candidate; or 23 "(B) any payment made c,r oblig;_tionincurred by 24 a corporation or a labor organization which, under the 25 provisions_of,the l_st paragraph of section 610 of title 18'. 32 31 I United States Code, would not constitute art expenditure 2 by that corporation or labor organization ;"; 3 (7) striking "and" at the end of paragraph (h); 4 (8) striking the period at the end of paragraph 5 6 (i) and inserting in lieu thereof a semicolon; and (9) adding at the end[thereof the following new 7 paragraphs' 8 "(j) 9 'identification' means,-"(1) in thc case ,ofan individual., his full name 10 and the full address of his principal place of 11 residence; and 12 "(2) in the case of any other person, the full 13 name and address of that person; 14 "(k) 'national committee' means tlle organization 15 which, by virtue of the bylaws of a political party, ia; 16 responsible for the day-to-day operation of that political 17 party at the national level, as'.determined by the Com-- 18 mission; and 19 "(1) 'political party' means an association, commit- 20 tee, or organization which nominates a candidate for 21 election to any Federal office..,whose name appears on 22 the election ballot as the candidate of that association, 23 committee, or organization..". 24 25 (b) (1) Section 302 (b) ofsuchAct (relating to reports of contributions in excess of $10) is amended by ._triklng ", 33 1 the name and address 2 business, if ally)' {occupation and principal pla,::e vf and inserting "of the contribution m:Ld o" the identification" 4 (2) Section 302 (c) of such Act (relating to detailed 5 accounts) is amended by striking "full name and retailing (; address (occupation andLthe princ,ipal place of business, 7 if any)"' in paragraphs (2) and (4) and inserting in each 8 9 such paragraph'"' (3) lOelltlllCatlOl_ -'_ ' ' ". Section 302 (c) of such Act is further amended by 10 striking tho semicolon at the end of paragraph (2) an,t in- 11 serting '"ana,' if apc.· rson ' s contributions aggregate more than 12 $100, the account shall includ,_occupation, and the principal 13 place of business (if any) ;" :14 :16 IIEGISTliATION OF CA: I_IDAiLS AND POLITICAl. SEc. 203. (a) Section 303 of thc Federal Election (Jan:L- 117 paign Act of 1971 (relating to regi:stration of political _:.}onqt:18 mittecs; statements) is amc_qtdcdby redesignating subsec- 19 tions (a) through (d)as 20 and by inserting after (b) through {e), respectively, _Jnc. o,_o. thc following new sulJ,- 21 section (a)' 22 23 "(a) Each candidate shall, within ten days after the date on which he has qualified under State_ law as a cf.ndi- 24 date, or on which he, or any person authorized by him 25 to do so, has received t[ contribution or made an expendi'.- 34 33 I ture in connection with his campaign 2 of preparing 3 Commission 4 thc Commission may prescribe. The statement 5 to undertake a registration "(1) or for the purpose his campaign, statement the identification in :file with such form and any 6 individual, 7 authorized to receive contributions 8 on his behalf in connection with his campaig'n; 9 "(2) as shall include of the candidate, political committee, the or other person he has or make expenditures the identification of Zhiscampaign depositories, 10 together with the title and number of each account at 11 each such depository 12 with his campaign, 13 in connection which is to ,be used in connection any safety deposit box to be used therewith, and the identification of reach t 14 individual authorized by him to make any expenditure or 15 withdrawal 16 17 18 19 "(3) from such account or box; and such additional relevant information as the Commission may require.". (b) The first sentence of subsection (as redesigrmted by subsection 20 _amended to read as follows: 21 cal committee 22 cf organization 23 the committee is organized.". 24 (c) of this section) "The treasurer within is of each polifi- shall file with the Commission ten days after the date The second sentence S. 3044 (a) (b) of such section a statement on which of such subsection (b) is 5 35 $4 1 amended by striking out "this Act" and inserting in lieu 2 thereof the following: "the Federal Electio:a Campaign Act 3 Amendments of 1974". 4 (d) Subsection (c) of such section (as redesign:tted 5 by subsection (,_) of this section) is amended by6 (1) inserting "be in such form as tlle Commission 7 shall prescribe, and shall" after "The statement of 8 organization shall"; 9 10 11 (2) striking out paragraph (3) and inserting irt lieu thereof the following: "(3) the geographic area or political jurisdiction 12 within which the committee will operate, and a general[ 1.3 description of the committee's autho:qty and ac;!ivi-- 14 ties;"; and 15 16 17 (3) striking out paragraph (9) and inserting: inL lieu thereof the following: "(9) the name and address of the campaign de_osl-. 18 ,toiles used by that committee, together with the :itl.e 19 and number of each account and safety deposit box: 20 used by that committee at each depository, and the 21 identification of each individual authorized to make, 22 withdrawals or payments out of such account or box;", 23 36 (e) The caption of such section 303 is amended by 35 1 inserting 2 3 "CANDIDATES ,CHANGES IN AND" after REPORTING "REGISTI_ATION OF"'. REQUIREMENTS Sr,:c.204. (a) Section 304 of tile Federal Election Cam-. 4 paign Act of 1971 (relating to reports by political com.. 5 mittees and candidates) is amended by6 (1) inserting"(1)" after"(a)" in subsection(a); 7 (2) striking out "for election" each place it ap-- 8 pears in the first sentence of subsection (a) and in-- 9 serting in lieu thereof in each such place "for nomina- l0 tion for election, or for election,"; 11 (3) striklng .out 4he second sentence of subsection 12 (a) and inserting in lieu thereof :the foIlowing' "Such 13 reports shall be filed on tl:te tenth day of April, July, 14_ and October of each year, on tile tenth day preceding 15 an election, and on the last day of January of each year. 16 Notwithstanding 17 required, by that sentence to be filed during April, July, 18 and October by or relating to a candidate during a year 19 in which no Federal election is held in which he is a 20 candidate, may be filed on thc twentieth day of each 21 month."; the preceding sentence,, the reports 22 (4) striking out everyt]hing after "filing" in the 23 third sentence of subsectio n (a) and inserting in lieu 24 thereof a period and the following' "If the person mak.- 25 lng any anonymous contribution is subsequently identi- 3'7 86 1 fled, the identification 2 ported to the Commission wit_Lin the reporting 3 within which he is identified."; 4 of the contributor shall b(. rep,_riod and (5) adding at the end of subsectio:a (a) the follow- 5 lng new paragraph: 6 "(2) Upon a request made by a Pres':dential cand:date 7 or a political committee which operates ill more than one 8 State, or upon its own motion, the Commission may waive 9 the reporting dates (other than January 31) set forth in 10 paragraph (1), and require instead that such candidat(_s or 11 political committees 12 monthly. The Commi.ssion may not requL, e a Presidential 13 candidate or a political coInmittee 14 one State to file more than eleven reports 15 report to be filed on January file reports not less frequently than operati::_g in more :Lha:n (not counting any 31 ) during ally calendar year. 16 If the Commission acts on its own motion under this t,ara17 graph with respect to a candidate c,r a political commktee, 18 that candidate 19 accordance with the provisions of chapter 7 of title 5, UILite,] 20 States Code.". 21 or committee may obtain j_ldicial review in (b) (1) Section 304 (b) of such Act (_elating to rei_orts 22 by political 23 striking 24 the principal place of business, if any)" 25 and (10) and inserting in lieu thereof in each such tara- 26 graph "identification". 38 committees and candidates) "full name and mailing is amended by (occupation and in paragraphs (91t address 87 I (2) Subsection (b) (5) of such section 304 is amended 2 by striking out "lender and endorsers" 3 thereof "lender, endorsers, and guarantors". 4 and inserting in lieu (c) Subsection (b) (12) of such section is amended by 5 inserting 6 with a statement 7 under which any such debt or Obligation is extinguished 8 and the consideration 9 the semicolon the following: as to the circumstances ", together and conditions therefor". (d) Subsection (b) of such section is amended by- 10 11 before (1) striking the "and" at the end of paragraph (12); and 12 (2) redesignating paragraph (13) as (14), and 13 by inserting 14 paragraph: 15 "(13) after paragraph (12) the following new such information as tile Commission may re- 16 quire for the disclosure of the nature, 17 and 18 bered, or restricted 19 and". 20 (e) The first sentence of subsection (c) of such section 21 is amended to read as follows: "The reports required to be 22 filed by subsection (a) shall be cumulative during the c_ien- 23 dar year to which they relate, 24 periods of time as the Commission may require.". designated recipient of any contribution amount, earmarked, source, encum- or other special fund; and during such additional 39 38 1 2 3 (f) Such section 304 is amended by adding at thc end thereof the following new su]_sec,tion_: "(d) This section docs not require a Member of Con- 4 gress to report, as contributions reccive(!Lor as expmdi5 tures made, the value of photographic, matting, or record6 lng services furnished to him ]beforethe first day of Jaruary 7 of the year preceding the year in 'which ]tis term of office 8 expires if those services were furnished to him by the 9 Senate Recording Studio, the House t_ecordlng St ldio, 10 or by any individual whose pay is disbursed by the S,_cre1.1 tary of the Senate or the Clerk of the I-Iouse of I_,_pre12 sentatives and who furnishes such services as his priJnary 13 duty as an employee of thc Senate or House of I_,_pre14 sentatives, or if such services were paid for by the Retubli- 15 can or Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, th.e 16 Democratic _ational Congressional Committee, or the 17 National Republican Congressional Committee. 18 "(e) Every person (other than a political committ,:_eor 19 candidate) who makes contributions or expenditures, ,,ther 20 than by contribution to a political commiltee or candi_iate, 21 in an aggregate amount in excess of $100 within a ca.Ich22 dar year shall file with the Commission a statement con- 23 taining the information req_fired by this section. State24 merits required by this subsection shall be filed on the 40 39 I da.tes on which reports by political commktces are filed but 2 need not bc cumulative.". 3 (g) Tile caption of such section 304 is amended to read 4 as follows' 5 "I_EPOI{TS"., 6 7 c_ _ '_r_ AT_ N ADX EL,[_,_I_IE_,TS SEc. 205. Section 305 of the Federal Election Cam- 8 paign Act of 1971 (relating to reports _by others than po9 litical committees) is amended to read as follows: 10 "REQUIREMENTS 11 12 I?ELATINC TO CA3[PAIGN ADVEI_TISING "SEC. 305. (a) No person shall cause any political ad- 13 vertisement to be published unless he furnishes to the ' _ ' 'g I _IIt his idemification in writing, 14 publisher of the 'ad_eitLeIl(_ 15 together wkh the identification of ,any person authorizing 16 him to cause such publication. 17 "(b) Any published political advertisement shall con- 18 taln a statement, in such form as the Commission may 19 prescribe, 20 the publication of that advertisement. 21 of the identification 'of the person authorizing "(c) Any publisher who publishes any political adver- 22 tisement shall maintain such records as the Commission 23 may prescribe for a period of two years after the date of 24: publication 25 material se_tlng forth relating such advertlsemen_ and any to identification furnished to him in 41 40 I connection therewith, and shah permit the public to inspect 2 and copy those records at reasonable hours. 3 "(d) To the extent that any person sells space in any 4 newspaper or magazine to _; candidate or his agent for 5 Federal office, or nomination thereto, in connection wit]h 6 such candidate's campaign for nominati(m for, or ,:_lec- 7 tion to, such office, the charges made for the uss of _suc]h 8 space in connection with his campaign shall not exceed the 9 charges made for comparable use of such space for (ther 10 purposes. 11 12 "(e) Any political committee shall include on the face or front page of all literature and advertisements solicting' 13 contributions the following notice: 14 "'A copy of our report filed with the Federal t]1ec- 15 tion Commission is available for purchase from the 16 Federal Election Co,nmission, Washington, D.C.' 17 "(f) 18 As used h:lthis section, the term-"(1) 'political advertisement' means any m_Ltter 19 advocating the election or defeat of any candidate but 20 does not include any bona fide news story (inclu,ling 21 interviews, commentaries, or other works prepared for 22 and published by any newspaper, magazine, or other 23 periodical publication the publication of which work is 24 not paid for by any candidate, political committee, or 25 agent thereof); and 42 41 1 "(2) 'published' means pablication in a newspaper, 2 magazine, or other 3 of printed leaflets, pamphlets, 4 display through the use of any outdoor advertising facil- 5 ity, and such other use of printed media as the Commis- 6 sion shall prescribe.". 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 periodical[ publication:, distribution or other documents, or WAIVER OF R,EPORTING REQUIREME;-_TS SEc. 206. Section 306 (c) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (relating to formal requirements lng reports and statements) "(c) respect-. is amended to read as follows: The Commission may, by published regulation general applicability, "(1) of relieve-- any category of candidates of the obligation 14 to comply personally with the requirements 15 tions (a) through 16 that such action will not have any adverse effect on the 17 purposes of this title, and 18 "(2) of subsec.- (e) of section 304, if it deterlnines any category of political committees of the 19 obligation to comply with such section if such com- 20 mittees-- 21 22 "(A) or local office, and 23 24 primarily support persons seeking Statc "(B) do not operate in more than one State or do not operate on a statewide basis..". S. 3044. 6 43 42 1 ESTABLISHMENT OF FEDERAL ELF_CTION COMMISSION; 2 CENTRAL 3 POSITORIES 4 SEc. 207. (a) Title III of the Federal Election Cam- CAMPAIGN COMMITTEES; CAMPAIGN DE-- 5 paign Act of 1971 (relating to disclosure _f Federal elna-. 6 paign funds) is amended by rcdesignating section 30_ as 7 section 312, and by inserting after section 307 the foll:)w8 ingnew sections: 9 10 '¢FEDElgAL ELECTION COMMISSION "SEc. 308. (a) (1) There is e_tablished, as an inde- 11 pendent establishment of the executive branch of the Gov12 ernment of the United States, a, commissioa to be known 13 14 as the Federal Election Commission. "(2) The Commission shall be composed of the Comp- 15 troller General, who shall serve without th,_ right to vote, 16 and seven members who shall be appointed by the Pr,;si17 dent by and with the advice and consent of the ,Senate_ Of 18 the seven members-19 "(A) two shall be chosen from an_ong individu als 20 recommended by the President pro tempore of ':,he 21 Senate, upon the recomme:adations of the :majority 22 leader of the Senate and the minority leader of _:he 23 Senate; and 24 "(B) 25 44 two shall be chosen from among individuals :recommended by the Speaker of the House of Rcp:,:e- 43 I sentatives, upon the recommendations of the majority 2 leader of the House and the minority leader of the 3 House. 4 The two members appointed under subparagraph 5 not be affiliated with the same political party; 6 two members ap,pointed under subparagraph shall nor shall the (B). members 8 than two shall be affiliated with the same political party. "(3) under such st_bparagra?hs, Of the 7 9 n_ot appointed (A) not more Members of the Coatmission, other than the 10 Comptroller General, shall serve for terms of seven years, 11 except that, of the members first appointed-- 12 "(A) 13 paragraph 14 appointed for a term ending ,0n the April thirtieth first 15 occurring more 16 which he is appointed; 17 one of the members not appointed under sub-. (A) "(B) or (B),of than paragraph six months one of the members after appointed (2) the shall be date on under para- 18 graph 19 year after the April thirtieth on which the term of the 20 member referred 21 graph ends; 22 (2) (A) shall be appointed for a term ending one "(C) to in subparagraph graph (2) (B) 24 two years _herea_ter; "(D) of this para- one of the members appointed under para- 23 25 (A) shall be appointed for a term ending one of the members not appointed under 45 44 1 subpa,ragraph (A)or 2 appointed for a term ending three years thereafter; 3 "(E) (B) of paragraph (2) shal! be one of tile members appoirted under ptra-- 4 graph (2) (A) shall be appointed fora term ending 5 four years thereafter; 6 "(F) one of the members appoi_ted under p._ra-. 7 graph 8 five years thereafter; and 9 (2)(B) "(G) shall be appoin'ted fora 'tem_ enUng one of the Inembers not appointed under _ub- 10 paragraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (2) shall be 111 appointed for a term ending six years thereafter. 12 "(4) Members shall be chosen on the basis of tJ_eir 13 maturity, experience, integrity', impartiality, and good judg14 merit. A member may be reappoin;:ed to ;he Commis_,ion 15 16 only once. "(5) An individual appointed to fill a vacancy occur- 17 ting other than by t_heexpiration o:[ a term of office s]mll 18 be appoi_ted .only for the unexpired term of the member he 19 succeeds. Any vacancy occurring in the o/lice of member 20 of the Commission shall be filled in the manner in wl_ieh 21 22 23 tha;t office was .originally filled. "(6) The Commission shall elect a Chairman am[ a Vice Chairman from among it,; :members for a term of two 24 years. The Chairman and the Vice Chairman shall not be 25 46 affiliated with the, same political party. The Vice Chairman 45 I shall act as Chairman in the absence or disability of the 2 Chairman, or in the event of a vacancy in that office. 3 "(b) A vacancy in the Commission shall not impair the 4 right of the remaining members to exercise all the powers of 5 the Commission. Four members of the Commission shall 6 constitute a quorum. 7 "(c) Thc Commission shall have all ofIMal seal which 8 shall be judicially noticed. 9 "(d) The Commission shall :at the close of each fiscal 10 year report to the ¢ongTess and to thc President concerning 11 the action it has taken; the names, salaries, and duties of all 12 individuals in its employ and the money it has disbursed; and 13 shall make such further reports on the matters within its 14 jurisdiction and such recommendations 15 16 for further legislation as may appear desirable. "(e) The principal office of the Commission shall be in 17 or near the District of Columbia, but it may meet or exercise 18 any or all its powers in any State. 19 "(f) The Commission shall appoint a General Counsel 20 and an Executive Director to serve at the pleasure of the 21 Commission. The General Cormsel shall be the chief legal 22 officer of the Commission. The Executive Director shall be 23 responsible for the administrative operations of the Commis- 24 sion and shall perform such other duties as may be delegated 25 or assig;!ed to him from time to time by regulations or orders 47 46 1 of the Commission. However, ;he Commissicn shall not d_le- 2 gate the making of regulations regarding elections to the 3 Executive Director. 4 "(g) .The Chairman of tile Commisskn shall app(,int 5 and fix the compensation of such personnel as are Decess:u'y 6 to fulfill the duties of the .ComnJissionin accordance with :he 7 provisions of title 5, United Sta_es Code. 8 "(h) The Commission may obtain the services of ,_x- 9 perts and consultants in accordance with section 3109 of title 10 5, United States Code. ll "(i) In carrying out its responsibilities under this tille, 12 the Commission shall, to the fullest extent p::acticable, a'vail 13 itself of the assistance, including persom_el and faciliti:_s, 14 of the General Accounting Office a_:_dthe Department of 15 Justice. The Comptroller General and the Attorney G{n16 eral may mak.e available to the Commission :tach personnz_l, 17 facilities, and other assistance, with or without reimbur:e18 ment, as the Commission may request. 19 "(j) Thc provisions of sec;ion 7324 of title 5, United 20 States Code, shall ai)ply to members of the Commissi,,n 21 notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (d)(3) of 22 such section. 23 "'(k) (1) Whenever ,the Commission su'b_qfits any budg et 24 estimate or request to the President or the Office of Ma::_25 agement and Budget, it :shall concurrently t_'ansmit a coty 26 of that estimate or reqttest .tothe Congress. 48 47 I "(2) Whenever the Commission submits any legislative 2 recommendations, 3 tion 4 Congress to .the President or ,the Office of Management 5 Bttdget, 6 the Congress or ,to the Member requesting thc same. No requested or .testimony, or comments bY the Congress it shall concurrently or by any Member transmit 7 officer or agency .of the United 8 authority 9 tire recommendations, la.tion, to any 11 approval, 12 such 13 Congress. States and to shall have any or testimony, "POWERS "(1) States for or review, prior to the submission of recommenda_dons, "Swc. 309. or comments on legis- office .or ,agency of the United comments, 14 16 a copy thereof .of to require the Commission to submit its legisla- 10 15 on leglsla- testimony, OF or commcnt.s to the COMMISSION (a) The Commission has the power-to require, by special .or general orders, any 17 person to submit in writing such reports and answers to 18 questions as ¢he Commission may prescribe; 19 submission shall be made within such reasonable period 20 and under oath or otherwise as the Commission may 21 determine; and .such 22 "(2) to administer oaths; 23 "(3) to require by su!bpena, signed by the Chair-. 24: man or the Vice Chairman, the _attendance and testi-. 49 48 1 ,mony of witnesses and the production of all documen' ary 2 evidence relating to the execution of its cUties; 3 "(4) in a,ny proceeding or invesligation 4 testimony 5 ';';,ho is designated by tile Commission and has the po ;_;er 6 to administer 7 testimony 8 manner as authorized under parqgraph 9 section; 10 "(5) to be taken by deposition before any peison oaths ,and, in such instances, and the production (3) of this sub- to pay witnesses tine same fees and mile Nge as are paid in like circmnstances 12 United States; "(6) to con]?el of evidence in the s_me 11 13 to o:_der to initiate in the courts of :lhe (through civil proceedings for in- 14 junctive relief and through 15 grand juries), 16 criminal action in the name of the Concmission for he 17 purpose of enforcing the provisions of this Act and of 18 sections 602, 608. 610, 611, 612, 613, 614, 615, (;16, 19 and 617 of title 18, United 20 General C.onnsel; 21 "{7) presenta,ticins to ]?ed_ral prosecute, defend, or appeal any civil or St_.LtesCo:le, through its to delegate any of its functions or powers, 22 other than the power to issue subpenas under p_ragraph 23 (3), to any ofiqcer or employee of the Commission; and 24 25 50 "(8) ,to make, amend, and repeal such rules, pitt- suant to the provisions of ,chapter 5 of title 5, Unit,_d 49 I States Code, as are necessary to carry out; the provisions 2 of this Act. 3 "(b) Any United States district court within the juris-- 4 diction of which any inquiry is carried on, may, upon petition 5 by the Commission, in case of refusal to obey a subpena or 6 order of the Commission issued under subsection (a) of this 7 section, therewith. 8 Any failure to obey the order of the court may be punished. 9 by the court as a contempt 10 "(c) issue an order requiring compliance thereof. No person shall be subject to civil liability to any 11 person 12 for disclosing information at the request of the Commission. 13 "(d) (other than the Commission or the United Notwithstanding States) any other provision of law, the 14 Commission shall be the primary civil and criminal enforce- 15 ment agency for violations of the ]provisions of this Act, and 16 of sections 602, 608, 610, 611, ¢12, 613, 614, 615, 616, 17 and 617 of title 18, United States Code. Any violation of any 18 such provision shall be prosecuted by the Attorney 19 or Department 20 with, and with the consent of, the Commission. 21 "(e) (1) of Justice personnel only after consultation Any person who violates any provision of this 22 Act or of section 602, 608, 610, 611, 612, 613, 23 616, or 617 of rifle 18, United 24 sessed a civil penalty 25 (2) General 614, 615, States Code, may be as- by the Coramission under paragraph of this subsection of not m(_re than $10,000 for each 5! 50 1 such violation. Each occurrence of a violation of this Act 2 and each day of noncompliance 3 ment of this title or an order of file Commission is,led 4 under this section shall constitute 5 determining 6 shall consider 7 the appropriateness '8 of the person charged, the gravity of the violation, and the 9 demonstrated 10 11 12 the amount the person's with a disclosure rcq_lh'c-- a separate of the penalty history offense. In the Commiss;ion of prcviou.s violati_ms, of such penalty to the financial resources good failh of thc person charged in attcml,king to achieve rapid compliance after notification of a viol:_ ion. "(2) A civil penalty shall be assessed by file Comnis- sion by order only after the person charged with a violstion 13 has been given an opportunity for a hcarir_g and the ('om14 mission has determlncd, by decision incorporating 15 of fact therein, that a violatim_. {lid occur, and the amora t of 16 the pen'fity. Any hearing under this section ;hall be of re _ord 17 and shall be held in accordance wi;h cha[ter 18 United States Code. 19 "(3) If the person against its findin;;s 5 of titl_ 5, whom a civil i)enalt_ ' is 20 assessed fails to pay 21 file a petition 22 penalty in any appropriate 23 The petition 24 order is sought to be enforced as the respondent. 25 of the petition shall forthwith be sent by registered 52 the penalty, for enforcement the Commission _;hall of its order assessing tho district court of the United St _tes. shall designate the person against whom the A {;opy or eer- 51 I tiffed mail to thc rcspondcut and his attorney of record, and 2 thcrcupon thc Commission shall certify and file in such court 3 tile record upon which such order sought to be enforced was 4 issued. The court shall have jurisdiction to enter a judgment 5 enforcing, modifying, and enforcing as so modified, or set6 ting aside in whole or in part the order and decision of the 7 Commission or it may remand the proceedings to the Corn8 mission for such further action as it may direct. Thc court 9 may determine de novo all issues of law but the Commis10 slon's findings of fact, if supported by substantial evidence, 11 shall be conclusive. 12 "(f) Upon application made by any individual holding 13 Federal office, any candidate, or any political committee, the 14 Commission, through its General Counsel, slmll ]?rovidc with- 15 in a reasonable period of time an advisory (,phfion, with 16 respect to any specific transaction or activity inquired of, 17 as to whether such transachon_'or actMty would constitute 18 a violation of any provision of this Act or of any provision 19 of title 18, United States Code, over which tlte Commissio_ 20 has primary _urisdiction under subsection (d).. 21 22 CEN[I:RAL "S_c. 310. (a) CAMPAIGN COMMITTEES Each candidate shall designate one 23 political committee as his central campaign committee. A 24 candidate for nomination for election, or for election, to 25 the office of President, may also designate one polltical 53 52 I committee in each State in whi& he is a candidate as ]lis 2 State campaign committee for that State. The designati:m 3 shall be made in writing, and a, copy of the designati(n, 4 together with 5 require, shall be furnished 6 designation 7 "(b) such information as the Commission to the Commission m_y upon the of any such committee. No political committee may be designated as the 8 central campaign committee 9 The central campaign committee, and[ each State campaign 10 committee, designated by a candidate nominated by a poll ti- ll cai party for election to the of[ice of Presi&nt 12 central campaign committee of more than one candida Le. shall be lhe and the' State campaign COLn- 13 mittee of thc candidate nominated by that party for el_c14 15 tion to the office of Vice President. "(c) (1) Any political commit,tee at:thorized by a 16 candidate 17 connection 18 or for election, which is not a central campaign 19 or a State campaig_ 20 required of it under section 304 (other tha n reports rcqui:'ed 21 under seoti_)n 311 (b)) 22 corrunittee 23 be required to furnish tMt report to the Commission. g ny 24 report properly 25 under this subsection 54 to accept contributions with his campaign or make expenditures for nominati,)n committee, in for electim, commit:ce shall furn!sh each report t'o tha't candida_te's central campa gn at the time it would, but for this subsectim, furnished _to a centred campaign shall be, for purpos_s commiltee of this ti;lc, 53 1 held and considered 2 mission at the time at which it was furnished to such 3 central campaign 4 "(2) to have been furnished to the Com.-. committee. The Commission may, by regulation, require any' 5 political 6 penditures in a State on beha][f .of a candidate who, under 7 subsection (a), has designated a State campaign committee 8 for that State to furnish its reports to that Slate campaign: 9 committee instead of furnishing such reports to the central 10 11 12 13 committee receiving contributions or making ex-. campaign committee of Shat candidate. "(3) The Commission may require any political com-- mittee to furnish any report directly to tile Commission. "(d) Each political committee which is a central cam-. 14 paign committee 15 ceive all reports filed with or furnished to it by other politi-. 16 cal committees, and consolidate and furnish the reports to the 17 Commission, together with its own reports and statements, 18 in accordance with the provisions of this title and regulations 19 prescribed by the Commission. 20 21 or a State car_paign committee "CAMPAIGN shall re-. DEPOSITORIES "SEc. 311. (a) (1) Each candidate shall designate on_, 22 or more National or State banks as his campaign depositories. 23 The central campaign committee of that candidate, and any 24 other political committee authorized by him to receive con-. 25 tribu,tions or to make expenditures on his behalf, shall main-, $5 54 I taln a checking account at a deposito W so d_signated by t;he 2 candidate 3 that committee into that account. A candidate 4 any payment received by him under section 506 of this Act 5 in the account maintained 6 tee. No expenditure 7 behalf of a candidate 8 check drawn on that account, other than pe:ty cash exp(nd- and shall deposit any contributions received by shall depssit by his central campaign com_ait- may be made by any such comn_itte_ on or to influence his election except by 9 itures as provided in subsection (b). 10 "(2) The treasurer of each political committee committee 11 than a political 12 receive contributions or to make expenditures 13 shall designate one or more 5'_ational or State banks as c;ml- 14= palgm depositories authorized (olher of that committee, by a candidate to on his beh_fif) and shall nmintala a 15 che&ing account for the conmfi'ttee a_t each such deposit,,ry. 16 All contributions l7 posited in such an account. No expenditure 18 that committee except by check drawn on th_;t account, olher received by that comnfitl;ee shah be de- 19 than petty cash expenditures 20 "(b) may be made by as provided in subsection (b). A political committee may maintain a petty (ash 21 fund out of which it may make expenditures not in e×,_ess 22 of 8100 to any person in connection with a single purcl ase 23 or transaction. A record of petty cash disbursements 24 be kept in accordance 25 56 with requirements the, Commission, and such statements established saall by and .reports the:'eof 55 1 2 shall be furnished to the Commission as it may require. "(c) A candidate for nomination for election, or for 3 clcction, to thc office of I'rcsidcnt may establish one suclt 4 depository in each such State, which shqll be considered by 5 his State campaign committee for that State and any other 6 political committee authorized by him to receive contribu.-. 7 tions or to make cxpenditures on his behalf in that State, 8 under regulations 9 single campaign prescribed depository. by the Commission, The campaign as his depository of 10 the candidate of a political party for election to the office 11 of Vice President 12 nated by the candidate 13 office of President.". 14 (b) (1) shall be the campaign of that party depository desig- for election to the Section 5314 of title 5, United States Code, is 15 amended by adding at the end thereof the following new 16 paragraph: 17 18 19 20 21 22 "(60) eral), Federal Election Commission (7)." (2) Section 53_5 of such title is amended by adding at the end thereof thc following new paragraphs: "(98) General Counsel, Federal Election Com- mission. 23 "(99) 24 mission." 25 3Iembers (other than the Comptroller Gen- Executive Director, Federal Election Com- (c) Until the appointment and qualification of all the 56 1 members of the Federal 2 eral Counsel and until the transfer provided for in this sub- 3 section, 4 Senate, and the Clerk of the House of Representatives 5 corttinue to carry out their responsibilities 6 title III 7 such titles existed on the day before the date of enactment 8 this Act. Upon the appointnlen; 9 Commission and its General C!ounse], the Comptroller the Election Commission and its den- Comptroller General, of the Federal Election the Secretary of the shall under title ][ md Campaign Act of 197] as of of all the members oi the (;eh- 10 eral, the Secretary of the Senate, and the Clerk of the House 11 of Representatives 12 range for the transfer, within thirty days alter the dat_! on 13 which all such members 14 pointed, of all records, documents, memorandums, 15 papers 16 under title I and title Ill associated shall meet with the Commission and ax-. with and the General carrying Counsel arc: ap-- out their .and o;her responsitfilifie_ of the Federal Election Camp;fign 17 Act of 1971. 18 (d) Title III of the Federal Election Campaign A('t of 19 19,71 is amended by-- 20 (1) amending section 301 (g) 21 tions) to read as follows: 22 "(g) 23 24 25 58 (relating to &fini- 'Commission' means the Federal iElection C(>rrlrnis- sion;"; (2) striking out "sup.erv![sory offi_r" 302 (d) and inserting "Commission"; in sect!ion 57 1 2 3 4 5 (3) striking out seclion 3(t2(f) {relating to organization of polilical committees); (4) amending section 303 (relating to registration of political committees; stal_ements) by(A) striking out "supervisory officer" each (; time it appears therein and inserting "Comnfis- 7 sion";and 8 (B) striking out "he" in thc secondsentence 9 of subsection (b) of such section (as redesig.- 10 nated by section °03 (t;_)of this Act) and inserting 11 "it"; 12 (5) amending section 304 (relal,ing to reports by 13 political conmdttees and candidates) by- 1,4 (A) striking out "appropriate supervisory ofli-. 15 cer" and "him" in the first sentence thereof and in-. 16 serting "Commission" and "it", respectively; and 17 (B) striking out ":supervisory officer" where it 18 appears in the third sentence of subsection (a) and 1.9 in paragraphs 20 by section 204(d)(2) 21 (b), and inserting "Commission"; 22 (6) striking ,out "supervisory officer" each place it 23 appears in section 306 (relating to formal requirements 24 respecting reports and statements) and inserting "Com- 25 mission"; (12) and (14) (as redesignated of this Act) of subsec,tion 59 ¸ 58 I (7) striking out "Comptroller Generel of the United 2 States" 'and "he" in section 307 (relating' to reports on 3 convention financing) and inserting "Federal Electi[on 4 Commission" and "k", respectively; 5 (8) striking out "smm:t_visoa¥ O_'F_CEn"in Ge 6 ,caption of section 312 (as redesignated by subsection 7 (a) of this section) (relating to du.ties of,_hesuperviso:y 8 officer) and inserting "co_:_t:[ssIc,_"; 9 (9) striking out "su?ervisory offi(,er" in secLi,m 10 312 (a) (as redesignated ,by su_bsectio:a (a) of t;his 11 section) the first time it appears and inserting "Com-- 12 mission"; 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 (10) amending section 312 (a) (as ::edesignated 5y subsection (a) of this section) by-(A) striking out "him" in paragraph (1) and inserting"it"; (B) striking out "him" in paragraph (4) and inserting"it,"; and (C) striking out "he" each place it appears in paragraphs (7) and (9) and inserting "it"; (11) striking out "supervisory offeer" irt section 22 312 (b) (as redesignated by subsection (a) of this s'_b- 23 section) and inserting "(Jommisskm"; 24 25 60 (12) amending subsection (c) of section 312 (as redesignated by subsection (a) of this section) by-- 59 I (A) striking out "Comptroller General" eaclh 2 place it appears therein and inserting "Commis-. 3 sion", and striking out; "his" in the second sentence 4 of such subsection and[ inserting "its'"; and 5 (B) striking out the last sentence thereof; and 6 (13) amending subsection (d) (1) of section 312 7 (as redesignated by subsection (a) of this section) by.... 8 (A) 9 striking out "supervisory officer" each. place it appears therein and inserting "Commis- 10 sion"; 11 (B) striking out "he" the first place it appears 12 in the second sentence, of such section and inserting' 13 "it"; and 14 (C) striking out "the Attorney General on 15 behalf of the United States" and inserting "the 16 Commission". 17 INDEXING 18 AND PUBLICATION SEc. 208. Section 312 (a) (6) 19 Act) 20 lating to duties of the supervisory 21 read as follows: 22 O17 REPORTS (as redesignated by this of the Federal Election C_mpaign Act of 1971 (re- "(6) officer) is amended to to compile and maintain a cumulative index 23 listing all statements and reports filed with the Corn- 24 mission during each calendar year by political conql-. 25 mittees and candidates, which the Commission shall 61 60 1 cause to be published in the Federal 2 frequently 3 and quarterly 4 be in such form and shall include such information as 5 may be prescribed 6 identification 7 commktee 8 of the statements and reports, and the number of pal:,_es 9 in each, than monthly ttegister no l_ss during even-numbered in odd-numbered yen's years _nd which sl:,a]l by the Commission of each statement, report, to permit e',sy candidate, _md listed, at least as to t.heir names, the da_es and the Commission shall naake copies of 10 statements and reports listed in the index available for 11 stile, direct or by mail, at a pr!ice determined 12 Commission to be reasonable to the purchaser;". 13 14 1)y !:;he JUDICIAL REVIEW SEc. 209. Title III of the ]Federal Elect on Calnpa gn 15 Act of 1971 is amended by inserting after section 3_[2 i[as 16 redesignated by this Act) 17 the following new section' "JUDICIAL _E[,. o_o. REVI:EW (a) Any agency action by ihe Commission 19 made under the provisions of this Act shall be subject to 20 review 21 District by' the United States of Columbi_ Circuit Court of Appeals upon petition for ;:he filed in snch 22 23 court by any interested person...Any 24 agency action by the Commission for which review is sought. 25 62 petition filed pursu.mt to this section shall be filed within thirty "(b) days after !;he The Commission, the national committee of _Lny 61 I political party, and individuals eligible to vote in an election 2 for Federal 3 including 4 relief, as may be appropriate 5 this Act,. 6 7 "(c) office, are authorized actions for declaratory to institute such actions, judgment or injunctive to implement any provision of Tile provisions of chapter 7 of tide 5.. l_nited Stales Code, apply to judicial review oti any agency action, as de-- 8 filled in section 551 of title 5,. United States Code, by the 9 Commission. 10 ¥I_XTXNCIXL aSS_STA:_C_ TO STAT:ES 11 12 TO PROMOTE S_c. 210. _Section 309 of thc Federal 13 paign Act of 1971 14 officers) 15 amended by- 16 striking 17 section (a) 18 mission"; (2) Election as seclSon '114 of such Act a,nd ,oat "a supervisory officcr" in sub.- and inse.rt,ing in lieu thereof made by him or on his behalf" 21 and inserting 22 he is a candida',te ,or in whikch substantial 23 are made by him or on his beMlf"; and 25 "the Com- striking out "in which an expenditure is 20 24 Cam- (relating to sta,tements filed with State is redesignated (1) 19 COMPLIANCE in subsection in lieu ,thereof the following: (a) (1) "in which expenditures (3) adding the following new subsccti,on: "(c) There is authorized to be appropriated to the 63 62 1 Commission 2 be raade available in such amoun_ts as the Commission deems 3 appropriate 4 in complying with their duties :_s set forth itt this sec_5on,'. 5 in each fiscal year the sum of $500,000, to to the States for the purpose of assisting th_,m CONTRIBUTIO_XS IN TIlE NAME OF ANOT[IER PER,_ON 6 SEc. 211. Section 310 of the Federal Election Campaig'n 7 Act of 1971 (relating to prohibition of contributions in name 8 of another) 9 amended by inserting after "another is rcdeslgnat.ed as section 315 oi such Act aad ][)crson", the firsi; time 10 it appears, the following: "or knowingly permit his name to 11 be used to effect such a eontril:ution". 12 ROLE OF POLITICAL PAtZTY 13 TIAL CAMPAIGNS; USE OF EXCESS 14 AUTIIORIZATIOX OF APPR,OPi_[ATIONS; 15 SEc. 212. Title III ORGANIZATION IN PRESII],EN- CAM:PAIGN .of ,the Federal FUN/iS; PENAL']?IES Election Campai:i}-n 16 Act of 1971 is amended by striking out section 311 and. !_y 17 adding at the end of such title fi:m fcllowino new sections: 18 "APPI_OVAL OF 19 20 PR,ESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN ]]Xt'ENDITUI_I_2S BY NATIOn'AL COMMITTEE "SEC. 316. (a) N0 expenditure in excess ,of $1,000 shfit 21 be made by or on behalf of any candidate who has recelvz_d 22 the nomination 23 President 24 proved by the chairman or treasurer 25 national committee or the designated 64 of his political party for President unless such expenditure or Vice has been specifically ap-c,f that political party's representative of tl_at 63 I national committee in the State where the funds are to be 2 expended. 3 "(b) Each national committee approving expenditures 4 under subsection (a) shah regisl;er under section 303 as _:L 5 political committee and report each expenditure 6 as if it had made that expenditure, together with the identi-. 7 fication of the person seeking approval 8 "(c) No political party shall have more than one na-- 10 tional committee. ]11 '_USE 13 and making thc expenditure. 9 12 it approves OF CONTRIBIJTiED AMOUNTS FOR CERTAIN PURPOSES "SEC. 317. Amounts received by a candidate as con-. tributions that are in excess of any amount, necessary to de-- 14= fray his campaign 15 tion 507(b)(1) 16 contributed expenses (after the application of this Act), and any other of sec-. amount.,_': to an individual for the purpose of supporting 17 his activities as a holder of Federal office, may be used by 18 that candidate or individual, as the case may be, to defray' 19 any ordinary 20 connection with his duties as a holder of Federal and necessary expenses incurred 21 may be contributed by him in by him to any organization office, or described 22 in section 170 (c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954. 23 To the extent any such contribution, amount contributed, 24 expenditure 25 under the provisions of this title, such contribution, or thereof is not otherwise required to be disclosed amount 65 64 :1 coni:ributed, or expenditure 2 anec with regulations 3 Coramission 4 as ]may be necessary 5 section. 6 shall be fully disclosed in accord- promulgated is authorized by the Commission..The to promulgate to carry "AUTIIORIZATI()N such regulations out the provisions of tlhis 012 APP]gOPRIACIONS 7 "SEc. 318. There are authorized to be appropriated 8 the Commission, for the purpose of carrying out its funet_,ms 9 under this title, title V, and under chapter _10 United States Code, not to exceed $5,000,000 11 year ending June 29 of tide to :tS, for the fi_,cal 30, 1974, and not to exceed $5,000..(_00 12 for each fiscal year thereafter. l'_ 14 _PENALTY "S]ails which could be repaid from public funds after the threshold is raised.. If the threshold could be raised from loans, in whole or in part, the spirit of thc law would be violated. Loans have their place and may be used for any other purpose duc-lng the entire period of election campaignino_ except for the raising of the "seed money" or threshold fund required to be r::tised by eaclt candidate who desires to receive m atchhlg Federal funds in primary elections for Federal office. Once having, met the required threshold, the candidate would be eligible to recmve an equal or matching amount from the Treasury. And, thereafter, each dollar contribution up to $9,50 would qualify the candidate to receive equal matching ftmds fro m the government _mtil he reaches the limit set for the amount ;he m_Lyspend in any primary election. That limit, as provided by the bill tS. 372, and incorporate_!l in this bill, is 10 cents multiplied by the voting age population of the geographic area in which an election is to be held, except, that in the case of Presidential Primary Elections, the limit is doubled for any given State. That is, the Presidential Preference Primary candidaf_ may spend for any primary electiou in a particular State twice the amount that a candidate running for nomination to the Senate in that State may spend. (See table .on page 30.) The reason for allowing Presidential Preference Primary candidates to exceed the limit set for any particular State, in contr, ast to the limit set for candidates for the Senate nomination, or Representativ.e at Large nomination, is to give an unknown individual the opportun-. ity to compete with one who enjoys a nation.fi identity or who is welt known in a particular area of the nation. However, the bill S. 372 set an aggregate or overall limit on the amount which could be spent for the entire nominating process by a candidate seeking nomination to the office of President of the United States, and that overall limit is retained for that pm'pose in this bill, i.e. 10 cents times the voting age population of the united States for the entire nomination period. In. calculating .and auditing expenditures made f_'om contributions recmved from private donors, every contribution up to and including $3,000 would be counted for the purpose of determining the total spending limitation. But, for the purpose of determining eligibility to receive public financing, only those p.rivat._ contributions up to $250 would be counted. Any candidate who qualifies, under the law of the State in whic,h he seeks nomination, to seek nomination for election for the office of United States Senator, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or Repre- 107 12 sentatiw_ from a State having only one Representative must _[1_:oraise a threshold or earnest-money base fund in order to be eligible to _'eceive Federal matching funds. Such a candidate would be required to raise an amount equal to the lesser of 90 percent of the maximum amount he may spend in i!ds pti> mary election, or $195,000. S. 372 sec the limitation upon the. t;imoul_t which a candidate for nomination for election to the Senate may spend. It is the :_mount to be obtained by multiplying 10 cents times thc voting age population for the geographic area (the State), but not ]e_:;sth.an , $1'25,000.. The $195,000 base was es.tablished as a reasonabh!; mi.n!mum for expenditures by candidates of those States having sma3 populations. Therefore, the 20 percent threshold amount would begirt w:ith the $125,000 base and rise to the m'aximum, but for those States ;![avin_i,, very large populations, i.e., California, New York: etc., the ma:;_dmum threshold figure would be $125,000. So_ a ee.ndidate for nominal:ion to the Senal_e would be required to :raise an amount not less than 5'0 per-_'_entof the base ($125,()00), or $o5,000, but not mor_ than the mn:..:]m[u:_ for eligibility, or $125,000. (See ta.b3e on page 33.) For the Senate, as for the House of Representatives, only tlh,:,se in-. dividua] contributions not in excess of $100 would qualify :!o:r :nlblic matching funds. Once having met the threshold, all additional dollar con'_r:ib ;ttions not in excess of $100 would qualify for matching Federal payments up to the limitation which a candidate for nomination to the Senat,_. :may spend in any State. A candidate for nomination for' election to the House of Representa-. tires must raise a threshold amount of $10,000. The threshold is th_!, same for all candidates seeking nomination for election to the ]!louse, except for those running in the States having only one Represen{:ative. or in the District. of Columbia. The $100 limit on contributions e'l _ .gibl c for matching payments applies as it does for the Senate. Where :separate run-off elections must be held to deterrnine n(:mduces for the Senate or the House of }_epresentadves, the same 10rr:,vsio:ns shall apply. All candidates seeking nolnination for election to the offices of '.i'}resi-. dent, Senator, or Representative, h'lve the option of solicit:ir, g all[ private oontributions up to the limitation on spending il[ t::_L:_?, sc, choose, or seeking both private and public matching funds.. I otal public' financing of primary elections is not provided. General elections · Candidates partici, p.a tin o-e,in general._election cam p ,__ai_rzns ars _]'_ated differently depending upon whet]her they are the nominees of r:mjor or minor_parties haxdng previous voting records, or of miner 'p..trties having, n ° previous voting records. A major party is defined as one whose candidates for Presiden: and Vice President in the preceding election received _t least 95 1,:.reent of the total number of popular votes cast in the United States t,_r all candidates for such offices. A candidate nominated by' a mai[or party would be eligible to r'_:,-eive full pubh,, funding m h:ts campaign for election up to the lira:it set by the bfil S. 372 (15 cents times the voting age population of the geo2 108 13 t_aphic area in which the election is to be held), as carried over into is public financing bill. A minor party is defined mean ,_ny in politicM party whose candi-. dates for President and Viceto President ths preceding election re-. ceived at least 5 percent but less than 25 percent of the total number of popular votes cast in the United States for all candidates for such offces. A candidate nominated by a minor funding up to an amount which is number of popular vote s cast for all bears to the total number of popular minor party. party would be eligible for public: m tZhesame ratio as the average the (_andidates of the major party votes cast for the candidate of the Where only one political party qualifies _s a ]najor party, then that party whose candidate for el,_ction to a particular office at the preceding general election received the next greatest number olf: votes (but not less than 15 percent of the total number of votes cast) shall be treated as 'a malor partly and entitled to receive full public funding as such for the current election. There are States in which one political party or the candidate of a politicM party is so popular or dominant as to' render, in :fact, all other parties minor parties, whether Democratic or Republican. Therefore, this provision. will help to ensure the equal entitlement of the Democratic and Re-. publican parties, except m very rare instances where one of those._) parties would rank third. The bill also takes into consideration the c_ndidate who ran at the, preceding election as a Democrat or Republican 'md received more than 25 percent of the votes cast and[ who then runs at the following election as an independent. When such a candidate switches from one party to another he does not carry wit]h him the "track record", i.e. Votes cast, at the last general election, when he runs under another party label. IIe would be entitled to payments as an independent only if he receives at least 5 percent of the votes at the current election an(][ his payments would be in reimbursements after the election, not before. If that candidate runs again as an independent at the succeeding general election, and if he received more than 25 percent of the vote as an independent at the preceding generM election, then he would be eligible for full public funding. If a candidate of a minor party whose candidate for election to :aL given Federal office at the preceding general ,election received at leas_; 5 percent of the votes cast for all candidates :[or that office, he will be entitled to receive public funds on a pro rata basis, and if at the current] election that candidate receives more th,m 5 percent of the total vote,,, cast, then h e will be entitled tO receive additionM payments, as reimbursements to reflect the additional voter support. In the general election , candidates . ma, Ychoose to receive all Private. .,' contributions and no public funding, a, blend of pmv'_te and pubhc funding within the limitations on expenditures for general elections as set forth 'in the bill, or, in the case of major party candidates ex:clusively public funding. Post-electio_ payments Post-election payments are available to candidates in 2 situations. First, if a minor part_ candidate ,or an independent candidate who is entitled to payments oefore the election in an amount which is less 28-517--7_ ..... 3 1()9 14: than the amount payable to the candidate of a m_Ljor part}' be :fore t'. m election receives a greater percentage of the votes than the ea:_didate of his party received in tile last election ('when compared lo 'tlle aw_rage percentage received by a major party eandi&_te in that el_,ctior,)_ he is entitled to receive ail additional amount afLer the electJ,m. For example, if the average percentage of the votes received by .:_major party candidate in the preceding election was 30 percent and th,:_minor party candidate received 15 percent of the votes in 'that. elect:.on, tim candidate of the nfinor party in the current election is entitled to a pre-election payment of half the amount to which a major part,, cand idate is entitled. If the minor party candidate in the current 'i:leer,ion receives 40 percent of the vote and tlhe average pe r'centage rece red ),y the major party candidates is still 30 percent, the minor party candid.ate is entitled to a post>election p'tyment equal 1o the amounl of tim pre-election'payment to which the major party e_ndidates we :e each entitled_ reduced by the amount of any payments he received bel_o::e the election and the amount of any contributions he received for u:_e in his campaign. If his pre-election payment and lq[is contriI::utions, added together, equal the spending limitati.on for that race tlm _.mount of his post-election payment is zero. If the sum of iris pre-electi.: m pa':ment and the contribution_ equals 90 percent of lhe spendm:.,_ Hmit'iCttion, his. post-election payment is 10 percent of the .spending Ii:initiation. Second, a candidate who is not the nominee of a major or rainor party and who did not receive more than 5 percert of the vote:_:in tl_e most recent general election for the same office, is. not entJtlec to receive any pre-election payments. If he takes the' s'tme steps be_!':_retl _e. election to become eligible for ]?ayments t.hat other candidat,i_.:s mu:;t take in order to receive pre-election payments, then., if he r,;_c_fves 5 percent or more of the votes in 'the current election he is entit[ :'_:ib]iclj:' such controls are imperative if Conff_.'essis to enact meaningful imits on direct contributions. Otherwise,%_ealthy indivJdu'ds lirnite,:[ to s. $3,000 direct corttribution could also purchase one hundred tt.kO,:sand dollars' worth of advertisements for a favored mndidate. S4ch s, loophole 'would render direct contribution limits ,drtnally m,;_:;_ning-. less. Admittedly, expenditures made d-i.reetly by an individual ix: urge, support of a candidate pose First .Ame:ndment issues; more vividl:,, than 114 19 do financial contributions to a campaign fund. Nevertheless, to pro-hibit a $60,000 direct contribution to ]beused for a TV spot commercial but then to permit the would-be contributor to purchase the time him-self, and place a commercial endorsing the candidate, would exMt con.stitutional form over substance. Your Committee does not believe the First Amendment requires such a wooden construction. If Congress may, consistent with the First Amendment, limit contributions to preserve the integrity of the elect:oral process, then it also can constitutionally limit independent expenditures irt order to make the contribution limits effective. At the same time, the bill avoids some of the constitutional issues in this area encountered by previous legislation. The 1971 Federal Elec-t]on Campaign Act deals with such independent efforts by requiring candidate approval before the media may accept advertisements fron:t any source which promote his candidacy. See ACLU v. ,.lennings , CA. No. 1967-72 (Three-judge court, D.C. Dist. Col.) In contrast, the Com-mittee bill does not require this candidate "si_l off." Nor does it in-clude unauthorized expenditures in the total spending limit imposed on the candidate. Limiting the amount of independent expenditure someone may make in support of a candidate, bu.t _,ot co_,_ti_g such amounts for purposes of the overall spending limit of the candidate, is the best compromise of competing interests in free speech and effective campMgn regulation. It controls undue influence by a group or individual. Yet it avoids the dilemma of either giving candidates a veto over such independent expression or subjecting the candidate to the independent decisions of his supporters, even if he prefers using his permitted expenditure in other ways. Thus, the bill preserves to everyone some right of political expression, which they can undertake regardlless of whether the candidate has already used up his permitted expenditures and regardless of whether the expression they wish to make on the candidate's behalf "fits in" with his campaign plan. Finally, your Committee has been careful to preserve inviolate every citizen's abili W to communicate to anyone his views on political issues. Expenditures made by a person or group to communicate such views, if the communication does not advocate specific candidates, count neither as direct contributions, nor as independent expenditures on behalf of a candidate. EXA2ViPLES OF THE APPHCATI0_ OF THE 'PUBLIC FINANCING TO FEDERAL i_LI'.;CTIO]_rS PROVISIONS There are elections which do not present the conventional situation of a choice between 2 major party candidates. It: is also true that:, from time to time, a candidate changes his political party affiliation. The following examples illustrate the a]?plication of the provisions of the bill to such elections and candidates. Example No. 1 In a 1984 election for the Senate, Mr. Apple is the candidate of political party A, political party B, and political party C. His opponent, Mr. (}range, is the candidate of political party 'D. grhen tb.e_ 115 2O votes are. counted, Mr. Apple has; received 55 percent of the tot_!,lmm:tbar of votes. He received 20 percent of the vote as l_he ca:ndi,:[ate of party the candidate vote as theof candidate of party 13.}md percent A.of20thepercent vote asof the p_Lrty C. Mr. Orange,, as tie15 candidate of party D, received 45 percent o:i the vo':e. In the 1990 contest for Mr. Apple's seat., palsies A, B, and D are treated as major parties. (Under section 5.01(8) cf the propos._d ne',v title of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 19'[1, a major i:,_rty [.s a political party whose candidate received, as the candids,te. ,:,f th_.t party, 2[; percent or more of the votes cast in the :most recent _ [action for the same office. However, if only one party qualifies s:s a majcr party under that rule, any political party whose candidate r,_ceived the second highest number of votes in that election is also Ireated as a major party if he received at least 15 percent of the vot.,_s_)In this example Apple received 20 percent of the vote as the cm::didate of party of A. the Since the party candidate of be party A did 95 'l:'ercert or more 'votes, A will treated in net tL.ereceive 1990 eh_cql:;i.i m as a major party only because its candidate received the second ]:ighe_!It number ,of votes in the 1984 election, and because he receive_:_mm:e than 15 percent of the votes. Mir. Apple also received 20 per,: ant (:_f the votes as the candidate of party B., so that party will also be :'.reate :1 as a major partly in the 1990 election. Party D is a major pa?by in the 1990 election becuse its candidate in 1984, Mr. Or:rage, recelve_:l :more than 25 percent of the votes. Party C is a minor party in the 19";i0 el.action because its candidate, in 1984, Mr. Apple, neither receive_:[ more than 25 percent of the vote as the candidate of that party nor' t._msm{:'.ond highest number of votes as the candidates of _;hal:party. The provisions of the bill app]_y to the 1990 coniest for Mr./!.p. ple:s seat in the following ways: VAR]_AT:[ON A Mr. Apple is again the nominee of party A, pa%y .B, and plrty C. Since party A and party B are each 'treated as a m_;lor p_rl_2;'_their candidates are entitled to payments equal in amount to the. sF,mding limitation (assume the applicable limitation is $2.90,(}00). The cand!date of t0,arty C in 1990 is entitled to a payment which bears th _ same ratio to the amount a major party candidate may receive ($2(0,000) as the number of votes received by tlhe candidate of that part? in the preceding general election bears to the average r:umber of votes received by aofmajor candidate in that election.,)fMr. as the candidate party party C in 1984, received 15 percent the App]e,. votes, nd the average number of votes received by the candidates of part:_ A I)arty B, andis Party 28.3 percent of fifteen the total. The [larry C candY,late ia 1984 entitledD was to approximately twenty-cig_iths of $9 )0,00), which equals about $107,175. Althoul_h Mr. Apple is the candi,:[ate of party A, party B, party C in 1990, he is not entitled to a co]::_bine_ payment of $507,175. The provisions of proposed ,;eetion 503(e, lim!it the ammmt of the maximum payment any candidate can rec_Sve to} the amount he can spend. Mr. Appple's sending ]im]t is $')_00.,,)00.so he would receive payments totaling $200,000. he w°mdd ceive the full amount as the candidate of Party W_ether A l or of party i1!_)_rem:l nothing as the candidate of the other 2 parties, or w]hether ]_leWoul,t 116 21 receive part _of the amount as the candidate of each party would depend upon the circumstances under which h_. certified his candidacy and upon the arrangements he made with each party. Since Mr. Orange_ as the candidate o]: party I), received 45 percent of the votes in the 1984 contest, the .candidate of party D in tile 1990 contest is entitled to receive a payment of $'.'200,000as the candidate of a major party. VARIATIO/_T B Mr. Apple decides not to seek re-election. For the reasons set forth above, the candidates of parties A, B, and I) would each be entitled to propose_A new title The of $200,000 for receive use in payments the 1990 under generalthe election campaign. candidate each of party C would be entitled to receive $107,175. VARIATION C Mr. Apple decides to seek re-election only as the candidate of party A. Mr. Apple is entitled to _ payment of $200,000, the candidates of parties B and D are each entitled to receive a payment of $200,000, and the candidate of party C is entitled to a payment ot! $107,175. WnIATIOX D Regardless of what Mr. Apple doe% Mir. Orange decides to try again for the seat, but this time he chooses to run _Lsan ind{4)endent candi.date rather than as the candidate o_! party I). Mr. Orange is :not entitled to receive one penny in public funds until after the election is over. If he receives more than 5 percent of the votes cast, then he is entitled to receive payments in reirabursement of his campaign expenses based on the percentage of votes he receives as compared to the average number of votes receiw_d by major party candidates in that election. Exav_ple No. 2 In a 1984 election for the House tlhe candidate of political party A is an individual who has been elected to the House from that district for over 80 years, so party B doesn't bother to nominate a candidate. The incumbent retires before his term :is up and a special election is called · · for 1985. In the special electi()n, the new candl{'t'_te of party ' · * · · , ' · A , date, but, since the party had no candidate !in the preceding general election for the office, he is not entitled to any payment before the election. In the 1985 election, the candidate of party A receives 45 percent of the votes; the candidate of party B receives 55 percent o:f the votes. The candidate of party B is then entitled to a payment after the election which bears the same ratio to the pre-election payment made to the candidate of party A as the number of votes received by the candidate of party B bears to the number of votes received by the candidate of party A. Since the candidate of party B received more votes than the candidate of party A, his post-,_lection pa,yment is equa.1 to the pre-election payment received, by the candidate of party A (it does not exceed that payment because of the application of the limita.. tion in proposed section 503 (c)). 28-517--74 4 Il7 2'2 lfxa_,_ple No. $ In the 1984 election mentioned in example number 94 pa,rtv, B de.tides thalL the incumbent :is to be thei:r' nominee as ,yell.. Sixty-:fi 'e pe:l:cent of the votes he receives come from the members of parl;y A :;._td the remaining 35 percent come from. the members of [,arty B. In t]ite special election of ;1085, both party A and partv_..B a_e rna'or]-1)ar"ies-._b_cause their candidat, e in 1984, the now retired i:acumbent, ri, ceived more than 95 percent of the vote in the preceding general elecl ion as the candidate of each par_w The candidate of party A and [he :_and!idate of party B in the 198ii election _[re each entitled to a pre-..electio::_ payment of $100,000. Preside_z_ial ge_.e._,a_e_'ectio._s The Committee bill makes no basso change in existing l_x'_- in_th_ application of t;he dollar checkoff to the er titlement of candid':_tes t,:} public funds in ]Presidential elections.. In general, a candidate qualifies for full public :!undine. if h_!,is th.i_ candidate of a "major" pa_'t? .... :-xparty that received 25 r_el::'(,._n.tof more of the popular votes cast in the [)receding election. H,3 q¥ alifie!; for partial public funding if he is the candidate of -t "minor" i:,a :'ty--?t. party that received 5 percent or more, but less than 25 perc,_!nt, o:[[ the popular votes cast in the preceding election; t kc amount of :mbli :: funds for a minor party candid,%_ i,; based on thc, proporti!on Sd!the popular vote he :received in the preceding election. In addition, a candidate ma3: als(:) qualify :for i)ublic funds retrc,-actively, ,on the basis of his; showing in the current election. In ;;uch :,; case, a candidate who recei_ es public funds after the election m i), us,_ the funds to reimburse private contributors. In the 197'2 Presidential election, President Nixon receive..,] 60.?, percent of the vote as the candidate of the ]]epublican Party. S,mato::' McGovern received 37.2 percent of the vol;e as tke candi(_t,_ ::,f th,i!. Democratic Party. lqepresentative Schmitz receive,ii 1.3 percent of th._ vote as the candidate of the An:terican Independ(nt Party or unde::' other party designations. In 197(; the Republican Party :.._ndth.e Democratic Party qual 5fy as major parties on the basis of the 19'7'2 election, and t;hei{: candidates will be entitled to full puMic funding.. Since no other party qmd:i ties as a major or minor party on the basis cf the 1972 ele_-tion, no otb,z;r candidates will be entitled t.o public funds in advance of'the 1971; elec-tion. However, if a candidate of a third party runs in 1'976 and r,'._ ceives more than 5 percent of the vote. h,e wi.ll qual!!fy retroactively :for 9ubli,:: funds, based on his showing in 0lc 197,8 elect!ton. . The application of the public flns.ncing provision to Presicentia[ elections !is also illustrated by the following section, showing ii;s q)pli.. cation to Senate elections. Senate deetions Some of the following examples 'tre adapted t rom actual l!;enat_) elections recent years. el: the, examples are d(iSigned trate the in application of theMost dollar checkoff to Senate dections ',k,c, ]:l_i?us-. ely.. lng relatively unusual situations_, The dell'ir checkoff, already _ppli_ 118 23 cable to Presidential general elections under existing law, was en.acted in 1971 with close attention to its impact on potential third party presidential candidacies. As the examples demonstrate, the formula in existing law for Presidential elections is easily applied to Senate. elections, as provided by the Committee bill. Typically, however, minor party candidates have not 'been a signifi.-. cant factor in the vast majority of recent Senate elections, In the past three Congressional election years, there have been si total of 1¢13Senate elections. In 42 of these elections--14 of the 34: races in 1972, 12 of the 35 races in 1970, and 16 of the 34 races in 1968--only two canclidates were entered--Democratic and Republican. In the other 61 races, additional candidates representing some 30 other par-ties were also on the ballot in those years ]invarious states. But, in those 61 races, there were only seven races in which ti'hethird candidate re-. ceived more than 5 percent of the vote---Louisiana in 1972; Connecticut, and New York in 1970; and Alabama, Alaska, Maryland and New York in 1968. In those seven races--seven out of 103 races in all--the third candidate would have qualified for partial public funding as a "minor" party candidate in the following election. In none of those seven races did the third candidate receive more than 25 percent of the vote; therefore, no third candidate would have qualified as a "major" party candidate entitled to full public funding in the following election. The examples follow: 1. In the 1968 Senate election, Candidate A of the De:mocratic Party defeated Candidate B of the Republican Party by 5(1percent to 48 percent, and Candidate C of Party X received 2 percent of the vote.. When the Senate seat is up_a_ain_irt.1974,.the Democra..tic Part y and the Republican Party are "major" parties. Their can&dates are each entitled to public funds in the amount of 15 cents per vote, based on the voting age population of the State. Since Candidate C failed to reach the 5 percent cutoff in the 1968 election, Party X does not qualify for public funds in 1974. 2. Same as example (i) for 1968. In the 1974 election, Candidate A of the Democratic Party defeats Candidate B of the Republican Party by 46 percent to 44 _ercent, and Candidate D of Party X re-ceives 10 percent of the vote. Candidate D qualifies as a "minor'" party c:_ndi&;te on the basis of his showing in the current election (1974), since he received more than 5 percent of the vote. He is therefore entitled to public funds on ,% retroactive reimubursement basis, even though he did not qualify for public funds in advance of the election because Party X failed to receive 5 percent of the vote in 1968. Candidate D would be entitled to 10/45 or '22 percent of the amount of public funds given to each major party candidate, A and B. The amount is based on Candidate D's proportional share of the average vote of the two major par_y candidates,, and is calculated as follows: 10% + (46;% + 44%)/'2=10/45=22%. Candidate C may use these public funds to reimburse private contrib.utors to his campaign in 1974. 8. In 1968, Candidate A of the Republican Partly defeated Candi-. date B of the Democratic Party by 4(; percent to 44 percent, and[ Candidate C of Party X won 10 pex'cent of the vote. 119 24 In 197'4,the candidates of the Democratic Party and the ]ge.[,lblic:im Party are "major" party candidates and qualify for :full pubti.: run, ts (15 cents per vote). The candidate of Party X is a "mi:aor 't parl;y candidate and qualifies for partial public funds in 19747 in the Immunt. of 22 percent of the entitlememL of each major l?arty candid:i_te. 4. In the 1974 Senate election., Candidate A of the I)emocra'_i,: Parl:y defeats Candidate B of th e Rep'abliean Party by ,[6 percenl: to _[ percent. Candidate C runs as an Independent and recerves 10 p,a:l:cent . ,)f the vote. Candidate C qualifies retroactively for public funds on tl_e same basis as if he were the candidate of a party, lie receives 2q >ercent of the amount of public funds given to each ma;ior party carididme. 5. A received 4 percent of the vote as the candidate of Party X aitd 3 percent of the vote as the candidate of Part_ Y in 1968. In 19d4, A quahfies for publ:tc funds a:s a minor party c'umdidate. His entklemem!, to public funds is brined on 7 percent of the_ 191;8 vor,e, since the, bill permits a candidate to accumulate his votes from '1:he preceding election, if he received 5 percent or more but less than g5 percent of the votes in that election. 6. In the 1968 election, Candidate A of the D,_mocratic t:>_rty defeated Candidate B of the Republic:an Party by _;4percent; to 37 percent. In the 1974 election, Senator A runs as an lndepende_nt, B runs as an Independent, C runs as the Candidate of th_ Republic_m Party_ and D runs as the candidate of the Democratic Ps,rty. (Based ,:ma r'ecent Virginia _oenate election.) Cand!date Party C of are the each Republican Candidate tim Democratic entitle(]_Party to full and public funding Dil of197'4, since they are candidates of a ma,jot ]party on the basis of tih,_19 _8elevation. Senator A is also entitled to ful.1 public funding, based on ]tis ov;'n showing as a 'winning major party candidate in 1974. B d,_es not qualify for public funds, since the Committee bill[ does not ofl!,_r[u_:_lie funds to an independent candidate who was a defeated major party ca,ndidate in the preceding election. 7. Senator A ran as an Independent in 1968 and won the _!]ecti(:,n with 54 percent of the vote. The candidate of the Democrat,i,::Par'l;y received 31 percent of the vote and the crmdidat,_ of the,, l_ep lblic_m Party received 15 percent, of '[he vote. (Based on a recent ¥'irgin:[a Senate election.) If Senator A runs again as an/independent in 1974, he is ent:.fled ';o full public funds (15 cents per vote), based on his: 19,08show:ira7 as _:n , e s e ';majo>:" party on the basis of its 1968 showing'. However, bhe candidat,: of the gepublican Party in 197+_will qualify on_.y for ]?artial public funds, since it is a "minor '? party based on its 1968 showings, even t.}'mgh :it was a "major" party based on _he 119(;2e]action. In 19_, the Republican candidate is entitled to 15/ (54 + 31) /g, or 35% of the ',tmount given to Senator A and to the Democratic candidate. If the Republican candidate receives more than _',5percent of the vote in 197_ he qualifies retroaetiw_ly as a "major" party ca_didage and is entitled to full public funds. 8. In 1968, candidate A of the Republican P_rty defeat.e_:[ Independent Candidate B by 50.7 percent to 49.3 percent, and there, was ]ao 120 25 candidate of the Democratic Party (adapted from the Virginia Governor's election in 1973). If Candidate B runs again as an IrLdcpendent in 1974, he is chtitled to full topublic funds. funds. Senator If At]herc of t_eis Republican als.() be entitled full public a candidate Party of thewill Democratic Party, he will not qualify for public funds unless he does so retroactively on the basis of his showing in the 1974 election. If Candidate B runs as the candidate of the Democ, ratic Party in 1974, he qualifies for full public funds--not because he is the Democratic Candidate, but because of his personal showing as an Independent in 1968. 9. In 1968, Candidate A of the Democratic Party defeated Candi.date B of the Republican Party by 78 percent to 29. percent (based on a recent West Virginia Senate election). In 1974 since the Democratic Party is the only "major" party on the basis of the 1968 results, the Republican Party will also qualifjr as a ,major" party under the bill. It !isthe party with the next highest showing' in the preceding election, even though its candidate in 1968 won less than 25 percent of the vote and would not ordinarily qualify as a "major" party. 10. In 1968, Candidate A defeated Candidate B by 60 percent to 40 percent. Candidate A received 45 percent of his vote as the candidate of the Democratic Party, and 15 percent of his voi,e as the candidate of the Liberal Party. Candidate B received !26 percent of his vote as the candidate of the Republican Party, and 14 percent of his vote as the candidate of the Conservative Party. (Adapted from recent New York Senate elections.) In 1974, the Democratic and RepublicarL candidates qualify as "major" party candidates. The candMates of the Liberal and Conserv.ative Parties each qualify as "minor" paxty candidates. In addition, it! B runs as the Conservative Party candidate, but not, as the Republican Party Candidate, in 1974, he qualifies only as a "minor" party candidate, because the bill does not allow a defeated major party candi-date to run as a minor party candidate !in the next election and carry over his status as a major party candidate. 9. In 1968. Candidate A of the Democratic Party wrm the election with 55% of the vote. Candidate B of the Republican Party won 19% of the vote and Independent Candidate C won 23% of the vote;. (Based on a recent Louisiana Senate ,election.) In 1974, since the Democratic PaI_y is the, only "major" party orr the basis of the 1968 results, the bill, '_s noted :in example, (9), operates to allow the Republican Party to qualify as a "major" party, even though it received less than 25% of the vote in 1968, and even though Independent Candidate C made a better showing in 1968. If Candidate C runs again as an Independent in 1974, he quMifles for partial[ _ublic funds as a "minor" party him candidate. Bat full the bill doesfunding not benei_ t an Independent by allowing to receive public a,, if he were a major party candidate. As exaraple (7) makes clear, il_ both an Independent candidate and the Dem:ocratic Party candidate qualify for full public funds on the basis of the preceding election, the bill does not operate to allow the Republican candidate to qualif3_ for full public funds. In other words, the bill does not operate to create full public funding for a third candidate, where two candidates already qualify for full public funds on, the basis of their showlng in the preceding election. 121 26 .;;_i;_Zeep_'int 3;0. ¢/._s' revised (Supplied by the GenerM Accounting O_ce) 1. 1076 Pvesi(le,_t;a[ lV'_imar':y _'/.cctio_s.---Assum_ four 717), mocr'ats and four Republicans raise a camp:aig'n fund of _t least $25,0.,,')00e:.ch from contributions of not more than $250 each. Each candida':e would be entitled to matching funds of $2130,000. plus one dollar i[o:u,._ach :tdditional dollar of qualif_ hxg contributions (under $2130) ra]se.o In e':ch primary election or convention to select natioaal convend,)n. &legates, each candidate cou_d spend up to twice the amom_t p: rmitl:ed a Senate primary candidate. For example? in the 1976 '_i, Viscon:!',in presidential primary each candidate could spend up to 20¢ time _ voting age populatio:n ($606,600 based o[1 current po pul:_ttion) m::t could receive up to one-half of that amount in public funds. 2. 1076 Presidential (re._e?'at £/_,c['io,_a..--lmth the Den'lo(tr'.tt ic and the I_epubiican candidates represent a major pa:ty (over 25':i_; of I:he popular vote in 1979). Both are entitled to optimml :full publS: thta m3rig' up_,,to the based spending lfinita o:f 15 cents tijnes F,olmlat'_on ($21.2a0,000 on curr_nt population), the voting sl)endingagel[mi! applies to all candidates whether or not: they choose pul)l! e financillg_ ?;o other candidate is qualified for public f_mds based on 1972 results;, but if anot]mr' candidate receives over 5% of the 1976 vote, he vould be entitled after the election to a proportionate share to reimbu:'se campaign expenditures. Assume the two rrmjo[' party c,indidates receive 41 per._ent: _:_nd '39 percent of the 197(i popular vote, respectively, and assume Can:Ii(late C ,of the National Party receives 10 percent. Ca.ndidate (!wi_H: be entitled to a Imst-dection payment based[ on the ratio of l:,is vote to the average of the major par(ms' vote; i.e. 10/40 of $.21_2a0,00(. Can :ii(late C would receive up to $52312,500. In the 1980 general ele,::tion ::for President, the I)emocra, ts and Republicans would be major pal ties; and the Natiorml ]Party would be :_ minor party whose candidale is _mtitled to pre-election payments in the same ratio. If Candidate., C ri(ms as 'in independent irt 1980, he would also be entitl_d to pay_m,:mts based on the votes he received in 1976. 3. ,Se,n,ate P.rimav;y ]fgection.--Candidate A is opposed fit [:he primary by Candidate B and both raise the required thresholdk campai_n d_und from contributions of, $100 or less;. Each candidate :is entitled to matching funds on a, dollar for dollar 5asJs. If eith,_ r can :ti,date doesn;t rMse the mimmum amount from prival:e som:'c_!'s he will not receive any public funds. 4. Sectate Nov_,ivz(_tiny Uon,ve,ztion.--Same result as in p_eeedhg example because the term "primary election" in the bill in,:ludes a convention or caucus of g politicM party held to nominate a ,cs :_,did_.te. 5. Se_,ate Ge_beval Election.--Assume Candidates A and B a:'e nominated by the major parties and Candidate C repr,_sents a nainc, :'par[y; and[ the voting age population o:f the state is; 4 million. Ca ndi dates A and B are each entitled to $600,000 (15¢ times voting a_e pop fiati(m) for their general election campaign. If the minor party rec,_ived _,§ of the ,q,verage vote of the major parties in the preceding eleclbi,,n, Candidate C is ent,itled to $fi00,000. lz,2 27 6. House Primary Election.--In a congressiional district in a multi.. district for than ma ior party' nomination qualify for.' matchingstate? fundsfourby candidates raising more $1_),000in contributions of $10(] or less. Each is entitled to spend up to $90,000 and is entitled to match.. lng funds for each dollar raised. 7. House GeneraZ £1ection.--The nominated candidate of a major' pa_ty- is entitled' to full public pya ment_of $9(},000 in the._ .eneral elec--., tion. If the State has only one district, the primary lirmt m lncreasea to $125,000 and the general election limit is increased to $175,000. COST ESTI_rATES PURSrrANT TO SECT[OX 252(a) OF THIS LEGISLATIVe: REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1970 Section 252(a) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 re-quires that any committee reporting a bill of a public character shall 'inc]ude in its accompanying report an estimate of the costs which would be incurred in effecting such legislation, or a statement of the reasons compliance with this requirement is impracticable. Accordingly, the Committee on Ru]es and Administration estimates: the annual cost to the United States G-overnment to an average of $89_391.693. This average estimate is based upon the supposition thai; all seats in the House of Representatives will be contested every two years; that one thir(t of ail Senate seats will be contesl:ed every two years; and that, of course, there wi-[] be a quadrennial election for President and Vice President. The costs are predicated upon total estimated public funds paid to eligible candidates for nomination for election, or election to Federal office. The Committee is not aware of any' estimates of costs made by any Federal agency which are different from those made by the committee.. COST ESTII_[AT!ES President (every 4 years): Plqmary elections, not including State conventions General ........................................................ Total, (21 States)__ President ............................................... Senate (33 campaigns every 2 years): Primary (33 States) including conventions ................... General (33 States) ........................................... Total, Senate ................................................ Multiplied by 2.......................................... House (every 2 years): Primary (435 seats) including conventions ...................... General (435 seats) ........................................... Total, House ................................................ Multiplied by 2.......................................... Total, 4-year cost ..................................... Average annual cost ................................... ADDITIONAL COST 4-year totall $42, 010, 80() 47, 218, 194: 89, 228, 994: 10, 170, 900, 23, 929, 900 34, 100,800 68, 201, 600 31,245, 100 69, 062, 888 100,307,988 200, 615, 076 358, 046, 570 89, 511, 643 I_STIMA_S The Internal Revenue Service furnished the following information, based upon 1971 figures_ demonstrating the cost to the government if 122; 28 all taxpayers were to designate dential Campaign fund · Total Total one dollar of tax liability to tlr e Presi- returns joint ........................................................ individual returns .................................................. Total returns $4:;, 770, 000 3: _ 830, 4)00 ...................................................... 7_:,600, 000 If all returns, individual and joint, should take full[ adva:atali :e of the one dollar check off the total cost would be $117,370,0,90. If, all returns should take full advantage of a two dollar c _ck o1_ the cost would be $B3_,740,000. RESULTSOF DOLLAR CHECKOFF Returnsusingcheckofffor 1973 Number 1973returnsfiled in 1974: Through Jan. 18................................. 43, 19_ Week of: Jan.. 25...................................... 120,202 Feb. 1...................................... 251,312 Feb. 8...................................... 396, 287 Feb.15..................................... 553, 80E Cumulative: Jan. 25.......................................... 163,400 Feb. 1............................................ 414, 712 Feb.8........................................... 810,99. c, Feb.15.......................................... 1,364, 805 Perc.'nt Amo,nt Total rel_rns filed I0.7 $60, 366 ............... 14.0 14.7 14.3 14.1 171,984 ............... 365, 777 ............... 585, 519............... 820, 986.............. 13.0 14.0 14.1 14.1 232, D50 ................ 597, B27 .............. 1,183,346 15,941:,000 2,004, 332 23,49:!, 000 Returnsusingcheckofffor 1972 Number 1973returnsfiled in 1974: ThroughJan. 18.................................... 21,580 Week of: Jan.25....................................... 59,36(1 Feb,.I ....................................... 120, 088 Feb.8....................................... 186, 534 Feb.15....................................... 258, 17;! Cumulative: Jan. 25......................................... 80,941) Feb. 1.............................................. 201,028 Feb.8............................................. 387,56Z Feb. 15............................................ 645,734 _OINT CONGRESS OF TtIE U]_ITED C05{]YIITTEE ON _.NTERNAL REVENUE LONGWORTtt HOUSE Pen;ent 5.3 Amount rotal re:urns filed {30, 461 ................ 6.9 7.0 6.7 6.6 85,99_[............... 177,41g ................ 280,093................ 390, 45/_ .................. 6.4 6.8 6.8 6.7 116, 459 ............... 293, 877 ............... 573,970 .............. 964, 429................ STATES, TAXATIO]_ O:FFIC]g _BuII,D][>_' ?]_ -Washington, D.C., February ¢:! , I972J. Mr. JA_ES H. Durra% Chief l_ou¢_seg, Subco,ramittee .on Privile!Tes and Elections, ;_i'm_e,¢_:md Administration C o_mittee, U.S. S enate_ W os Aingtcm. Z).,!7. Dr_a MR. Durr¥: This is in. reference to yom: telephorte r_quest of February 9,0 :for the estimated decrease in Federal individmL [ incc,me tax liability which would result from doubling from $50 (_100 for joint returns) to $100 ($200 for joint returns) the maximu:t:_ deduction for political contributions and doubling from $19.50 ($25 :for joint returns) to $25 ($50 for joint returns) the maximum t.:tx credit for politicaI contributions. 124 29 Based on estimated 1972 levels of political contributions under the proposal as derived from the levels ,of contributions reflected in tax returns filed for 1972, we estimate that the proposed doubling of the maximum deduction and the maximum credit would decrease Federal individual income tax liability by abou_ $26 million of which $15 million is ascribable to the doubling of the maximum deduction and $11 million is ascribable to the doubling of the maximum credit. Sincerely yours, Larm_sc_ N'. WoovwoRTm SENATE CAMPAIGN FUND LIMITATIONS UNDER RULESCOMMITTEE BILL 1973 voting age population (VAP) for 1974 elections State · labama ........................................... A 2, .-138,000 Alaska ............................................. 2.00, 000 Arizona ............................................ 1,345, 000 Arkansas ........................................... 1,374, 000 California .......................................... 14, 3.43,000 Colorado........................................... 1,631,000 Connecticut ........................................ 2, 101,000 Delaware ........................................... .'-182,000 Florida ............................................. 5, 427,000 Georgia ............................................ 3,1.40,000 Hawaii ............................................. 549, 000 Idaho .............................................. 501,000 Illinois ............................................. 7,568, 000 Indiana ............................................. 3, 530,0(10 Iowa ............................................... 1,957, 000 Kansas............................................ 1,570, O00 Kentucky .......................................... 2, ;!35, 000 Louisiana .......................................... 2, 399,000 Maine ............................................. 689, 000 Ma ryland .......................................... 2,720, 000 Massachusetts...................................... 4, 006, 000 Michigan ........................................... 5, 922,000 Minnesota .......................................... 2, 575, 000 Mississippi ......................................... 1, ,153,000 Missouri ........................................... 3, 251,000 Montana ........................................... 474, 000 Nebraska .......................................... 1, {)42,000 Nevada ............................................. :165,000 New Hampshire ..................................... 531,000 New Jersey ......................................... 5, 030, 000 New Mexico........................................ t;91,000 New York.......................................... 12, t;65, 000 North Carolina...................................... 8, 541,000 North Dakota ....................................... 421,000 Ohio.............................................. 7,175,000 Oklahoma .......................................... 1,832, 000 Oregon............................................ 1,532,000 Pennsylvania....................................... 8, 240,000 Rhode Island ....................................... 677, 000 South Carolina ...................................... 1,775, 000 South Dakota ....................................... 454, 000 Tennessee ......................................... 2, 799, 000 Texas ............................................... 7, 785, 000 Utah............................................... 715,000 Vermont........................................... .-109, 000 Virginia ............................................ 3, 243,000 Washington......................................... 2, q29, 000 West Virginia ....................................... 1,228, 000 Wisconsin.......................................... 3, 033,000 Wyoming .......................................... 234, 000 Primary General Primary spending spending threshold limit--10cents limit--15 cents matching times VAP or times VAP or fund _ $1;!5,000 $175,000 $46, 760 25,000 26, 900 27, 480 125,000 32, 620 42, 020 25, fi00 108, 540 62, 800 25, 000 25, 000 125, 000 70, 600 39, 140 31,400 44, 700 47,980 25, 000 54, 400 80, 120 118, 440 51,500 29, 060 65, 020 25,000 25, 000 25, 000 25, 000 100, 600 25, 000 125, 000 70, 820 25, 000 125,000 70, 820 30,640 125,000 25, 000 35, 100 25, 000 55, 980 125, 000 25,000 25, 000 64, 860 46, 580 25, 000 60, 660 25, 000 $233, 800 125, ¢00 134, 500 137, 400 1,414, 300 163,100 210, 000 125, 000 542, 700 314, O00 125, 000 125,000 756, 800 353, 000 195,700 157,000 223, 500 239,900 125, 000 2Z2,000 400,600 592, 200 257, 500 145,300 325, 100 125, 000 125, 000 125, 000 125, 000 503,000 125, 000 1,266, 500 354,100 125, 000 717,500 183, 020 153,200 824,000 125, 000 177, 500 125, 000 219, 900 718, 500 125,000 125,000 324,300 232,900 125,000 303,300 125,000 $350,700 175, 000 201,750 206, 100 2, 121, 45d, 244,650 315,000 175, 000 814, 050 471,000 175, 000 175 000 1,135, 200 529 500 293 550 235 500 335 250. 359 851] 175 000 408 000 600 900 888 300 386 250 217 950 487 650, 175 000 175 000 175 000 175 000 754 500 175 000 1,899, 750 531,150 175, 000 1,076,250 274, 800 229,800 1,236, 000 175, 000 266, 250 175, 000 419, 850 1, 167, 750 175,000 175,000 486, 450 349, 350 184,20(I 454,950 175,000 t Figures in this column represent 20 percentof the applicable primary spending limit except for a maximum threshold of $125,000 and a minimum threshold of $25,000. 28-517--74 5 125 30 PRESIDENTIAL PIi:IMARY (Based on 1972) Assumptions;: 1) 2) Candidates qualify by raising $250,000 .Apply 1972 qualifiers to p:dmaries actually Requirements: 1) To qualify candidates Formula: 1) Match $1 for $1 raised by those qualifying up to spending limit Spending limit is 2 times the Senate formula which is the greater of I0¢ x state VAP or _125,000 2) 1) run must raise $250,000 New Hampshire -. 4 candidates in primary raised $250,000 spending limit: 104 x 531,000 = $53,100 x 2 = $106,200 government cost: $125,000 x 4 candidates := $500,000 or $250,000 2) Florida - 8 candidates spending limit: government cost: in primary raised $250,000 10¢ x 5,427,000 = $542,700 x 2 = $1,085,400 $542,700 x 8 candidates := $4,341 ;500 3) Illinois - 1 candidate in primary raised $250,000 spending limit: 10¢ x 7,568,000 = $756,800 x 2 = $1,513,600 government cost: $756,800 x 1 candidate = $756,801) 4) Wisconsin - 8 candidates spending limit: government cost: 5) Massachusetts7 candidates in primary raised $250,000 spending limit: 10¢ x 4,006,000 = $400,600 x 2 = $801,200 government cost: $400,600 x 7 candidates := $2,804,200 6) Pennsylvania - 5 candidates in primary raised $250,000 spending limit: 10¢ x 8,240,000 = $824,000 x 2 = $1,648,001) government cost: $824,000 x 5 candidates := $4,120,300 7) District of Columbia - 1 candidate in primary raised $250,000 spending limit: 10¢ x 529,000 = $:52,900 x2 = $105,800 government cost: $125,000 x 1 candidate =: $125,000 in primary raised $250,000 10¢ x 3,033,000 = $303,300 x 2 = $606,600 $303,300 x 8 candidates := $2,426,400 or $750,000 8) Indiana - 4 candidates spending limit: government cost: in primary raised $250,000 10¢ x 3,530,000 = $353,000 x 2 = 5706,000 $353,000 x 4 candidates = $1,412,000 9) Tennessee - 8 candidates-in primary raised $250,000 spending limit: 10¢ × 2,799,000 = $279,900 x 2 = $559,800 government cost: $279,900 x 8 candidates = $2,239,200 10) Ohio -. 5 candidates in primary raised $250,000 spending limit: 10¢ x 7,175,000 = $717,500 x 2 = $1,435,00C government cost: $717,500 x 5 candidates = $3,587,500 11) North Carolina - 5 candidates in primary raised $250,000 spending limit: 10¢ x 3,541,000 = $354,100 x 2 = $708,200 government cost: $354,100 x 5 candidates = $1,770:500 126 31 12) Nebraska - 8 candidates in :primary raised $250,000 spending limit: 10¢ x 1,042,000 = $104,200 x 2 = $208,400 government cost: $104,200 x 8 candidates = $833,600 13) West Virginia - 2 candidates in primary raised $250,000 spending limit: 10¢ x 1:,228,000 = $122,800 x 2 = $245,600 government cost: $122,8(10 x 2 candidates = $245,600 14) Maryland - 8 candidates in primary raised $250,000 spending limit: 10¢ x 2,720,000 = $272,000 x 2 = $544,000 government cost: $272,000 x 8 candidates = $2_176,000 15) Michigan - 5 candidates in primary raised $250,000 spending limit: 10,i x 5,922,000 = $592:;200 x 2 = $1,184,400 government cost: $5'92,200 x 5 candidates = $27961,000 16) Oregon - 8 candidates in prJ[mary raised $250,000 spending limit: 10,t x 1,532,000 = $153,200 x 2 = $306,400 government cost: $1:53,200 x 8 candidates = $1,225,600 17) Rhode Island - 8 candidates in primary ntised $250,000 spending limit: 10!_x 677,000 = $67,700 x 2 = $135,400 or $250,0(10 government cost: $1:25,000 x 8 candidates = $1,000,000 18) California - 6 candidates in primary raised $250,000 spending limit: 10_tx 14,143,000 = $1,414,300 x 2 = $2,828,600 government cost: $1,414,300 x 6 candidates = $8,485,800 19) New Jersey - No candidates in primary raised $250,000 20) New Mexico - 6 candidates in primary raised $250,000 spending limit: 10_!x 691,000 = $69,100 x 2 = $138,200 or $250,000 government cost: $125,000 x 6 ca:adidates :=$750,000 21) South Dakota - 2 candidates in primary raised $250,000 spending limit: 10,! x 454,000 = $45,400 x 2 = 590,800 or $250,000 government cost: $125,000 x 2 candidates = $250,000 Total primary cost to government = $4.2,010,800 127 32 Requirements;: 1) 2) Major parties (255 or more vote) receive full Federal funding up to spending limit. Minor parties (5-25% of vote) receive propo::tionate share. Formula: 1) Spending limit is 15¢ x VAP ($21,248,400) Assumption: 1) 2) Two major parties One minor party gets 10% of vote VAP = 141,656,000 spending limit: government cost: 15¢ x 141,656,000 = $21,248,400 $21,248,400 x 2 candidates :: $42,496,800 + minor party= 4,721,394 $47,218,194 $42,010,800 47,218,194 $89,228,994 128 33 U.S. SENATE (Based on 1972) Assumptions: 1) 2) 3) Formula: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) Primary opposed- 2 candidates qualified and spent maximum Primary unopposed- candidates did not raise qualifying amount General- major candidates raised qualifying amounts Qualifying amount- lesser of 20% of primary spending amount or $125,000 Primary spending amount- greater of 10¢ x VAP or $125,000 General spending amount- greater of 15¢ x VAP or $175,000 Matching in primary- 1 for 1 Full amount in general 1) Alabama: Qualify (lesser of 20% of $233,800 or $125,000) = $46,760 Primary: spending lirait = 10¢ x 2,338,000 = $233,800 4 candidates qualified - matching government cost = $233,800 + 2 x 4 = $467,600 General: spending limit = 154 x 2,338,000 = $350,700 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost = $!350,700 x 2 = $701,400 2) Alaska: Qualify (20% of $125,000) = $25,000 Primary: spending limit = 10¢ x 200,000 = $20,000 or $125,000 no candidates qualified government cost = 0 General: spending list = 154 x 200,000 = $30,000 or $175,000 2 candidateg qualified - full amount government cost = $75,000 x 2 = $350,000 3) Arkansas: Qualifying (lesser of 20% of 137,400 or $125,000) = $27,48(I Primary: spending limit = 104 x 1,374,000 = $137,400 2 candidate:_ qualified - matching government cost = $137,400 x 2 = $274,400 General: spending limit = 154 x 1,374,000 = $206,100 2 candidate,s qualified - full amount government cost = $206,100 x 2 = $412,200 4) Colorado: Qualifying (Lesser of 20!70of $163,100 or $125,000) = $32,620 Primary: spending limit = 104x $1,6131,000= $163,100 2 candidate,s qualified - matching government cost = $163,100x 2 + 2 = $163,100 General: spending limit = 154 x 1,631,000 = $244,650 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost = $244,650 x 2 = $489,300 129 34 5) Delaware: Qualifying (lesser of 20% of $38,200 or $125,000) :=$25,000 Primary: spending limit = 10¢ x 382,,300 = $38,2,00 or $125,000 nc> candidate qualified governmenl cost = 0 General: spending limit r- 15¢ x 382,,300 or 175,000 :: $175,0C,0 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost =: $175,000 x 2 = $353,00(I 6) Georgi[a: Qualifying Primary: General: (lesser of 20% of $314,000 or $125,000) = $62,800 spending limit = 10¢ x 3,140,000 = $314,000 4 candida res qualified - matching government: cost = $314,000 + 2 x 4 = $628,000 spending limit = 15¢ x 3,140,000 = $471,000 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost =: $471,000 x 2 = $942,000 7) Idaho: Qualifying (lesser of 20% of $50,100 or $125,000) =: $25,000 Primary: spending limit = 10¢ x 501,000 = $50,100 o:r $125,000 4 candidates qualified - matching government cost = $125,000 + 2 x 4 = _250,000 General: spending limit = 15¢ x 501,000 = $75,105 o:r $175,000 = $175,000 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost -: $175,000 x 2 = $35 ),000 8) Illinois: Qualifying (lesser of 20% of $756,800 ox $125,000) = $125,000 Primary: spending limit = 10¢ x 7,561g,000 = $75 6,800 2 candidates qualified - mat ahing government cost = $756,801) x 2 + 2 = [756,800 General: spending limit = 15¢ x 7,56g,000 = $1,135,2:00 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost =: $1,135,200 x 2 = $5,270,400 9) Iowa: Qualifying (lesser of 20% of S195,700 or $125,000) = $39,140 Primary: spending limit = l 0¢ x 1,957,000 = $1 c 5,700 2 candidates qualified - matahing government cost =: $195,701) x 2 + 2 = $195,700 General: spending limit = 15¢ x 1,957,000 = $2c_3,550 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost = $293,55t) x 2 = $587,100 Kansas: Qualifying Primary: 10) General: 11) 130 Kentucky: (lesser of 20% of $ l 57,000 or $125,000) = $31,400 spending lirait = I0¢ x 1,570,000 = $157,001) 2 candidates qualified - mat :hing government cost = 157,000 x 2 -- 2 = $157,0,00 spending limit = 15¢ x 1,570,000 = $225,501) 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost := $235,501)x 2 = $47 [,000 Qualifying (lesser of 20% of $:223,500 oI $125,000) = $4,4,700 Primary: spending limit = [0¢ x 2,235,000 = $223,501) 4 candidates quali:fied - mat,ahing government cost = $223,500 + 2 x 4 = $447,000 35 11) Kentucky (cont'd) General: spending limit = 15¢ x 2,235,000 ---$335,250 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost =:$335,250 x 2 =:$670,500 12) Louisiana: Qualifying (lesser of 20% of $239,900 or $125,000) = $47,980 Primary: spending limit = 10¢ x 2,399,000 = $239,900 2 candidates qualified - matching government cost = $239,900 + 2 x 4 = $479,800 General: spending limit = 15¢ x 2,399,000 = $359,850 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost =:$359,850 x 2 :: $719,700 13) Maine: Qualifying (lesser of 2[3%of $68,900 or $12!5,000) = $25,000 Primary: spending limit = 10¢ x 689,000 = $68,900 4 cmadidates qualified - matching government cost = $125,000 + 2 x 4 = $250,000 General: spending limit = 15¢ x 689,000 = $103,350 or $175,000 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost = $175,000 x 2 := $350,000 14) Massachusetts: Qualifying (lesser of 20% of $400,600 or $125,000) = $80,120 Primary: spending limit = 10¢ x 4,006,000 = $400,600 2 candidates quat[fied - matching government cost := $400,600 x 2-- 2 = $400,600 General: spenMing limit = 15¢ x 4,006,000 = $600,900 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost = $600,900 x 2 = $1,201,800 15) Michigan: Qualifying (lesser of 20% of $:592,200 or $125;,000) = $118,440 Primary: spending hmit = l0¢ x 5,922,000 = $592,200 no candidates qualified government cost = 0 General: spending limit = JI5¢ x 5,922,000 = $888,300 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost = $888,300 x 2 = $1,776,600 16) Minnesota: Qualifying (lesser of 20% of $1257,500 or $125,000) = $51,500 Primary: spending limit = 10¢ x $2,575,000 = $257,500 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost = $257,500 + 2 x 2 = $257,500 General: spending limit = 15¢ x 2,575,000 = $386,250 2 candidates qualified _full amount government cost = $386,250 x 2 = $772,500 17) Mississippi: Qualifying (lesser of 20% of $145,300 or $125,000) = $29,060 Primary: spending limit = 10¢ x 1,453,000 = $145,300 4 candidates qua!lifted - matching government cost = $145,300 + 2 x 4 = $290,600 General: spending limit = 15¢ x 1,453,000 = $217,950 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost = $217,950 x 2 = $435,900 131 36 18) Montanta: Qualifying Primary: General: 19) Nebraska: Qualifying (lesser of 20% of $104,200 Primary: General: 20) New Hampshire: Qualifying Primary: General: 21 ) New Jersey: (lesser of 20% of $47,400 or $125,000) = $25,4)00 spending limit = 10¢ x 474,000 = $47,41)0 or $I 25,00(} 4 candidates qualified - matching government cost = $125,000 + 2 x 4 = $250,000 spending linfit = 15g x 474,000 = $71,100 or $175,000 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost = $175,000 x 2 = $350,000 Qualifying Primary: General: New Mexico: Qualifying Primary: General: (lesser of 20% of $503,000 or $125,000) = $1CI0,600 spending limit = 10g x $5,030,000 = $503,000 4 candidates qualified - matctfing government cost = $503,000 + 2 x 4 = $ ,006,000 spending limit = 15¢ x 5,030,000 = $754,500 2 candidates qualified - full amount North Carolina: Qualifying Primary: General: 132 cost = 5754,500 x 2 = $1,50%000 (lesser of 20% of $69. 100 or $125,000) = :¢25,000 spending limit = 10g x 691,0(}0 = 569,100 or $125,000 4 candidates qualified - matc?dng government cost = $125,000-2 x 4 = $250,000 spending limit = 15_fx 691,000 = $103,650 or $175,000 2 candidates qualified - full amount government 23) :: $25,000 (lesser of 20% of $53,100 or $125,000) = $25,000 spending lim, t = 10g x 531,000 = $53,100 or $125,001) 2 candidates qualified - matclfing government cost = $125,000 + 2 x 2 = $L25,000 spending limit = 15¢ x 531,C,00 = $79,650 or $175,001) 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost = $175,000 x 2 = $350000 government 22) or $125,000) spending limit = 10¢ x 1,042,000 = $10%200 or $125,000 4 candidates qualified - matcZaing government cost = $125,200 + 2 x 4 = $250,000 spending limit = 15¢ x 1,042.000 = $15_;,300 or $175,000 2 candidates qualified - full a mount government cost = $1'75,000 x 2 = $350000 cost = $175,000 x 2 = $350,300 (lesser of 20%) of $354,100 or $125,000) :: $70,820 spending limit = 10¢ x 3,541,000 = $354.100 4 candidates qualified - matching government cost = $354,100 + 2 x 4 = $708,200 spending lirni't = 15¢i x 3,541,1)00 = $351 150 2 candidates qualified .. full amount government cost = $531,150 x 2 = $1,06 ._,300 37 24) Oklahoma: Qualifying (lesser of 20% of $183,200 or $125,0001 -- $36,640 Primary: spending limit = 10¢ x 1,832,000 = $813,200 4 candidates qualified - matching government cost =:S183,200 + 2 × 4 = $366,400 General: spendinglimit = 15¢ x 1,832,000 :=$274,800 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost =:$274,800 x 2 =: $549,600 25) Oregon: Qualifying (lesser of 20% of $153,200 or $1125,0001 = $30,640 Primary: spending _imit = 10¢ x 1,532,000 = $153,200 4 candidates qualified - matching government cost =:$153,200 + 2 x 4 = $306,400 General: spending limit = 151 x 1,532,000 = $229,800 2 candidates qualified - full. amount government cost --: $229,800 x 2 :: $459,600 26) Rhode Island: Qualifying (lesser of 20% of $67,700 or $125,0001 = $25,000 Primary: spending limit = 10¢ x $677,000 :: $67,700 or $125,000 no candidates qualified government cost :: 0 General: spending limit = 15¢ x $677,000 :: $101,550 or $175,000 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost :: $175,000 x 2 :: $350,000 27) South Carolina: Qualifying (lesser of 20% of $177,500 or $125,000) = $35,500 Primary: spending limit = 10¢ x 1,775,000 = $177,500 2 candidates qualified - matching government cost = $177,500 -3 2 x 2 = $177,500 General: spending limit = 15¢ x 1,775,000 = $266,250 2 candidates qualiified - full amount government cost = $266,250 x 2 :: $532,500 28) South Dakota: Qualifying (lesser of 20% of $45,400 or $125,0001 = $25,000 Primary: spending limit = 10¢ x 454,000 = $45,400 or $125,000 4 candidates qualified - matching government cost = $125,000 + 2 x 4 = $250,000 General: spending limit = 15¢ x 454,000 = $68,100 or $1751000 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost = $175,000 x 2 := $350,000 29) Tennessee: Qualifying (lesser of 20% of $279,900 or $125,0001 = $55,980 Primary: spending limit = 10¢ x 2,799,000 = $279,900 4 candidates qualified - matching government cost :=$279,900 + 2 x 4 = $559,800 General: spending limit = 15¢ x 2,799,000 = $419,850 2 candidates qualified - full amount gow:rnmemt cost :=$419,850 x 2 = $839,700 30) Texas: Qualifying (lesser of 20% of $'778,500 or $125,000) = $125,000 Primary: spending hmit = 104 x 7,785,000 = $778,500 2 candidates qualified - matching government cost := $778,500 x 2 - 2 = $778,500 General: spending limit = ][5¢ x 7,785,000 = $1,167,750 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost = $1,167:,750 x 2 = $2,335,500 28-517--74---6 133 38 31) Virginia: Qualifying (lesser of 20% of $324,300 or $125,000) = $64,860 Primary: spending limit = 10¢ x 3,243,000 = $324,300 no candidates qualified government cost = 0 General: spending limit = 15¢ x 3,243,000 = $486,450 2 candidates qualified = full amount government cost = $486,450 x 2 = $972,900 32) West Virginia: QUalifying (lesser of 20°I,of $1:22,800 or $125,000) = $25,000 Primary: spending limit = 10¢ x 1,228,000 = $122,800 or $125,000 no candidates qualified government cost = 0 General: spending limit = 15¢ x 1,22_,000 = $18 _,,200 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost = $184,20C, x 2 = $36_,,400 33) Wyoming: Qualifying (lesser of 20% of' $23,400 or $125,000) = $25,000 Primary: spending limit = 10¢ x 234,C00 = $23,430 or $125,000 2 candidates qualified - matching government cost = $125,00G + 2 x 2 = ! 125_000 General: spending limit = 15¢ x 234,000 = $35,100 or $175,000 2 candidates qualified - full amount government cost = $175,000 x 2 = $35£,000 TOTALPRIMARY TOTAL GENERAL GRAND TOTAL SENATE 134 $10,170,700 23,929,700 $34,100,,_00 39 CtlANGES IN EXISTING I_AW In compliance with subsection 4 of rule XXIX of the Standing RUles of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill S. 3044 as reported by the Committee on Rules and Administration, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed ill black brackets, new matter is l_rinted in italic, and existing law ill whic]h no change is proposed is shown in roman): COMMUNICATIONS (47 U.S.C. ACT OF 1934 2,15, 317) § 315. Candidates for public office; facilities; rules (a) If any licensee shall permit any person who is a legally qualified candidate for any public office, otlter titan Federal electi_.'e o_ce (ineluding the o_ce of Vice President), to use a broadcastin_ station, he shall afford equal opportunities to :all other such candidates for that office in the use of such broadcasting station: Pro_?ided, That such licensee shall have no power of censorship ow_r the inaterial broadcast under the provisions of this; section. No obligation is imposed upon any licensee to allow the use of its station by any such candidate. Appearance by a legally qualified candidate on any-(1) bona fide newscast, (2) bona fide news interview, (3) bona fide documentary (if the appearance o[ the candidate is incidental to the presentation of the subject or subjects covered by the news documentary), or (4) on-the-spot coverage of bona fide news events (includint_ but not limited to political conventions and activities incidental thereto), shall not be deemed to be use of a broadcasting station within the meaning of this subsectiorf. Nothing in the foregoing sentence shall be construed as relieving broadcasters, in connection with the presentation of newscasts, news interviews, news documentaries, and on-thespot coverage of news events, from the obligation imposed upon them under this chapter to operate in the public interest and to afford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views on issues of public importance. (b) The charges made for the use of any broadcasting station [by any person] by or on behalf of any person wh ° is a legally qualifieii candidate for any public office in connection with his Campaign for nomination for election, or election, to such office shall[ not exceed .... (1) during the forty-five days preceding the date of a primary or primary runoff election and during the sixty days preceding the date of a general or special election in which such person is a candidate, the lowest unit charge of the station for the 'same class and amount of time for the same period.; and (2) at any other time, the charges made for comparable use of such station by other users thereof. £ (c) No station licensee may make any charge for the use of suc]h station by or on behalf of any legally qualified candidate for Federal elective office (or for nomination to ,tach office) unless such candidate 135 40 (or a person specifically author![zed by such candi date in wrid :_g to do so) certifies to such licensee in writing that the payment of suci:t cha]:'_e will not violate any limitation specified in paragraph (1), (!i!), or (3) of section 10_(a) of the Campaign Communications Refolml Act, whichever paragraph is applicable.] (c) No station licensee may make any charg_ /or the use o.f s,,teh station by ov o_t bel_.al/ of az_y legally (]_talified candidate /o_, no¢:,_,i_,ation fo_ _election, or for election, to Federal elective o_ce _:i_i!,ress s'_tch candidate (or a person specifically aztthoz,;zed t,y 6_uch canal?date in writi**g to do so) certifies _o such licensee i,_ ,writ_!n.g thaz_the ?:aymcnt o/such cl_arge _,ill not exceed f:l_elimit o,n,expc_diP,,_res ap?:,l:_:cableto that candidate under section 504 of the ,?ederai Ei'.ectio_ U,'._.v_,pa_;gn Act of 1971, or unde/' section 614 o./title f3, United States Uode. r(d) a State by law and expressly---I-(l) has provided that a l)rimary or oti!_er election for a.ny office of such State or of a political subdivision thereof i:i_subject to this subsection, I'(2) has specified a limitation upon total expenditurc_!_ for the use of broadcasting stations on behalf of tlc candidacy of each legally qualified candidate in such election, I' (3) has provided in any such law an unequivocal expression of intent to be bound by the provisions of this sabsection, a.n_t I' (4) has stipulated that l:he amount of such limitation shall r,ot exceed the amount which would be determined for such ,_lection under section ]04(a) (1) (B) or 104(a) (2': (B) (wMci!:ever is applicable) of the Campaign Communications Reform Act had such election been an election for a Federal el ective o_ce ,:::rnomination thereto: [.then no station licensee may make any ct'arge for the use of' swh si:ation by or on behalf of any legally qualified cand!date in such _lectir)n unless such candidate (o}' a person specifically authorized !)y such candidate in writing to do so) certifies to such licensee in wr:it:.in.gtl_at the payment of such charge will not violate such State ]im!ii:atio_:,..] (d) I/a State by law imposes a limitation upo_ the amov_i.:_wh_ich a legally qualified candidate/or _wminat:ion for election's,, or ?or electioot, to public off,ce (other than Federal elective o;_ce) wit)it,in t?lat State may spe_d in covtnection with his campai_Tn for such,. :,wm,iz,atio_ or t_is campaign for election, then no statio<_ licensee _,',_:lyv_o'.ke any charge for the use of such statio_g by or on beh:df of sue,5 c_i::adidc,te unless su.ch candidate (or a person sveci]_;cally a_thorized in writi_,zg by him, to do so) certifies to such licehsee :in writing that ti_e f:,ayme:_t of such charge will _ot _,iolate that li'_aitation. (e) Whoever wil]fully and knowingly violates the proviz!dons of subsection (c) or (d) of this section shall be pun!shed by a fLr,-_not to exceed $5,000 or imprisonment ]!or a period not tc exceed five :i;ears, or both. The provisions of sections 501 through 503 of this Act shall not app!_, to violators of either such subsection. (f) For the purposes of this section: (A) The term "broadcasting statJ:on' includes a con::_mun!ity antenna television system. (B) The term "licensee" and "station licensee" when us_d wiith respect to a community antenna te]Levision system, rrm:ms the operator of such system. 136 41 (C) The term "Federal elective office" means the office of Presi-dent of the United States, or of Senator or Representative in, or Resident Commissioner or Delegate to, the Congress of the United[ States. (2) For purposes of subsections (c') and (d), the term "legally qual-. tried candidate" means any person _Tho (A) meets tile qualifications prescribed by the applicable laws to hold the office for which he is _t_ candidate and (B) is eligible under applicable State law to be vote(][ for by the electorate directly or by means of delegates or electors. (g) The Commission shall prescribe appropriate rules and regu-lations to carry out the provisions of this secl;ion. § 317. Announcement of payment fox b:roadcast (a) (1) All matter broadcast by _ny radio station for which any money, service or other valuable consideration: is directly or indirectly' paid, or promised to or charged or accepted by, the station so broad-casting, from any person, shall, at tile time the same is so broadcast,, be announced as paid for or furnished, as the case may be, by such ['person: Provided, That] person. If such matter is a political adver-. tisement soliciting funds for a candidate or a political committee, there shall be announced at the time of such broadcast a statement that a copy of reports filed by that person with the Federal Election Com.. mission is available from the Federal Election Commission, Washington, D.C., and the licensee shall not make any charge for any part of the costs of making the announceme_%t. The term "service or other valuable consideration" shall not include any service or property fur-ished without charge or at a nominal[ clmrge for use on, or in connec-tion with, a broadcast unless it is so furnished in consideration for an identification in a broadcast of any pe_ison, product, service, trade.mark, or brand name beyond an identification which is :reasonably related to the use of such service or property on the broadcast. (2) Nothing in this section shall preclude the Commission from requiring that an appropriate announcement shall be made at the time of the broadcast in the case of any political program or any pro-gram involving the discussion of any controversial issue for which any films, records, transcriptions, talent, scripts, or other material or serv-ice of any kind have 'been furnished:, without charge or at a nominal charge, directly or indirectly, as inducement to the broadcast of such program. (b) In any case where a report has been made to a radio station, a,; required by section 508 of this title, of circumstances which wouh![ have required an announcement under this section had the considera.tion been received by such radio station, an appropriate announcement shall be made by such radio station. (c) The licensee of each radio station shall exercise reasonable dili.gence to obtain from its employees, and from other persons with Whom it deals directly in connection with any program or program matter for broadcast, information to enable such licensee to make the announcement required by this section. (d) The Commission may waive the requirement of an announcement as provided in this section in any case or class of cases with respect to which it determines that the i_ublic interest, convenience, or necessity does not require the broadcasthlg of :such announcement. 137 42 (e) Each station lice_see shall maintain a record of a_,y 7;oi'itic:zl advertisement broadcast, together with the identification o/t)'i,_! person who caused it to be broadcast, for o; period of two years. :F)%_!: reco',_,g shall be available/or public inspection at reasonable t_ou_s. lei (f) The Commission shall prescribe appropriate rules an5 regxlations to carry out the provisions of this section. CAMPAIGN [TITLE COMMUNICATIONS I--CA3IPAIGN REFORM AC'i" C03r:_UNICATIONS SHORT TITLE [Src. 101. This title may be cited as the "Campaign tions Reform Act". Comr:nmic_- [DEFIN]_TIONS [SEc. 102. For purposes of this title.: [(1) The term "communications raedia" means brosd.:!as,;ing stations, newspapers, magazines, outdoor advertising' fa?ilities, and telephones; but. with respect to telephones, spendin,.[ or :!t,n expenditure shall be deemed to be spending o:: art expenditure £,:>r the use of communications media only if such _pendin. gm' _ xpen, Iiture is for the costs of telephones, paid telephonists, an._ aut> matic telephone equipment, used by a candid:_te for Feder[d elective office to communicate'w:ith potential vo';ers (exc].udiag any costs of telephones incurred by a volunteer for use of teh!phones by him). [ (,2) The term "bro_tdcasdno' station" has the same n,,,_ 5ng :_[s such term has under section 315 (f) of the Coramunieatiom! Act of 1934. [ (3) The term "Federal elective office" means the o:ffice o :!]?resi.dent; of the United States, or of Senator or [[ep]L'esentati v _ in..tn' Resident Commissioner or Deleqate to., the Congress of the United States (and for purposes of section 103 (b) such term ineh_des the office of Vice President). [114) The term "legally qualified candidate" means any pm_on who (A) meets the qualifications prescribed by the a'p];licaMe laws to hold the Federal elective office for which ihe is a cm:_didate, and (B) is eligible m'lder apph ,able State la'_v to be voted for ]::y the electorate directly or by' means of delegates or elect(m!, [ (5) The term "voting age population" me _ns residem, ]>opu] _tion, eighteen years of age and o] der. [,(6) The term "State" includes the District of Colum'l)ia and the CommonweMth of Puerl:o B[:ico. [MEDIA RATE AND REI,AU_D REQUIRE]_ENTS [SEc. 103. Note: Subsection (a) amended the (,ommunicaiil ns A:':t of 1934, which lis not affected bY repeal of [he Car:lpaign Conn::mnic :t.tions Reform Act. [ (b) To the extent that any ]person sells',space !n any news p q)er or magazine to a legally qualified candidate for Fe&_ral elective (:,race, or nomination thereto, in connection wit_L such candidate's campai_ for 138 43 nomination for, or election to, such. office, tlhe charge,,; made for th.e use of such space in connection with his campaign shall not exceed the charges made for comparable use of such space for other 15urposes. I=LD/IITATIOXS OF EXPENDITURES FOR USE OF COM3fUNICATIOI_S I_EDIA I,SEc. 104. (a)(1) Subject to paragraph (4), no [legally qualified candidate in an election (other than a primary or primary runoff election)[ (A)fora spend Federal may]for theelective use of office cC,mmunic,_tions media on behalf of his candidacy in such election a total amount in excess of the greater of-[(i) 10 cents multiplied by the voting age population ('m certified, unqer. .Paragraph (5)) of the. geographical area in which the election for such office is held, or I' (ii) $50,000 or I'(B) spend for the use of broadcast stations on behalf of his candidacy in such election a total amount in excess of 60 per centum of the ac,count determined under subparagraph (A) wit;ih respect to such election. I' (2) N o legally qualified candidate in a primary election for nomination to a Federal elective office, other than President, may spend .... I,(A) for the useof communications media, or ['(13) for the use of broadcast stations, [on behalf of his candidacy in such election a total amount in excess of the amounts determined under paragraph (1) (A) or (B), respectively, with respect to the general election for such office. For purposes of this subsection a primary runoff election shall be treated as a separate primary election. I-(3) (A) No person who is a candidate for presidential nomination may spend:[ (i) for the use in a State of comnmnications media, or [ (ii) for the use in a State of broadcast stations, ['onexcess behalf ofof the his candidacy _or presidential a total amount in amounts ,xhich would havenomination been determined unde r paragraph (1) (A) or (B), respectively, had he been a candidate for election for the office of Senator from such State (or for the office of Delegate or Resident Commissioner in the case of the District of Columbia or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico). I'(B) For purposes of this paragraph (3), a person is a candidate for presidential nomination if he makes (or any other person makes on his behalf) an expenditure for the use of any communications medium on behalf of his candidacy for any political party's nomination for election to the office of President. He shall be considered to be such a candidate during the period--I,(i) beginning on the date on which he (or such other person) first makes such an expenditure (or, if later, January I of tlhe year in which the election for the office of Presid(mt is held), and ['(ii) ending on the date on which such political party nominates a candidate for the office of iS'resident. ['For purposes of this title and of section 315 of the Communications Act of 1984, a candidate for presidential nomination shall be considered a legally qualified candidate for public office. 139 44 [(C) The Comptroller General Shall prescribe re_gulatiom under which any expenditure by a candidate for presidel'_tial nominat Lon for the use in two or more States of a communications medium shall be attributed to such candidate's expenditure limitation in e_Lch such State, based on the number of persons in such State who c_n :masm[ably be expected to be reached by such comrnunicati_ns medittm. [(4) (A) For' purposes of subpa-ragraph (B): [(i) The term ;price index means the average over a ca tenda.'r year of the Consumer Price Index (all items--United Stat _s city average) published monthly by the Bureau (,f Labor Sta::istic',_;. [(ii) The. term "base period" means the calendar ye:_r 11.970. [ (B) At the beginning of each calendar year (commencing in 197'2)., as there becomes available necessary data from the Bureau of Labor: Statistics of the Department of Labor, the, Secretary of Labo:l' shall certify to the Comptroller General and publish in the Federal R,;_g'iste [' the per centmn difference between th.e price index fo]: the ]?2 I_:tonth3 preceding the beginning of such calendar year and the price imi. ex fo:' the base period. Each amount determined under }?aragraph (ii)(A) (i) and (ii) shall be increased by such per centum difference. Eac]_. amount so increased shall be the amount in effect for such calendar' year. [(5) Within 60 days after the date of enactlnent of this Ac:, anti during the first week'of Jaamary in 11973and evmy subseque}lrt: ?ar. the Secretary of Commerce shall certify to the Comptroller (.'_,mera[ and publish in '[he _ ederal Register' an estimate of the voth':.F age population of each State and congressional district for the las"; :alen-. dar year ending before the date of certification. [ (6) Amounts spent for the use of communications media or_ behal:t' of any legally quMified candidate for Federal ele:tive office (or i'o].' nomination to such office) shall_ for the purposes of this subsection. be deemed to have been spent by such candidate. Amounts spe:ttt fo_ the use of communications media by or on beht.lf of any h;:,gally qualified candidate for the office of Vice President of the [nited States shall, for the purposes of l;his section, be de_med to hay(! beert spent by the candidate for the office of President of the United :!::;t.ates_ with whom he is running. [(7) For purposes of this section and section 3-"5 _L(c) of 1;he Cram... munications Act of 1934-[(A) spending and charges for the. use of communie_:tions medi_ include not only the direct char_es of the media bu', also, · . C/_ . . agents commmsmns allowed . the a_,ent by the :nedm, and · [ (B) any expenditure for the use of any communications .Ined.ium by or on behalf of the candidacy o1! a candid_te for Federal elective office (or nominatio_x thereto) shall b3 charged a_;ai[nst the ex:penditure limitation under this subsection applicable i:o the election in which such medium is used. [(b) No person may make any charge for the use by or' on b,d:mlf of any legally qualified candidate for Federal elective office (c,c for nomination to such office) of any newspaper, ma_'azine, or ouldoor advm*ising, facility,, unless, such. 'candidate.: . .(or a i}er_on_, sp m:ifi"al]_..y a,uthonzed by such candidate in wmtmg to do so) certifies in. writing to the person making such charge that the payment cf such chtxi'_j_i,will not violate, paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of subsection (a), whi'.'&_ever is applicable.] 140 45 NOTE: Subsection which is not affected Ce) amended the Communications by the repeal Act of 1934, of tZhis section. [REGULATIONS [SEc. 105. The Comptroller General shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out sections 102, 103 Cb), 104(a), and 104(b) of this Act. PENALTIES [SEc. 106. Whoever willfully and. knowing'ly violates any provision of section 103 Cb), 104(a), or 104Cb) or any regulation under section 105 shall be punished by a fine of not more than $5,000 or by imprisonment of not more than five years, or both.] THE FEDERAL ELECTION TITLE III---D_scLosunE 0r CAMPAIGN FEDERAL ACT OF 1971 CA3II:AIGI_' FUXDS DEFINITIOXS SEC. 301. When used in this title-(a) %lection' means (1) a general, special, tion, (2) a convention or caucus of a political primary, or runoff elecparty held to nominate a candidate, (3) a primary election held for the selection of delegates to a national nominating convention of a political party, and (4) a primary election held for the expression of a preference for the non:dnation of persons for election to the office of President £, and (5) the election of delegates to a constitutional convention for proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States']; Cb) "candidate" means an inclividual who seeks nomination for election, or election, to Federal office, whether or not such individual is elected, and, for purposes of this pa_agr_tph, an individual shall be deemed to seek nomination for elect:ton, or electicm, if he has (1) taken the action necessary under the law of a State to qualify himself for nomination :for election, or election, to Federal office, or (2) received contributions or made expenditures, or has given his consent for any other person to receive contributions or make expenditures, with a view to bringing about his nomination for election, or election, to such office; (e_ "Federal office" means the office of President or Vice President of the Umted States; or of Senator or Representative m, or Delegate or Resident Commissioner to, the Congress of the United States; r(d] "pohtmal' ' , committee" means_ an. y. committee,, association,, . oro'rg'anization which accepts contributions or :makes expen(htures during a calendar year in an aggregate amount exceeding $1,o00 ;] Cd) "political committee" _ans-(1) a_y committee, persons which receives club_ asso_i:atio_, an!,/ contributions or other group of or moires expendi- 141 46 tures during a cale_dar year 'i_,_an aggregate, amount exceedi,ng $1,000; (2) any national co_n_ittee, a,._ociation, or organizatio,:,,_ of a political party, any _5'tate a_',liate or subsidiary of a _a_i!:_ t'ional ;polit_'cal party, and a_,y Sto_te centrai: co_r_m_ttee o/,.:_ political party; and (3) any committee, associazlion_ or organization eng'agze,..:t in the administration of a separate segregated fu,_d describe,.:l in section 610 of title 18, United' _*tates Uode ; (e) "contribution" means-(1) a gift, subscription (i_whtding any assess_nez,_t, fee, o.r membership dues), loan, advance, or deposit of money or any.. thing of value, made for the purpose of influencing the nomination for election, or election, of any person to Federal of_ rice or :is a presidential or vice-presidentiM elector, or for the purpose of influencing the res:alt of a primary held for 1;h,:_ selection of delegates to _ national nominating convention o::_ a political party or for the expression of a preference for the :nomination of persons for election to the office cf President, ['or for the purpose of influencing the election of delegates, t,::'_ a constitutional convention for proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United SLates] or for the p_.rpose o? financi_g any operatioz_,$ of a .political co_iwnittee (other th a_,',,_ a paymer_t v,ade or obliyation _hcurred b_/a corT,oration or ,:_ labor organization ,which, under _he provisions of the lgs;_ paragraph of section 610 o/ _itle 18, United _tat_es (7ode, would _ot constitute a contribution by z':hat corporation o,.r labor union), or for the pttrpo_,_eof payi_i,g, at any time_ an_7 debt or obligation kwurred by a cavdidate or a political corn mit_ee 'in convection with any carr_paign for no_vination fo:,.' election, or for election, to Federal ol_ce ; l,(_) a contract, promise, or ag'reement, wh_ther or no'II.: legally enforceable, to make a contribution for any such pur pose; l-(3) a transfer between political committees;] (3) fu_ds receiwd by a political committe_ which, arc transferred to that committee fro_% another political com.. mittee; l' (4)2] (3) the payment, by any person other than a cgndi... .(late or political committee; of compensation for the persona] services of another person which are rendered to suc.h candi.. (late or committee without charge for any such parpose; and [(5)] (_) notwithstanding the foregoing meanings o:1!! "contribution", the word shall no_ be construe& to includ(_ services provided without compensation by individuals vol... . unteering a portion or all of their time or, belha]t of _ candi-.. (late' or political committee; I' (f) "exp,enditure" means-[ (1) a purchase, payment, d_istribution., loan, vdvance, qe... posit, or gift of money or anything of value, m ade_ for th(_ purpose of influencing the nominai!_ion for election, or dec-.. tion, of any person to Federal office, or as a pres!dential and. vice-presidential elector, or for _Lhepurpose of influencing thc!,., 142 47 result of a primary held for the selection of delegates to a national nominating con;ention of a political party or for the' expression of a preference for the nomination of persons foi' election to the office of President, or for the purpose of in-fiuencing the election of delegates to a constitutional conven.tion for proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States; [(2) a contract, promise, or ag:reement, whether or not legally enforceable, to make a:n expenditure, and [(3) a transfer of funds between political committees;'.] (f) "expenditure"-(1) means a purchase, payment, d_tribution_ loan, advance, deposit, or gift of money or anything of value, made for the purpose or-(A) influencing the nomination for election, or th,e election, of any person to Federal office, or to the office of presidential and vice-preside,._;tial electoe; (B) influencing the result o)i a primary election held for the selection of delegates z,o a national nominating convention of a poliScal party or for the expression of a preference/or the nomin_,tion o/persons for election to the office of President; ( U) fina_wing a_y operations of a political committee; or (D) paying, at any time, any debt or obligation incurred by a candidate or a political comzmittee in eom_ectiem with any campat;gn for nominatio_e for election, or for election, to Federal office; (2) means the transfer of funds by a political committee to another political com,mittee ; but (3) does _ot include-(A ) the value of services rendered by i.n£1ividuals wino volunteer fo work wit,hour cow_pensation on behalf of a candidate; or (B) any payment _ade or obligation incurred by a corporation or a labor organiza;_ion which, under the provisions of the last paragraph of section 610 of title 18, United States Code_ would not constitute an expenditure by that corporation or labor organization; [(g) "supervisory officer" means the Secretary of the Senate with respect to candidates for Sen'_tor; the Clerk of the }louse of Representatives with respect to candidates for Representatives in, 'or Delegate or Resident Commissioner to, the Congress of t]he United States; and the Comptroller General of the United States in any other case ;] (g) "CVommission '' means the Federai! Election Commission; th) "person" means an individual, partnership, committee, association, corporation, labor organization, and any other organization or group of persons; [_nd] ti) State means each State, of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonweal[th of Puerto Rico, and any terr:itory or possession of the United States[.]; 143 48 (j) "identification" _ean,_-(1) in the c_e of an i_dividual, his fu;'l name a_d ;._e fu,!l address of his 2_'i_wipal place of residence: a_d (2) in the case of a_y other perso_t, th_ fo;ll name o:;_.da6_!-dress of that persor_; (k ) "nationa_ com_nittee' rr_eans the duly constituted o;2,;aniza-tion which, by virtue o/the bylaws of a political party is' ?espo_'i-. sibel for the day-to-day operation of t/_at pe,litical ,vart:'_yat the _zational level, as detervdned by the Uo_r_mission; and (1) "politica_ party ,? means an c_ssociation, cov_nit:_ee, or o_ ganization which _.ominates a candidate for election to. o:,7 Fed-eral o_ce whose .name appears on t/he election ballot _ t/t e card,idate of that association, committee, or organizc'.tio.._. ORGANIZATION OF POLITICAL CO_MI[_'WEES S_c. 302. (a) Every political comraittee shall have a chai.rm '::n an:] a treasurer. No contribution and no expenditure shall be acc%ted or made by or on behalf of a political committee at a lime when th,::re is _ vacancy !in the office of chairman or treasurer thereof. No exp,_l:_ditnre shall be :made for or on behalf of a political committee with(:_ulLthe authorization of its chMrman or treasurer, or their designated. ,,i_gent.._. (b) Every person who receives a contribution in excess of $10 fc,_:' a political committee shall, on demand of the treasurer, and :n an/ event within five days after receipt of such contribution, render to th _ treasurer a detailed account thereof, including the _mount [, th,_,nam:!_ and address (occupation and the principal place o:? business, if _ny)'] of the contribution and the identification of the person makin,:_- suCl,. contribution, and the date on which receiw_d. All funds of ;_ ]%,litical committee shall be segregated from, and may not b_ commingl,:_(! witl., any personal :funds of officers, members, or ._ssociates o:11suc]t committee. (c) It shall be the duty of the treasurer of a potitical commi !:t,_et,:l, keep a detailed and exact account, of-(1) all contributions made to or for such committee; (2) the [full name and mailing address (occupation al_d thi._ principal place of business, if any)'[ identification of ev,_i_r'y' per-son making a contribution in excess of $10, and the &:ute and[ amount thereof [;1 a**d, ifa person"s contributions _9.2:.egate more than 8100, the aecou_vt shall i_lude occu:patio_, ,.._._.dthe principal place of busi_ess (if any); (31) all expenditures made by or on behalf 9f such comrt:[l:tee ;: and (41) the [full name and. raailing address (occupatioia ai::td the principal place of business, )]:. an);)] identification of every )!)erso:t_. to whom any expenditure _s made, the date and amount tlmreo:_! and the name and address of, and office sought by:, each ea.:n,lidat,_!_ on whose behalf such expenditure was made. ed) It shall be the duty of the treasurer to obtain and keel:, a :rei ceipted bill, stating the particulars, for every ex]?enditure n mde b:i: or on behalf of a political committee in excess ,of $100 in amotmt, and for any such expenditure in a lesser amoun'b, if the aggregate amounl: of such expenditures to the same person during a cai[endar year e:_:ceeds 144 49 $100. The treasurer shall preserve all receipt,sd bills and accounts re.quired to be kept by this section for periods of time to be determine(![ by the [supervisory officer.'[ Commission. (e) Any political committee which sohcits or receives contributions or makes expenditures on behalf of any candidate that is not author.ized in writing by such candidate to do so shall include :_notice on the face or front page of all literature and advertisernents published irt connection with such candidate's campaign by such committee or on its behalf statin_o-that the committee is not authorized by such candidate and that such candidate is not responsible for the activities of such committee. [(f) (1) Any politicM committee shall inc]ude o:n the face or front Dale of all literature and advertisements soliciting funds the following notice: ["A cody of our report filed with the appropriate supervisory ofllcel: is (or will be) available for purchase fron_t the Superintenklent of I)ocuments, United States Government Printing ()fflee, Washin_on, D.C. 20402." [(2) (A) The supervisory officer shall compile and furnish to the Public Printer, not later than the last day of March of each year, an ammal report for each political committee which has filed a report with him under this title during the period from March 10 of the preceding calendar year through Jarmary 31 of the year in which such annual report is made available to the Public Printer. Each such annual report shall contain-[(i) a copy of the statement; of organization of the political committee required under 'section 308, together with any amendments thereto; and [(ii) a copy of each report filed by such committee tinder section 304 from March 10 of the preceding year through January 31 of the year in which the annual report is so furnished to the Public Printer. [(t3) the Pubhc t tinter shall make copras of such annual reports available for sale to the public by the Superintendent of Documents as soon as practicable after they are received from the supervisory officer.'[ REGISTRATION OF CANDIDATES AND POLITICAL C03_MITTEES: STATE3_ENTS SEc. 803. (a) Each candidate sJ_all, within ten days after the date or; whic_ he has qualified Uader Sta;_e law a8 a ca_lidate, or on which l_e, or any perso_ autl_orized by him to do so, ]_c_ received a contribution or n_ade a_, expenditure in co_nection with his campaign or for the purpose of preparing to undertake his campaign,? file with the Uom,raissio_ a registration stateraent in such form as the Uoram?ssion _nay prescwibe. The statement shall include-(1) 'the ide_tification o.f the candidate, and any individual, political committee, or other perso_ he ,_as authotgzed to receive eontributi°_s or make expendi_ures on his behalf in connection with his campaign; (2) the ide_tifica, tio_ of his campa ig_ depositories, together with the title and number of each account at each such depository which is to be used in connection with his ca_r_paign,and safety 1,45 5O deposit box to be used in connection ._hevewith, a,_ the ¢[entii_L, catio_ of eac]_ i_divid_al autho'_'ized bi,/ him to make a._y e;_.?)end.iture or witl_drawal f._vv_ such accou,_t or box; _wa; (3) such, additio_al _eleva_.t i'nfo_.nzation as the Coz_:,,iisdc% may require. [ (a)'l (b) [Each political connnittee which anticipates re,_e:ivirl_g contributions or maki:rlg expm_d]tures duri:_g the calendar 3;e_::__:', in an aggregate amount exceeding $:',000 shall file with the suI::,e:'_;isoxy officer a statement of organization, within ten days after :its'.or_i::aniz:,.tion or, :if later', ten days after ,[he {late on whict: it has ilnfc,r:-natic, n which causes the committee to antic![pate it will r_ceive contri]:,'{ltio_:,s or make expenditures in excess of $1,000.] The treasurer _:,[ e._, t} political corr_mittee shall fi_e witch t_e Uommission a stateme:;,_.!'.6.f o,; cla,_,izatio_ within ten. days after _ thc date on whi.'h ?he co_,_.m.: _!ee .i's organized. Each such committee in existen._e at th:_ date of er_}_.'tmel_ of [this Act] the Federal Election Ua_,paign 2_et A.mendm,_ts o)_ 10'_¢ shall file a statement of organization with tlhe I['supervJs,:,:t'y o_!ricer] Commission at such t,ime as [he] it prescril)es. I[(b)] (e) The statement of organization shall b_ i._ s_wh_/o_:_-ic,_ the _om missio_ sh all p¢_'e._c,'ibe,and _,_]_ ali include .... (1) the name and address of the committee; (5) the names, addresses, and relati{;nships of aflqliate(I ,:,t' cm-nectcd organizati()ns; [ (3) the area, scope, or jurisdiction of the committee ;] (3) Ute geographic area ov 7)oNtical ju'_isd_ction withi:, ?d_ici'_,_ :'he committee win o.pe._ate_ and ,2 ge¢_eral desr._4ption o.f th ':::6,_v-. m.ittee's authority/a_d act.h_.ities : (4) the name, address, and position of the custodian (:_}books and :accounts; (5) the name, address, and position of other principal officer:5, including officers and nmmbers of the finance committe_e, !_ any; (6) the name, address, office sought, and party affiliate ('.f (A 1 each candidate Whom the committee is suppo]-ting, and (']!!;) 'my other individual, if any, whom the committe,_ is supporl:;i_:_.: :fo_: nomination for election, or election, to any public office .,v]:__ew_r :; or, i_ the committee is _upporting the entire ticket of a,ny [)arty._ the name of the party; (7) a statement whether the committee is a continuing; one.; (8) the disposition of residual funds which will be made in th_!_ event of dissolution; £ (9) a listing o_ all banks, safety deposit boxes, or other :t_'posi. tories used ;] (9) the name a_d address o/the campaign depositories i_.,.'edby' that ,committee, togethe_ _wit], the title and _.u_nbev of each ,_,:co_:_?, a_d safety deposit box _.sed b._ that committee at each dep.o,!;ito:,_'. a_d the identification of each individu,ag au.tho_gzed to rnaii:_wi_h._ drawals or payments o_tt of such accouni_ or box ,' (10) a statement of the reports required to be filed by th_!:c:om.. mittee with State or locM officers, and, if so_ th, munes, addve_sses, and positions of such persons; and (11) such other information as slhM1 'be requ:ired by the }_!.nper.. visory officer.] Uommission. 146 51 [(c)](d) Any change in inforraation previously :submitted in a statement of organization shall be reported to the [supervisory officer] Commis,]ion within a ten-day period following the change. [(d)](e) Any committee which, after having filed one or more statements of organization, disbands or determines it will no longer receive contributions or make expenditures during the calendar year in an aggregate amount exceeding $1,000 shall so notify the [supervisory officer.] Commission. REPORTS [BY POLITICAL C05fSHTTEES AND CANDIDATES] SEc. 30& (a) (1) Each treasurer of a political committee supporting a candidate or candidates [for elec,tion]] for ?_,omination for. election, or.for. election_ to Federal office.,and each candidate [for election] for. nomination for. election, or.for election, to such office,,shall file with the [appropriate supervisory officer] (7om_n,issio_; reports of receipts and expenditures on forms to be prescribed or approved by [him.] ;it. [Such reports shah be filed on the tenth (lay of March, June, and September, in each year, and on the fifteenth and fifth days next preceding the date on which an election is held, and also by the thirtyfirst day of January..] Such reports shall be filed on the tenth, day of Apt.il, July, and October of each year, on the tenth day preceding a_z election, a_d on the last da w of January of each year. Not withstandi_g the preceding sentence, the reports required by that sen;tence to be filed during April, July_ and October by or. relat_ing to a candidate during a year in which no Federal election is held in which he is a candidate, may be filed on the twentieth day of each month. Such reports shall be complete as of such (late as the [supervisory officer_] Commission may prescribe, which shall not be less than five days be:fore the date of filing[, except that any contribution of $5.0'90 or more received after the last report is filed prior to the election shall be reported within forty-eight hours after its receipt.] If the per.son mak_;_,9 any anonymous contribution is subsequently identified, the identification of the contributor shall be reported to the Commission with i,_ the r.eporting period within which he is identified. (2) Upon a request made by a Presidential candidate or a political committee which oper.ates in _nore than one State, or. upon its own motion, the Uommission may waiw,' the r.epor.ti,ng dates (other thom January 31) set for.th in paragraph (1), and r.equir.e i_stedd that such candidates or political committees file r.epor.ts not less frequently thom monthly. The Uommission _nay not r.equire a Preside,ntial candidate or a political committee operating i,, more titan o_t,eState to file mor.e than eleven repot.ts (not counting any report to be filed on Janu,ar?/31) during a_y calendar, year. [f t:[e Commission acts on its ow,r_ motion under this paragraph with respect to a candidate or. a political comcr_ittee, that candidate or committee' may obtain judicial review in aceor.dance with the provisions of chapter. 7 of title 5. United States Code. (b) ]Each report Under this section shall disclose-(1) the amount of cash on hand at the beginning of the reporting period; (2) the full name and mailing address (occupation and the principal place of business, if any)-of each person who has made 147 52 one or nqtore contributions to or for such cmnmitt._e or candi,::t_,te (including the purchase of tickets for events such aa dinne:s, luncheons, rallies, and similar fundraising events) witl._in t.._m calendar year in an aggregate amount or value in excess of $1(,0, together with the amount and date of such contr[bwfions; (3) the total sum of individual contributions :na(te to or :l!:.,r such committee or candidate during the reporting period and ]:lot reported under paragraph (2); (4) the name and address of each political comIaittee or ca:m:[![-date from which the reporting committee or the camdidate :re-ceived, or to which that commit,tee or candidate made, _.l_y [ra:l:s-fer of funds, together with the amounts and. dates of ali transfe[ s :; (5) each loan to or from any person within the calendar vE!,_r in an aggregate amount or vMue in excess of S100, together {v:i-1_ the full names and mailing addresses (occupations and the pr:. n-. cipal place of business, if any) of the [lender and endorser!!,] I le.nder, e_do.rsers, and g_tava._.tor_,_, if any, arm the d_te aJxd amc, u _:_.t of such loans; (6) the total amount of proceeds from (A) the sa!lc of tick_!,ts to each dinner, luncheon, rally, and other fundraising ewi!_r_t: (B) mass collections made at such events; :_nd (C) sales of ite:i _s such as political campaign pins, but'tons, badges, flags, emblen s? hats. banners, literature, and similar materiMs; (7) each contribution, rebate, refund, or other receipt in ex,:ess of $100 not otherwise listed undar paragraphs ('2', through (f;t; (8) the total sum of all receipts by or for such commitl_ee )r candidate during the reporting period; (9) the [full name and mailing address (occupation and ti_e principal[ place of business, if any)] identification, of each. pers,:m to whom expenditures have been made by such comraittee or ,Em behalf of such committee or candidate within the calendar ye:tr in an aggregate amount or value in excess; of $1C.0, the amora _., date, and purpose of each such expenditure and the name :_,:.d address of, and office sought by, each candidate on whose tetra l.f such expenditure was made: (10) t]he [full name and' mailing address (occupation and tim principal place of business, if any)] identificaSon of each. t;,ers,'.m to whom an axpenditure fo,' personal services, salaries, and reh_bursed expenses in excess of $100 has been made, and which is n)t otherwise reported, including the amount, date, fnd purpose _>f such expenditure; (11) the total sum of expenditures made by such o>mmittee >r candidate during the calendar year; (19) the amount and nature of debts and oblig:_tions owed. 'i:_y or to the committee, in such form as the [supe::visory ol ic ::']l Commission may prescribe and a continuous reporting of th,?:ir debts and obligations after the election at such periods a,s the [supervisory officerJ Uo_n.v_ission may require until such del:3,ts and obligations are extinguished, tog'ether with a ,_tatement a_s _o tl_.e circus;stances a_d conditions _nder w,hich any such deb;!'_or, obligation is extinguished ancl t],e consideration there/or; []a:n,:!: ] (13) s._h i_[ormat_ as the Uo_mission may req<,zirefor tae discloa_ure o/the _ature, amount, so_.vee, a_d desigr_at,ed._'ec_;p:ient 148 53 of any ear-marked_ encumbered, or restricted cont_gbution or other special fund; and [13] (14) such other information as shall be required by the [supervisory officer.] Uom/rrdssion. (c) [The reports required to be filed by subsection (a) shall be cumulative during the calendar year to which they relate, but where there has been no change in an item reporl:ed in a prevmus report during such year, only the amount need be carried forward.] The reports required to be filed by subse_tio_ (a) shall be cumulative du_ing the calendar year to which they _elate, a_d during such additional periods of time as the Uor_mission may require. If no contributions or expenditures have been accepted or expended during a calendar year, the treasurer of the political committee or candidate shall file a statement to that effect. (d) This section does not refuire a Member of Uo_wress to report, as contributions received or as expenditures made, the value of photo-. graphic, matting, or recording services furnished to him before the first day of January of the year preceding th e year in _which his ter,_, of o_ce expires if those serwces were furnisi_ed to him by the Senat, e Recording Studio, the House Recording Studio_ or by av_. individual whose pay is disbursed by the Secretary of t)_e Senate or the Clerk of the House of Representatives and who furn_ishes such services as his primary duty as an e_r_ployee of the Senate or House of Representa-. tires, or if such services were paid for by the Republican or Demoeratic Senatorial Uampaign Uomwittee, the Democratic National Uon-. gressional Uommittee, or the National Republican Uo_gressiona.l Uommittee. (e) Every person (other than a poliScal committee or candidate) who makes contributions or expenditures, ot,_er than by contribution to a political committee or candidate_ in an aggregate amount in excess of $100 within a calendar year shall file with the Uommission a statement co,_taining the i_formation recruited by this section. Statemengs required by this subsection shall be filed on theedates on Which reports by political committees are filed, but need _ot be cum,ulative. [REPORTS BY OTHER THAN POLITICAL CO_IITrEES /'SEc. 305. Every' person (other than a political committee or candidate) who makes contributions or expendil;ures_ other than by contribution to a political committee or candidate,, in an aggregate amount in excess of $100 within a calendar year shall file with the supervisory officer a statement containing the information required by section 304. Statements required by this section shall be filled on the dates on which reports by political committees are filed, but :need not be cumulative.] REQUIREMENT_ RELATING TO CAMPAIGN AD'VER.TI,SI2V_ Sro. 305. (a) No person shall cause any political advertisement to be published unless he furnishes to ti!e l_blisher of the advertisement his identification in writing_ toget]o_r with the identification of any person authorizing him to cause such put licat_on. (b) Any published political ad/vertisement _,_hallcontain a statement, in such fo_ as the Uommisio_ may prescribe, of the identification of the person au.thorizing the publicatio_, of that advertis6w_ent. 14.o 54 re) Any publisher who p_.blishes any politica_ ._dver'tiseme_'i._ s_a,i';l _nab_.tai_ such records as the Uomm_ission may prescri_e for a I:,.e::B_dof two years after the date of publication, sei_ting forth sucla ad,v.ertis(_ _nent a_d any material rdati_g to identification furnished to ,_im. i.:_ eo_ection therewith, and shall _9ermit. the public to inspect: o:_,,t cop:!/ those records at reason, able lwurs. rd) To the exte,_t that a.n.y person, sells space in a_y _ewspo:per or wagazine to a candidate for Federai'_ off'ce,, or _wz,ination _'_he:,:_to.i,,,'_ eon_ectitm with such candidate's cam.pa'_g._for · ' nomi_atio_, for,., ._:. retec.. -_' tio_ to, such o_',ce, the charges .made for the use oj such, spc_e _!_co,'i _ectio_ with his campaign shall _ot exceed the cbc ryes wade fo _ com-. parable use of such space for other pv, rposes_. 'Ie) Any po?itical cov_,v_,ittees)_all include o_ the face o_r]:ro_i:_:page of all literatu:re a_d advertisements solici;_in 9, co_tributiovz t,i'_eroi!'-. lowi.n,g notice: "A copy of o_.__ report filed with the Federal £_ectio_; (?o_n.v'd_,i-. sion 'is available /or purcl_se from the Federal: £lec_i6,v. Ucc! mission, Washi_wton _ D.U.' (f) As _tsed i_ this sectio_r_,the i_e,rm_(1) "political advertisemer6ts" mean_ any w,_tter advocat_i _!7 the electio_ or defeat of any candidate or otherwise seeking to i_!-. fiuence the outcov_e of a,n.y dection, bui_does _.o.t i.nchtde o:n:!tbon:_, fide _wws story (in.cl_dinq i_.terviews, commentaries, or othei_' worlcs prepared for a_nd p_i31ished by any _e,,,spaper, ma!':?azine., or other periodical publication the publication of which _,!,ork _!_' not paid for by av,y ca_dida_e_ politlca:_ committee, or ag_e_,'_il: t;%r_-. of or by a_.y other person); ond (2) "published" mea_s publication i_ a _e,,2s_,aper, ma!.:/azinc., or other pe_¥odical publication, distribution of p_4nted l_!:aflet,_, pa_r6ph,lets, or other documents., or d_;splay _hrough _':he_se o/ any outdoor advertising facility? and such o_her use of _,.:.rinte,;i5 n_edia as the Uo_m.ission shall prescribe. FORe,AL RE,QUIRE:_I[ENTS IIESP]_CTING REPORTS A_CD STAT:E_[lg:X':'S S_c. 306. (a) A report or statement required by this title tc, ]::,efile,] by a treasurer of a political committee, a ,_andid_te, or by a_:'_i:other person, slhall be verified by the oath or affirmation of the pe:_so_:lPilini_; such report or statement, taken before any officer authorized tc, ',!_ dmir,.ister oat]hs. fil (b) it A for copy aofperiod a reportof or time statement to be designated shall be preserved by t]he by £super_bsorb,' th,:_'i)erso:_:_ officer] Uommis8ion in a published regulation. Ir (c) The supervisory officer may, by published regulation of g!?neral applicabiility, relieve any category of: political corr mittees of th_ oblii-. gation to comply with section 8.04 if such. comm:ttee (1) prbnari!y' supports persons seeking State or local office, and does not substa:_ ttial!?' support candidates, and (2) does not operate :in more than one State or on a statewide basis.] re) The Uommission r_ay, by' published regulation of gen,_i,a;_ ap.. plicability_ relieve(I) any category of ca,mtidates of the obligation _o c_r_p/';r personally with the re_uire,_r_e_.ts of section 394/, if it O!e,':e_i.w_i_e,s 150 55 that _uch action will not have any adverse effect on the purposes of this title, and (2) any category of politicai', committees of the obligation to comply with such i.[ such comrrdttees-(A ) primarily support persons seeking State or focal o_ce, and (B) do not operate in more than one State or do not operate on a statewide basis. (d) The ['supervisory officer] Commission shall, by published regulations of General applicability, prescribe the manner in which contributions and expenditures in the nature of debts and other contracts, agreements, and promises to make contributions or expenditures shall be reported. Such regulations shall provide that they be reported in separate schedules. In determining aggregate amounts of contributions and expenditures, amounts reported as provided :in such regulations shall not be considered until actual payment is made. RETORTS Ol_ CONVEI_[TI()I_ FIXANCING SEc. 307. Each committee or other organization which-(1) represents a State, or a political subdivision thereof, or any group of persons, in dealing with officials of a national political party with respect to matters involving :_ convention held in such State or political subdivision to norainate a candidate for the office of President or Vice President, or (2) represents a national political party in making arrangements for the convention of such party held to nominate a candidate for the office of President or Vice ]President. shall, within sixty days following the end oJf the convention (but not later than twenty days prior to the date on which presidential and vice-presidential electors are chosen), file with the ['Comptroller Gem eral of the United States] Federal Election Uo_nmzsszon a full and complete financial statement, in suclh form and detail as I_'he] it may prescribe, of the sources from which, it derived its funds, and the purposes for which such funds were expended. F_DFRaL r_CTWN co_ss_o_ Sr,c. 308. (a) (1) There is hereby establ_;shed, as an independent establishment of the executive brahe;5 o]' the Gove_'nme_,t of the United States_ a commission to be known as the Federal Election Uovvmission. (2) The Commission shall be composed o[ the Comptroller Ge,neral, who shall ser_ve without the _gght to ,vote, and. seven members who shall be appointed bY the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. Of the seven members o[ the Uommission .... (A ) two shall be chosen from among individuals recomnded by the President pro tempore of the ,Senate, upon the recoz_,mendations o/the majority lec_ev of the Senate a_d the v, inority leader of the Senate; and (B ) two shall be chosen from among individuals reeommend_d by the Speaker o/the House of Representatives, upon the recommendations of the majority leader of the House and the minorit':y leader of the House. The two members appointed under subparagraph (A ) shall not be a_liated with the same political party; nor shall the two members 151 56 appointed _nder subparapaph (B),. Of t;{e members not ap_;;o_;nte,:;i_ under such subparagraphs, not z_ore than :_wo sho/1 be a{fil:atc, 1 wit?i_ the same political party. (3) Members of the Uommission, other z':has,t/_ Uomptrol.i!"e__ Ge_'i... eral, shall serve for terv_s off seven years, except ti_at, of the z_,v: m.be_'_i_ first appointed-(`4) one of the vzewbers _ot appoCnted u._cler subpa:?,:;,grap?i. (A) or (B) o/paragraph (2) si_all be appointed/or a ter:,,_ e_zd.. lng on the April thirtieth first occu.ri:_g mo,e t':han s._gx_.;wnth_i_ after the date o_ which he is appointed; (B) one of the members appointed under paragraph ('._)(`4) shal_: be appointed for a term ending one year after th.e :pvLi; thirtiet_ on whicf_ the term of the member re/erred :_o i.:'_,su_ paragraph (A ) of thi_ paragraph ends; (U) one of the members appointed under paragraph (:?) (B} shall be appointed for a rems, ending two years th,ereafte_'; (D) one of the members not appointed u_der subpa,_,'oqvap/._. (A) or (B) of parag_'ap]_ (2) shall be appointed for ,:; ;term, ending three years thereafter; (E) one of the members appointed under varagrap,_ (:_) (`4 1 shall' be appointed foe a term ending ]o,r ye6:rs thereafter: (F) o_,e o/ the members appointed under pa,ragrap't_ (!?) (B':! shall be appointed for a term e.r_di,ng five years therea',f_':e,>,;and. (6 _) one o/ the members not appoi, nted u_,de,., subpa:i,"aTrap,i'i_ (_4) or (B) of paragraph (2) shall be appointed for o i_e:r'_,_, ending six years thereafter. (_) Members_shall be chosen _m the basi_' of the:;., maturii_y,, ,:_pe.vi-. ence, integrity, impartiality, a_d good judgment. A ,nzember v:ay be reappointed to the Uommission only once. (5) A._,_individual appointed to fiU, a _,acanvy occurring ot)!i,.e_,tha,.i;,. by the expiration of a term of o]_ee shall be app,>i,rd:ed only 5tgr the unexpired term of the member .be succeeds. Any _,aean.cy occ i:_rm'n!,7 in the o/fi'ce of mzmber of the Uommission s,Scdl be iglled in ti_e z,;anne: in which that office was origi9zally filled. (6) ]'he Uorr_zissio,r, shall elect a Chairman and a Vice U)'i!.a.,'m_x,i_ from among its members fora ter_ of two _ears. TI_, Uhaimi,_;i_ and the Vice Uhairman shall _.ot be a]_liated wi_':_ the same political _art y. The Vice Uhairman shall act as Cha>mnan in the aSsence or d.i's_::'bil.it!,/ Uhairman, or i_ the event of a ,,acane._y in that. office,. °f(b) _4 .vacancy in the Uom,missiog_ shall _i,ot imp_zr the ._itTht 9/th,!_ remaining members to exercise ai!l the powers of ti_e Uomm._;ssi,:;,?_ a_): /our mejm,bers thereof shall constitute a quor,_m. (c) T)_e Uommission shall )_ave an official s_al which ,'_.dl be judicially noticed. (d) The Uommission shall at the dose o/each )_;scal year re_::ovt to the Congress and to the Preside_.t concerni_g the _ction it _a_i_i!;aken:' the names_ salaries, and duties of all individucds in its employ a,;,_dth,i_ _rooney it has disbursed; and shall make s_!ch furvJ_er repovt,,i_ ,:,n the matters ,_ithin its jurisdiction a_d such _eeommendations for/.i_rtJ,,_e,.:' legislation as may appear desirable. (e) The principal office of the Uommiss_On sba21 be in 09, ¢;!e& the District of Uolumbi% but it may meet or exercise x_y or all its _5, ower,_ in any Sb2te. O: 152 57 (f) The Commission shall appoint a _e_eral Counsel and an Execu,-. tire Director to serve at the pleasure', of the. Commission. The General Counsel shall be the c]_ief legal o]_cer of the Commission. The Exec_v. tire Director shall be responsible for the administrative operations of the Commission and shall perform such other duties as may be delegated or assigned to h,im from time to time by regulations or orders of the Commission. HOwever, the Uommissio;_ shall not delegate the making of regulations regarding elections to the Executive Director. (g) The Chairman of the Commission shali', appoint and fix the com._ensation of such personnel as may be _wcessary to fu,lfill the duties o'/the Uomv'ffss4ion in accordance w_th the provisions of title 5, United States Code. (h) The Uommission may obtain the services of experts and consultants in accordance with section 3109 of ti_le 5, United States Uode. (il In carrying out its responsibilities under this title, the Uommis. sion shall, to the fullest extent practicable, avail itself of the assistance, including personnel and facilities, of the Gene_'al Acco'unting O/rice and the Department of Justioe. ]'he Comptroller Ge_wral and y * ._ o the Attorney General are authomzed to matce avazlable to the Commission suc/_ personnel, facilities, and other assistance., with or without reimbursement, as the Commission may request. (j) The provisions of section 73_!_ o/ title 5, United States Code, shall apply to members of the Uommission ,wtwithstanding the provisions of subsection (d) (3) of such section. (k) (1) Whenever the Uommissio_ submits any budget estimate or reg_est to the President or the Office of Management and Budget, it shall concurrently transmit a copy ,of that estimate or request to the Uongress. (2) Whenever the Commission submits a,.gy legislative recomme_dations_ or testimony_ or comments o_ legislation requested by the Congress or by any Member o/Uongress to the President or th.e Office of Management and Budget, it shall conc_,,rrently transmit a copy thereof to the Uongress or to the member refuesting the same. No officer or agency of the U_ited States shall i_ave any authority to re9uire the Commission to submzt _t_,,leg_slatwe recommendatwns, or testimony, or comments on legislation_ to a_y o._ce or agency of the United States for approval, comments_ or ,,ewew_ prior to the submission of such recommendations_ testimony, or comments to the Congress. POWERS OF TttE COMMISSIOn7 SEc. 309. (al ]'he Uommissio_ shall have the power_ (1) to require, by special or general orders_ a_y perso_ to submit in writing such reports and answers to questions as the Commission may prescribe; and such submis_io_s sha_l be made witkin such reasonable period and u_er oath or othesnoi,_e as the _o_mission may determine; (2) to administer oaths; (3) to require by subpe_a, sig_ed by :_he Chai ,r_a_,or the Fi4,e Chairman, the a_tendance and tesgim4my of witnesses and the production o/all documentary evidence relating to the exeeutio_ of its duties; 153 58 (4) in any proceeding ¢r investigation to o,de_, testi_o_Ji _/ to be taken b.y deposition before· any perso_ who. is desi.,gnate,i 'by tie. Uo_vrrb_ssion and has the power to a&nin_stev oaths a_, i_ _uci% instances, to compel testimony and the p_'oduetio,_ of evid,_ce :i:n the same manner as author-&ed ,u_er paragraph (3) of iUiis su;!'_section; (5) to pay wirelesses the same fees and mi,!eage a_' a_re ;!)aid _!;,_ like circumstances in tb,e courts of the United States; (6) to initiate (through civil Froeeedings for injuncti'v,_, _oeli_!:_ f and through presentatWn6 _ to Federa._ gran_i juries), p:_wsecut,i_ defend, or appeal a_y ci_,ii! or crimi_aal actior, in the name of t?ie Uommission for the purpose of enforcing the p_ovi_i6,_!_ ._/_ this title and of sectio_ 602_ 608_ 610, 611,612, 613_ 61_, 615_ ,3_;i6,a_d '617 ,of title 18_ United States Uode, th:,ough i:_s d_eneral U_'unse,?; (7) to delegate any of its function_, or po_'_er_,_,other ;(:Jl_a;_ tl_i_ power to issue subpenas under paragraph (2), to any (:;7)'ilcer_:_ employee of the Uommission; and (8) to make, amend, a_ repeal sueh rules, pur_t to tt,_e provisions of chapter 5 of title 5_ United >_tates Uode_ a_ a_"e necessary to carry out the p_ovisions of this .4ct. (b) Any United States dis_{ct court ,within the ju_%di,x'._on of which anq/ inquiry is cawied on, _;_ay, upon petition by the U_mmissio_'.;, in ease of refusal to obey a subpena or order of the Uommis_,_i6,_?iss_$e,;i! u_der section (a) of this section, issue an order requirin cov_'l lla.ace therewit)_. Any lailure to obey the order of the oo_,rt may be t_. _s/_e,:i! by the court as a contempt thereof. ( e) No person shall be subject to civil liability t 9 any perso.:_. (other,' than the Uommission or the United States) for, disgosing in[or:,_atio,_ at the request of the Uommi88ioqrt. (d) Notwitlgs_tanding any otb.er provision of l_w, the Uov;!v_i_,_sio:_, shall be the primary dvil and crimi.r_.al enforeeme_t agency fy.i, violc!. tions of :the provisions of t,_is ti:_le, and of seetion_ 602, 605, (?_!_, 61:!., 612_ 613, 614, 615_ 616, a_ut 617 of title 18, United States Uod,!:_An:i/ violation, of any such provision shall be prosecuted by the 21_':_or_e:i:/ General or Department of Justice personnel only' after eons.:ui':tatio:_, with, and with the consent of _the Uo_r_mission. (e) (1) Any person who violates any p_ovisio_ of t_is Act, or of g , j .... sections 602, 608, 610, 611,be 612, 613, a614, 616. by or the 617 Uoni of l,i'? l&, United States Code, v_ay assessed civil 615, :penalty _:i_sio,i'_ under paragraph (2) of this subsection of _ot more than $10/i;90 fo_' each suc)_ violation. Each occurrence of a violation of thi_ t::,;_',i:e and each day of noncompliance with a disclosure re_uirewent o/tb::'s title or an order of the Uommission issued under thi_, sec:,ioz_shall c¢,_:._t_tut,? a separate offe_e. In determini,ng the amount of t].e penalty b_t,_Uom.. mission shall consider the persor_'s history of pre_ious _violat_;o_i._.s, th,_ appropriateness of such penalty to the fi_oncial rcso_rees of :!':/! e pe_.... son chargedi the graz, ity of the _iolation_ and the devwnstrate,_? good faith of the person charged in attempting to achieve rapid co_i¢,lia_w,!_ after notifwation of a violation. (2) A civil penalty s_all be assessed by the Uommission bb' orde:' only after the person charged with. a violation has been g:5_:e_ a_,_, opportunity for a hea_ing and the Uomm.ission :_as deter_i_,ed_ by decision incorporating its findings of fac_': thereia, tlhat a v:_datio,i,_, 154 59 did occur, and the amount of the _'_enalty. Any hea_ng, under, this. i section shall be of record and shall be held _ accordance w_th sectwn 554 of title 57 United States Code. (3) If the person against whom a civil penalty is c_sessed fails t:o pay the penalty, the Uommission shall file a petition for enforcement of i.ts order assessing the penalty in any appropriate district court of the United States. The petition shall designate the person against whom the order is sought to be enforced as the respondent· A copy of the petition shall forthwith be sent by registered or certified mail to the respondent and his attorney of record, and thereupon the Uom-. mission shall certify a_d file in such court the record upon which such order sought to be forced was issued· The court shall have jurisdiction to enter a judgment enforcing, modifying, xnd enfort_ng as so modi-. fled, or setting aside in whole or zn part the order and decision of the Uommission or zt may rev_and the proc_edmgs to the d omr_ss on for such further action as it may direct. The court may determine de novo all issues of law but the Uommission's findings of fact_ if supported by substantial evidence, shall be conclusive. UENTRAL UAMPAIGN UOMMITTEES SEc. 310. ( a) Each candidate s]_ai'_ldesignate one political commit-. tee as his central ca_apaign committee. A candidate for nomination for election, or for election, to the oi_ce of President, may also desig-. hate o_e political committee in each State in which he is a ca_tidate as his State campaign committee for that State. The designation shall be made in writing, and a copy of the designation, together with such information as the Uommission may res_uire, shall be furnished to the · · ' · r · J Uommzsswn upon the deszgnatw_ of .an_ such com mzttee. (b ) No political committee may be designated as t_ central cam.paign committee of more than one candidate. The central campaign committee, and each State campaign committee, designated by a can.didate nominated by a political _arty for election to the office of Presi.dent shall be the central campawn committee and the State campaig,n committee of the candidate nominated by that party for election to the office of Vice President. (c) (1) Any political committee authorized by a ca_.diclate to accept contributions or make expenditures in con_ection with his campaig_n for nomination/or election, or for election, which is not a central campaign committee or a State campaign committee, shall furnish each report required of it u_der section 304 (other _han reports required under the last sentence of section 304(a) a_wl 311 (b) to that candidate's central campaign committee at the t';ime it would_ but for this subsection, be required to .furnish that report to _he Uommission. Any report properly furnished to a central cav_paign co_nvmittee under thi_ subsection shall be, for purposes of this title_ held and co,sidered t_ have been furnished to the Uommission at the time at which it was furnished to such central campaign committee. (2) The Uommission may, by regulation, require any political committee receiving contributions or making expenditures in a State on behalf of a candidate who, under subsection (a), hos designated a State ca_rbpaig_ committe e for that State to furnish its reports to that State campaign committee instead of furnishing reports to the central campaign committee of that candidate. 155 6O (3) The Commission may re_'uire any poi!itical c_mmittee to furnish any report directly to the Uommissior._. (d) Each political committee which is a centrai campaign c(:mmi/:tee or a State campaign commiL_ee shall recei.ve a!l reports fi,i;e:_,wi_h or furnished to it b_/ other politica_ committees_ and consolid,;ite ae_d fur_ish the reports to the Uommissior_ together _zith its own r.?port_, in accordance with the provisions of this title a:_,d regulotio? s prc.sc_Sbed by the Uommission. Src. 311. (a) (1) ]z'ach c(t,n&[date shall designate ¢._e or _r!,c,.;_,e Net-. tional or State banks as his cam2aign depositorie,_. The cent?_:rgcaw,paign committee of that caT,didate, and any other political c6ri:!mittee authorized by him to. receive contrib,ttions or to make expendi ti :res o_a his behalf, shall maintain a checking accou_,t at a depository _!iodesig.hated by the candidate a_d shall deposit any co_t_ibu, tio_s ,_?ceived by that committee i_to that aceou._,t. A candidate s)_all deposit any payment received by him _lnder section 50_ of thi_, Act in t)_e o:_cou_l,t maintained by hi_ central cctmpaign committee. No expend_itur.? _'_,aybe made b_/ any such committee o_ behalf of a candidate or to _i:_5, guence his election except by cheek drawn on tha_'; account_ other _!h::[?:petty cash ex?_nditures as provided ir* subsection (b ). (2) The treasurer of each political com_nittee l ot_er than o: polio',-, ical committee authorized b?/ a candidate to receive ,contribvt_ions or to make expenditures on his behalf) shall design6;te one or v!.o,e Ns-. tional or State banks as campaign depositories of _ihat cOmmi:it,_e,,and shall _naintain a checking acco_nt .for the committee at eat,5 s'_,,_ei_ &-. pository. All contributions recei_:ed by that committee sha2ii[ be &-posited in such an account. No expenditure may be made by t)',,_t co_!-. mittee except by cheek d?awn on that accou.nt_ ot,%r than pe._:!'._] cas5 expenditures a_qpro_ided in subsection (b ). (b) A political committee may maintain a petty cash f_',w::_out ct: which it may make expenditures not in excess of $: O0 to any _,e:,'son i:, connection with a single purchase or transaction. A record oi: petti_7 cash disbursements shall be kept in accordance with reguirevi!,e _,_':se_,i _-. tablished by the Uommission_ and such statements and reporte i':_ereo/: shall be fu_ rushed fo the Uomm2SoZOn_ it may require. (c) A candidate, for noraination for election, or for elect:[o,J[,,to the office o/ President may establis?_ one such dep.ositor!7 in each State., which shall be considered by his State cazxpazgn committee f_:::rthat': State a_d any other political committee a_.thorizeg by him to :_eceiq:e contributions or to m_ake exper_ditures on his behalf in t_hc_:tState.. under regulations prescribed b_/ the Uommission_ as his sing, L:',cam-. paign depository. The campaigr_ depository of the cxaclidate of a political party for election to the o_ce of l;¥ce President shat.i! 5e th,_ campaign depository designated by the candidate of that p.::_:_'_y for' election to the office of President. I)UTIEkq OF TYI]_ [SL_PERVISOR¥ OFFICER] GOMMISSI'02[ Ssc. £308.] 312. (a) It sh_ll _,_ the duty of the [mpervisorj' c,ffieer'] Uommission-(1) to develop _nd furnish to the person rec uired by _h,_ provJisionq_ of this Act p'rescribed forms for the making, of the. :_"_port_. .,_ _nd ,,statements required to be filed with [himJ[ it under tl::_; txtle; 156 61 (2) to prepare, publish, and furnish to the person required to file such reports' and statement_ a manual setting forth reeom.mended uniform methods of bookkeeping and reporting; (3) to develop a filing, coding, and cross-inqexing system con.sonant with the purposes of this title; (4) to make the reports and stateme:ats filed with [him] i_ available for public inspection and copying, commencing as soon as practicable but not later than the end of the second day follow.lng the day during which it was received, and to permit copying of any such report or statement by hand or by duplicating ma-chine, as requested by any person, at the expense of such person: Provided, That any information copied from such reports and statements shall not be sold or utilized by any person for the pur-pose of soliciting contributions or :for any commercial purpose :; (5) to preserve such reports and statements :for a period of ten years from the date of receipt, except that reports and statements relating solely to candidates for tlhe House of Representatives shall be preserved for only five years from the date of receipt; [(6) to compile and maintain a current list of all statements or parts of statements pertaining to each candidate ;'! (6) to compile a_d maintain, a cumulative i_,dex listing ali statements and reports filed with the Commission duri_(q eac/_ calendar year by political commffttees a_d candidates, whic/_ the Commission shall cause to be published in the Federal Register no less frequently than monthly during e_ven-_umbered years and quarterly in odd-numbered years and wh_ich shall be in such/or_J_ and shall include such information as may be prescribed by the Commission to permit easy identificatio_ of each statement, re.port, candidate_ and committee ilisted, at least as to their names, the dates of the statements and reports, and the number o/pages i_ each, and the _ommission shall make ,copies o/statements and reports listed in the index available/or sale_ direct or by mail, at a price determined by the Uommission to be reasonable to the purchaser; (7) to prepare and publish an annual report including compilations of (A) total reported contributions and expenditures for all candidates, political committees, and ,other persons during the year; (B) total amounts expended according to such categories as [he] it shall determine and broke n down into candidat e , party, and nonparty expenditures on the national, State, and local levels; (C) total amounts expended for influencing nominations and elections stated separately; (D) total amounts contributed according to such categories of amounts as [hel it shall determine and broken down into contributions on the national, State, and local level for candidates and political committees; and (E) aggregate amounts contributed by any contributor shown to have contributed in excess of $100; (8) to prepare and publish fro_l time to time special reports comparing the various totals and categories of contributions and expenditures made with respect '_ preceding elections; (9) to prepare and publish such other reports as [he] it may deem appropriate; 157 62 (10) to assure wide dissemination c,f statistics, summ_..ries, and reports prepared under th:is title; (11) to :make from time l:o time audits anc-field investi:i_'ations with respect to reports and statements filed under the p?.X:,vis!LO:nS of tlhis title, and with respect to alleged failu::es '[o file al:l?' report or statement required under the provisions of [his title; (:12) to report apparent violations of law to the ap]?r_priate law enforcement authorities; and (:13) to prescribe suitab].e rules and regulations to ca:.:ry o,,t. the provisions of this title. (b) The [supervisory officer] Uoqnmlss_'on shall encourage, md c:,operate with, the election officials in the; several States to ([evelop procedures which necessity oI to multiple By permitting the filingwillof eliminate copies of the .Federal rel_orts satisfy filings '!:h_ State requirements. (c) It; shall be the duty of the [Comptroller (]}eneral] 6_(:,_,'_i_¢io_r; to Serve as a national clearinghouse for informat!on in respect, to t]te administration of elections. In carrying out [his] its duties u:mter tiffs subsection, the [Comptroller General] Cam_nission shall e:nt:_r in;o contracts for the purpose of eonductin. . . g independent studi,zi_,sof the administration of elections. Such studies shall irelude, but s]::.all n,:,t be linfited to, studies of(l) the :method of selection of, and the type of duties a_;sigm,d to, officials and personnel working on boards of elections; '(!'2) practices relating to the registration of voters; and (3) voting and cou.ntmg methods. Studies made under this subsection shall be published by tlhe ][Comp,troller General] Commission fred copies thereof shaT[1be mad,i: ,zva lable to the general public upon the payment ()f the cost l:.!mrec,f. [Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to :mthorize tlm_ Corns,troller General to require inclusion of any comment or recor:n:nendii,tion of the Comptroller General in any such study.] (d) (1) Any person who l:_elieves a violation of this hi:lc, h:!ts occurred, may file a complaint, with the [supervisory offi.ceff,il] _,.Uo_:,__r_ission. If the [supervisory officer] (7om.:_ission del;ermines t here is substantial reason to believe such '_ violation has occurred _!ihe] it shall expeditiously m_ke an investigation, which ,;hall also ir[el ude sn investigation of reports and statements filed by tk.e complaina_:::t if ]t.e is a candidate, of the.matter complained of. Whenever in th,_: judi!z'ment of the [supervisory officer] ,_ozr_;&sion, after a:fford,i:l_r dire notice and an opportunity for sb hesbring, any personL has en,;.,;_ged or is about to engage in any aets_ or practices which constitut,i¢ Jr will constitute a violation of any provision of this tiff e or any re:g;fiaticn or order issued, thereunder, [the Attorney General ,on beha]t! of the United States] the Com,a;i8,sio,, shall instii;ute a civil action f,,:)_:relief, including a permanent or temporary injunction, rest:cainin;_ ,:)rder, or any other appropriate order in the district court of tlhe Unitt:,d Stat_s for the district in which the per,_on is found, resid,_s, or trartssci:s business. Upon a proper showing that such person has enlcged or !;_;abol.tt to engage in such acts or practices, a permanent or temportbry: njun,> tion, restraining order, or other order shall be granted witho__:; bored by such court. 158 63 (9) In any actionbrought under Para_ra_h _ 1 (I ) of this .subsection, subpenas for witnesses who are required to attend a Umted States district court may :run into any other district. (8) Any party aggrieved by an order granted under paragraph (1) of this subsection may, at any time within sixty days after the date of entry thereof, file a petition with the United States court of appeals for the circuit in which such person is found, resides, ortransacts business, for judicial review of such order. (4) The judgment of the court of appeals affirming or setting aside, in whole or in part, any such order of the district court shall be final, :subject to review by the Supreme Court of the United States upon certiorari or certification as provided in section 1254 of title 28, United States Code. (5) Any action brought under this subsection stroll be advanced on the docket of the court in which filed, and put ahead of all other actions (other than other actions brought under this subsection). JUDICIA_L REVIEW SEc. 313. (a) Any agency action by the Com_nissio_er made unde_ the p_o.visions of this Act shall be subject to review by the United _tates Court of Appeals for the District o[ Columbia Uircuit upon petition filed in such court by any interested person. Any petition filed pursuant to this section shall be filed within thirty days after t)_e agency action by the Commission for w?_ich review is sought. ( b) The Co_nmission, the national committee of any political party, an_ i_li_idua_s e_igibte to _ote in an election for Federal o_ce, are au t_r_zed to institute such actions, including actions for declaratory judgement or injunctive relief_ as z_ay be appropriate to implement any provision of this A ct. ( c) The provisio,_s of chapter 7 of title 5, i[Tnited States Code, apply to jmticial review of any agency action, as defined in section 551 of title 5, United States Code, by the Commission. STAT_E_TS mLrD WITh: STATr orrIcr_Rs Src. [309.] 314. (a) A copy of each statement required to be filed with Ia supervisory officer] the Coz_m_ssion by this title shall be filed with the Secretary of State (or, if there is no office of Secretary of State, the equivalent State officer) of t_he appropriate State. For purposes of this subsection, the term "appropriate State" means-(1) for reports relating to expenditures and contributions in connection with the campaign for nomination forelection, or election, of a candidate to the office of President or Vice President of the United States, each State [in which an expenditure is made by him or on his behalf_'[ in which he iS a candidate or in which substantial expenditures are made by _,_imor on his behalf; and (2) ,for reports relating to expenditures connection wlth thecampMgn for nomination tion, of a candidate to the office of Senator or Delegate or Resident Con_nissioner to, United States_ the State in which he seeks and contributions in for election, or elecor Representative lin, the Congress of tho election. 1.59 64 (b) It shall be the duty of the Secretary of State, or the equJ valer.,t; State officer, under subsection (a)-(1) to receive and maintain in an c.rderly manner M1 :t:epor_:s and statements required by this title to be file:l with him; (2) to preserve such reports and statements foi' a perle,:?, of ten. years from date of receipt, except that reports and. stat¢,ments. relating solely to candidates for the House of lqeprese:r,l:atives. shall be preserved .for only five years from the ,:late of rEzceipt:; (3) to make the reports and statements filed with him a _ i][abl_,_ for public inspection and copying during' regul _r office hot:; rs, com.. meneing as soon as praetic'_ble but not: later than the en.::l _.)ft h,_ day ,:luring which it was received, and to permit copying ,:,f an:: such report or statement by hand or by duplicating ra:i,chine_. requested by any Person, at: the expense of such person; :aid (4) to compile and maintain a current list of all stater, t,:;_m:so? parts.', of statements pertaining to each candidat,_. (c) l'here is a_tho_zed to be appropriated to the Uomv_:,:_,sgoni,;_, each fiscal year the sum of $500,000_ to be made available {?_ ._ad,4 amounts as the Uommission deems appropriate to the States ? gr th,? purpose of assisting them i_ co_r_,plyi,n,gwit],_ their o_uti,esas set :i_::ri_h i;_, this section. PROHIBITION OF CONTRIBI?PIONS IN NA3/IE ()F ANOTIt3_]:;:: SEc. IFg10.1 315. No person shah make a contribution in the :n[,nm o:_ another person or knowingly permit his name to bc _sed to eff,_,:::_,s_eJi_ a contributio% 'md no person shall knowingly accept a cont:[':ilmtion made by one person in the name of another person. PENALTY ;FOR VI/OLAq'[()NS IFSEc. 311. (a) Any person who violates any of the provisirm:s!_,::,fthine title shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisc,ned not m(:n ,,.tha_t one year, or both. IF(b) In case of any conviction under th!is title, where 'the p,mish. ment inflicted does not include in'tprisonmenh such conviction s'::all be deemed a misdemeanor conviction: only._] APPROV.4L OF PRESIDENTIAL CA.A_fPAIGN EXPE3[DITURES COMMITTEE BY N,,IJ"[O2VA.t', SEc. 316. (a) No expenditure in excess of 31,000 shall be v_o',? by o__ on behalf of any candidate who has receipted the nominatio_it, _/ hi_? political party for President or Vice President u_,2es_ such e;::q:,e_i lure has been specifically appro_ved by the chair,,an or trea6,_::;_ero/ that political party's national committee or the designated rep:,_*c_enta ,,, tire of that _ational committee i_ the State where :_he funds a?_!:go b_ expended. (b) Eadh _ational committee aplz,oving expe_titures u_gO"e:i _,sub,, section (a) shall register under ,section 3021 as a poli:_ical eov_ittee! and report each expenditure it approves c_ if it ih_cl made t,_,._:_t ex. penditure, together with the identification of the 2erson seele;_;_ W ap. proval and making the expenditure. (c) No political party shall lucre more thxm one z_tional c(m_,_?>ittee, 160 65 us_ oF eOKVmBm'ED .4_OaNVS $'OR ecRl'.4ty vc;Rvos_s SEc. 317. Amounts received by a candidateas contributions that are _n excess of any amount necessary to defray his cav_paign expenses (after the application of section 507 (b ) (1) o)' this Act), and any other amounts contributed to an individual ]:or the purpose of supporting his activities as a holder of Federal office, v, ay be used by that candi.. date or individual, as the case may be, to defray any ordinary a_ot necessary expenses incurred by him in conneotion with his duties as a holder of Federal office, or may be contributed by him to any organization described in section 170(c) of the I.aternal Revenue Code of 1954. To the: extent any such contribution, a_rwunt contrlbuted_ or expenditure thereo[ is not otherwise required i_o be disclosed under the provisions of this title, such contribution, amount contributed_ or ex.. pe_diture shall be fully disclosed in accordaJwe with regulations pro.. mulgated by the Commission. The (7ommissio_z is authorized ta pro.. mulgate such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the pro.. e';sions o/this section. AU_I_HORIZATION OP AP.PR OPZ_IATIO._$ SEc. 318. There are authorized to be appropriated to the Co_wrr_ission, for the purpose of carrying out its functions under this title, title V, and under chapter 29 of titk 18, U_gited States Uode, _ot to exceed $5,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1974, a_t not to exceed $5,000,000 for each fiscal year thereafter. PE-_rALTY FOR VIOLATION'S SEc. 319. (a) Violation of any provision of this title is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $10,00& imprisonment for not more than one year, or both. (b ) Violation of any provision of this titg;e with knowledge or reason to know that the action committed or omitted is a violation of this tit]e is punishable by a fi_e of not _,ore tha_, $100,000, iwp_sonment for _ot more thaq, five years_ or both. TrrLE IV--GE:srnAn [:EFFECT ON STATE PaowsmNs LAW [S_c. 403. (M :Nothing in this Act shall be deemed to invalidate vr make inapplicable any provision of any State law, except where compli, a.nce with such provision of law wou]d result in a violation of a prowmon of this Act. £(b) Notwithstanding subsection (a), no provision of State law sha]l be construed to prohibit any person from taking any action authorized by this Act or from makin_ _ny expenditure (as such term is defined in section 301 (f) of this Act) which he could lawfully make under this Act.] EFFEGT ON STATE LAW SEc. 403. The provisions of this Act, a_,d of regulations prom_gated _nder this Act, preempt any prov;sion of State law with re- 161 66 spect Zo cam.paigns fo_' _wmi_,ati_ l_ede_al o_ce for election, or for e_c_ikm, _o (as s'ueh te_'n_ is defer,ed in section 301 (c) ). SECTIONS 5314 AND 5315 OF TZ[TLE 5_ UNITED STATFJS CODE § 5314. ]Positions at level III Level III of the Executive Schedule applies to the fo]low::,:.:l_{po_!itions, for which the annual rate of basic pay is $40,000: (60) Members (other t3a_ t?_eUomptroiTer Ge_ieral) _t_e,Terc:i_£1e orion Commission (7). § 5315. ]Positions at level IV Level IV of the Executive Schedule applies to the followhl g' positions, for whiclh the annual rate of basic pay is $38.,000: (98) _Teneral 6_ou_sel, Federal Electio_, Com_'dssion. (99) Exec_ttive Director, lVederai!Eleci_ion Com_r_issio_. CHAPTER 9_9OF TITLE 18_ UNITED STATES CODE Sec. 591. Definitions. $ $ 608. Limitations an,g $ $ on contributions _amily $ $ and expenditures *'1_ :g out of candidat:e_/ i,crsor_,:ll ]und& :._ $ $ $ $ $ 6L_. Limitation on expenditure_ generally. 615. Limitation on contrgbutions. 6_6. Form o[ contributions. 617. Embezzlement or conversion of political contributions. § 591. Definitions When used in sections 597. 599,,600, 60_ 608_610, ['and 611] ,_il_ dl_._. 615. 616, avd 617'o_ th_s title'-(a) "%lection' means (1) a general, special, primary, or ru:l[_:_ ff dec.tion, (2) a convention or caucus of _ political party held to I:_{:_ ninm!:e a candidat% (3) a primary election held _or the s{;lec'tion of d.,:,,e,gat_is: to a national nominating convention of a political party, .or (41: a primary election held _or the expression of a preference for the [;.,>mimLtion' of persons for election to the ottice of Pres]dent, £and (ii) tie. election of delegates to 't constitutional convention for p:_:.,::,p0sin,;r: amendments to the Constitution .of the Unil;ed Stales]; (b) "candidate" means an individuM 'who seeks nomina_J m fcc' .election, or election, to Federal office, whether or not suclh in,:_ixddmd _s elected[, and, for purposes of this paragraph, and individual !_roll L:{_ deemed to seek nomination for' election_ or electicn_ to Fed er[_.ioffic% 162 67 if he has (1) taken tile action necessary under the law of a State to qualify himself for nomination for election, or election, or (2) received contributions or made expenditures, or has given his consent for any other person to receive contributions or make expenditures, with a view to bringing about his nomination for election, or election, to such office; (c) "Federal office" means the office of ]?resident or Vice President of the United States, or Senator or Representative in, or Delegate or' Resident Commissioner to, the Congress of the United States; ['(d) "political committee" means any individual, committee, asso.ciation, or Organization which accepts co_tributions or makes expenditures during a calendar year in an aggregate amount exceeding' $1,000 ;] (d) "political committee" means-(1) any committee, club, association, or other group of person, which receives contributions or makes expenditures during a cal.. endar year in an aggregate amount exceeding $1_000; (2) any _ational covvmittee, association, or organization of a political party, and State a/filiate or subsidiary of a national, political party, and any State central committee of apolitieai! party; and (3) any committee, association, or orga_izabon engaged in the admi_,istration of a separate segregated fund descmbed in sectio_._ 610; (e) "contribution" means__ (1) a gift, subscription (including any assessme_,t, fee, or mem-. bership dues), loan, advance, or deposit of money or anything of value (except a loan of money by a national or State bank made in accordance with the applicable banking l_ws and regulations and in the ordinary course of business), made for the purpose of influencing the nomination for election, or election of any person to Federal office, for the purpose of influencing the results of a primary held for the selection of delegat_s to a national nominat-mg convention of a political party or for the expression of a pref.. erence for the nomination of persons for election to the office of President, ['or for the purpose of influencing the election of dele.gates to a constitutional convention for proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States] or/or the purpose o/financ.. i_g any operations of a political eo_/rrdttee, or for the purpose o.f paying, at a_y time, any debt or obligation incurred by a candi.. date or a political committee in connectio_ with any campaigz._ for nominatio_ for election, or for election, to Federal office; ['(2) a contract, promise, or agreement, express or implied, whether or not legally enforceabl% to raake a contribution for such purposes; [' (3) a transfer of funds between political committees ;] (2) funds received by a political committee which are trans.. ferred to that committee from another political;. [' (4)] (3) the payment, by any person other than a candidate m: political committee, of compensation/or the personal services of another person which are rendered to such candidate or political[ committee without charge for any' Such purpose; and 163 68 [(5),,'1(4) notwithstanding the foregoing meanings cf "cc,ntribution"_ the word shall not be; construed to include serv_ :es provided without compensation by individuals volunteerin_ a pof tion or all of their time on behalf of a candidate or ilolitic,'fi committee; [(f) "expenditure" means--. [(1) a purchase, payment, distribution, loan, advance, teposit, or gift of money or anything of value (except a loan o:f money by a national or State bank made in accordance with the applicable banking laws and regulations :and in the ordinary course of business), made for the purpose of infirtencing the ]t,o:minaP tion for election, or election, of any person to tederal oi!!:ice,for the purpose of influencing the result of a:primary held for tlhe selection of delegates to a national nominating conve_ti,m of a political part_ or for the expression of a preference for tlhe nomination o_persons for election to the or,ce of President, or for the .purpose of influencing the election of delegat,_s to a constltutmnal conventmn for preposing amendments to t:lm Constitution of the United States; [(2) a contract, promise, or agreement, express or implied, whether or not legally enforceable, to make any expenditure; and [(3) a transfer of funds between political committees ;'[ (f) "expenditure" meads(I) a purchase, payment, distribution, _,oon (except a i_oan of money by a National or State bank _,_ade in accordance _ith t_._ applicable banking laws and regulations, and in the o,dinar?/ course of business), advance, deposit_ or g(ft o{ mo_ey or a_,ything of ,alue, made for the'purpose of_ (A) influencing the nomination for dection, or t/ie election, of any person to Federal office, or zo the o_ce o? pre_,;'idential and vice-presidential elector/ (B) influencing the result of a prim_.ry election. ?:,eM for the selection of delegates to a national nominating convention of a political party or for the expret_sio,n of a prefere_we for the nomination of persons /or election to the (_ee of President; U) financing a poiYtieal eommi:_tee; D) payzng_ atany anyoperations 'time, any of [lebt or obi_igation i_curredor by a candidate or a political committee in con_eetie:,n with any campaign for _o_r_ination for election, or .for election, to Federal office; and (2) the trwns/er o.f funds by' a potYtical c_mmittee to motl_er political committee; but (3) does not include the _value o.f service re_ gered by indi vidua_s who _olunteer to work without compe_sation on behalf of e_can&:date. (g) "person" and "whoever'"' mean an individual, partnership, cmnmittee, association, corporation, or any other organiz:_tion or gcoup of persons; [and] (h) "State" means each State of the United s1;ates, the I)is_Lrict of (?olumb. ia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any territory or possessmn of the United [Sta_s.'] States; 164 69 (_) _politwal party means any assomatwn, cov_m2ttee, or organzzation-whidh nominates a candidate /or election to any Federal office whose name appears on the election ballot as the candidate of thet associatio% committee, or organization; a_cl (i) 'national committee' means the organ_gzation which, by virt.ue o/the bylaws of the political party, is respo, zsible for the day-to-day oT_eration o/ that political party at the national level as determined by the Federal Election Uommission u_ater section 301 ( k ) o/the Fe°! 'eral Election Uampaign Act of 1971. § 608. Limitations on contributions dates' personal and family and expenditures funds out of candi- £(a) (1) No candidate may make expendJitures from hi_ persona] funds, or the personal funds of his immedi_te family, in connection with his campaign for nomination for election, or election, to Federal office in excess of__ r(A) $50,000, in the case of a candidate for the office of Pres:[-. dent or Vice President; [(B) $35,000, in the case o.f a candidate for the office of Sen.-. ator; or [(C) $25,000, in the case of a candidal_ for the office of Representative, or Delegate or Resident Commiissioner to the Congress.'] (a) (1) No Candidate may make expenditures from his perso_i_ f_ds, or the personal funds of/ds immediate family, in connection with his campaigns for nominations for election, and for electio% to Federal o_ce in excess, in the aggregate of(A) $50,000 in the case of a candidate for the o_ce of Pres,i:dent or Vice President/ (B)$35,000 in the case of a candidate for the o_ce of Sena-to,(,_,_' _$25,000 in the ease of a candidate for the office of Repre.sentative, or Delegate or Resident Uom_dssio_,er to tl_e Congress. (2) For purposes of this subsection, "in_aediate family" means a candidate's spouse, and any child, parent, grandparent, brother, or sister of the candidate, and the spouses of such persons. (3) No candidate or his imn_ediate family may _na2_e loaws or ad.. vances fro_ their personal funds in co_eetion with his campaig,n for nomination for election, or election, to Federal off_;eeunless suc,_ loa_ or advance is evidenced by a written instmtment fully disclosing the te_w_s and conditions of such loan or _dvaz;ce. (4) For purposes of this subsection, any such loan or advance s]_ai!l be included in computing the total avwunt of such expenditures only to the extent of the balance of such loan or ,_lvance outstanding and unpaid. (b) No candidate or political committee shall knowingly accept any contribution or authorize any expenditure i:a violation of the prom-sions of this section. (c) Violation of the provisions of this section is punishable by a fine not to exceed ['$1,0001 $25,000, imprisonment for not to exceed[ [one year'[five years, or both. 16 5 70, § 611. Contributions by Government contractors _Vhoever-(a) entering into ally contract witlh the United States or any department or agency thereof either for the rendition of personal services or furnishing any materiM, supplies, or equipment to the United States or any department or agency thereof or for selling any land or building to the United States or any department or agency thereof, if payment for the performance of such contract or payment for such materiM, supplies, equipment, land, or buildlng is to be made in whole or in part from funds appropriated by the Congress, at any time between the commencement of negoti_tions for and the later of (1) Il;he completion of performance under, or (2) the termination of negotiations for, such contract or furnishing of material, supplies, equipment, land or bu!ildings, directly or indirectly makes any contribution of money or other thing of value, or promises expressly or iml)liedly to make any such contribut{on, to any politicM party, committee, or candidate · for public office or to any person for any political purpose or use; or (b) knowingly solicits any such contribu':ion from ary such person for any such purpose during any such period; shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. It shall not constit_,te a _,iolat_;on of the p_'o_isi_as of this sec_ion for a corporation or a labor organizatio_ to establish, _minister, o_'solicit contribution' to a separate segregated fund to be _tilized /or politic_l purposes by that corporation or labor ortTanizat_;on if the es_!ablis/_, merit and administration o/, a'_l solicitation of contributions to, s_h fund do not constitute a _iolatie_ of section 610. § 614. Limitation on expenditures generally ( a) (1) No candidate may make expendi:_ures in conneetio_ %'ith his campaign for nomination for election, or for elects;on, to Federal office in excess of the amount to which he woui_l be li,._ited u_ter sectiog 504 of the Federal Election Uampdgn Act of 1971 if ]_ewere receivi_eg payments under title V of that Act. (2) Expenditures m_de on bei_al/ o/ any egndidate are, for t/_e pu_,poses of this section, considered to be made by suc._ candidate_ (3) Expenditures made by o_, on behalf of a_y candidate for tt_e office of Vice President o/the U_ited States are for the purposes of this sectio n, considered to be m_e by the candidate for the office of President of the United States with whom ],_ is ru_ni_g. (4) For p_rposes of this subsection, an expend_;ture is made o.a behal/of a candidate, including a Vice Presidentic:l e_didate_ i/it _;s made by.-(A) an authorized committee or any other agent of the candidate for the purposes of making any ex;venditure, or (B) any person a_thorized or requested by the candi&_te, an authorized committee of t]_,' candidate_ or an agent of the candidate to make the expe_utiture. (5) The Federal Election Uommission shall p,.oescrlbe regui!atio_s under wMch any expe,utiture by a candida;_e for t=res_ential nomin_- 166 71 _ion for use in two or more States shall be ai_tributed to such candi.. date's expenditure limitatio_ ,in each such State, based on the voting age population in such State .which can reasonably be expected to be influenced by such expenditure. (b) The:national committee of a political party may not make any expenditure during any calendar year i_ connection with the general election campaign of any candidate for Federal office who is affiliated with that party which, when added to the sum of all other expendi-. tures made by that national committee during that year in connection with the general election campaigns of all candidates affiliated with. that party, exceeds an amount equal to 2 cents multiplied by the voting age population of the United States. The State committee of a political party, including any subordinate committees of the State committee., may not make any expenditure durgn_7 the calendar year in connection with the general election campazgn of a candidate for Federal office in such State who is affiliated with t:hat party which, when added to all other expenditures made by that State committee during that year in connection with the general election campaigns of candidates' affiliated with that party, exceeds an amount equal to _2cents multi-. plied by the voting age population of that State. For purposes of this' subsections(I) the term "voting age population" means voting age popu-. lation certified for the year under section 50¢(g) of the Federal Election Uampaign Act of 1971; and (B) the approval by the national committee of a political party of an expenditure by or on behalf of the presidential candidate of that party as required by section 316 of that Act is not con-. sidered an expenditure by that national committee. (c) (1) No person may make any expendi_ure (other than an ex-. penditure made on behalf of a candidate under the provisions of sub-. section ia) (_) ) advocating the election or defeat of a clearly identi-. fled candidate during a ealendar year which_ .when added to all other expenditures made by that person durin 9' the year advocating the eleq-. tion or defeat of that candidate, exceeds _1,000. (B) For purposes of paragraph (1)iA') "clearly ide_tifiecP' means(i) the candidate's name appears; (ii) a photog_raph or drawing of the candidate appears; or (iii) the identity of the candida, re is apparent by un.. ambiguous reference; (B) "person" does not include the National or _gtate commit., tee of a political party; and (U) "expenditure" does not include a_y payment made or in-. curved by a corporation or a labor organization which, under the 7,_o,dsio,s of the last paragraph of section 610 of title 18, United States Uode, would not constitute an expenditure by that corpora-. tion or labor organization. iD) Any person who k_wwingly or willfully violates the provisio_ of this section, other than Subsection ia) (5), shall be punishable by a fine of $B5,000, imprisonment for a period of not more tha_ five years, or both. If any candidate i8 convicted of violating the provisions of ,_his section because of any expenditure made on his behalf (as deter.. 167 72 mi_ed under subsection ( a) (4)) by a political committee, the t_,,easurer of that committee, or any other person a_thorizi._g such expe'aditure, s hall be punishable by a fine of qtot to exceed $25,000, impriso_z,_ent for not to exceed five years, or both, i.f 8ueh person knew, or had reason tt> know, that such expenditure was _n excess of the !imitation applicable to such candidate under this section. § 615. Limitations on contrib_tions (a) No perso_ may make a _nt_ibution to, or for the benefit of,, a candidate for that candidate's ,_ampaign .for nomination for' decti°n, or ejection, which_ when added to: the su,n of al._ other contr, lbution_ made by that person for that ca_,paign, exceeds $3,000. "(b) (!) _ o candidate _aay kqww_;ngly occept a contributio¢_, for his campaign from any perso_ which, when added to the sum of ,_:glother contributions received from that _oerson for that campaig_,, exceeds $3,000. (2) No officer or empZoyee o/'a political comm. ittee or of a 2:_olitiea_ party may knowin_Tly accept az,,y contribution made for the benefit or' use of a candidate which that candidate couJd net accept under paragraph (1). (c) (1) For purposes o.f the limlta_iio_s conta:_ ed in this section .,_l[ contribution, s made by any per_'_ondirectly or i_directly to or .for the benefit of a particular candidate, i_cl_uding contr_:butions whici_ are in any way earmarked, eneu.mberecl, or otherwise directed through an 'intermediary or conduit to that candidate, ._hall be treated as contributions from that person to that candidate. (2) Cont_ibutions made to_ or for the 5enefit el, a candidat'e _ov'_inated by a political party for election to the office of Vice P?esident shall be considered, .for p_rposes o[ this section, _o _e made to, or for the benefit of, a ca,_didate nomi_a[ed by that party/or elect(o_ to the office of President. (3) The limitatio¢_s imposed; by subsections (a) and (b) shcz!:lapply separately to each pt4ma_T, primary runoff, ge_wral, and special election in which a candidate partidpates. ( d) ( ! ) No i,ndividual way make a contribution du_ing any calendar year which, when added to the sum of all other ce,nt_ibutions ,made 5y that individual durg,.g that yea% exceeds $25,000. (2) Any contribution made for a campaign in c, year, other lhan the calendar year in which th,e election is hdd to which that ca;_pai!Tn relates, is, for purposes of this section, considere] to be made duri_ag that calendar year in which that election is held. ( e) Violation of the provisions of this section i_ punishable .by a fine of not to exceed $25_000_ imp_i.__onment for not to exceed five ?/ears, or both. § 616. Form o£ contributions "No person _ay _nake a cont_b'ation to, or fo_' tlie benefit o;C any candidate or political corrvraittee in excess, in the aggregate dv r'd_i,gany calendar year, of $100 unless such contributions _;s_de by a written instrument identifying the pe_'son making the co_,tribution. Violation of the provisions of this pt_,isha;!le by a fi_e of not to exceed $1_000, imprisonment forsection, not b:,isexceed oz,e ??ear, or both. 168 73 § 617, Embezzlement or conversion of political contributions ( a) No candidate, o_cer, employee, or age_t of a political committee, or person acting on behalf of any candidai_e or political committee, shall embezzle, knowingly co,weft to his own ase or the _se of another_ or deposit in any place or in any manner except as authorized b_t la/w, any contributions or cav_paig_ funds entrusted to him or unaer hi8 possession, custody, or control, or use any campaign fu_nds to pay o'_· defray the costs of attorney .fees for the defense of any.person or per. seres charged with the corrbmzsswn of a criv_',: or recevve, conceal, ? Vetai_ the same with _intent to convert it to t,_a perso_3al use or gaz_,, knowing it to hame been embezzled or converted. , (b)Violation of the provisions of the sectio_ is punishable by a fine of not _ore than $25,000, imprisoq_ment for not more than te_ years, o_ both; but if the value of such property does _rwtexceed the sum of $100, the fi_ shall not exceed ?1,000 and the imprisonment, _ shall not exceed one year. Notwithsta_zcting t)_e provisions of rids sec.tion, any surphts or unexpended campaign funds may be contributed to a national or State political party for poli_ical purposes, or to educational or charitable organizations, or may be preserved for use i_ future ca/mpaigns for elective office, or for any other lawful purpose. INTERNAL Sec. 41. Contributions REVENUE to candidates CODE OF for public 1954 office. (a) Gr_rmAL RrrLe.--In the case of an individual, there shall be allowed, subject to the limitations of subsection (b), as a credit against the tax imposed by this chapter for the taxable year, an amount equal to one-half of all political contributions, payment of which is made by the taxpayer within the taxable year'. (b) LI_rrrATXONS.-[(1) MAxI_rv_r CReDXT.' The credit allowed by subsection (a) for a taxable year shall be limited to $12.50 ($25 in the case o:1! a joint return under Section 6013).] (1) M.4xx_rr_ cRrrn'.--The credit allowed by subsection (a) Joy a taxable year shall not exceed $25 ($50 i_ the case of a joint_ return under section 6013). (2) ArrnICATIO_ WITH OTn-_a CREDrTS.---The credit allowed by' subsection (a) shall not exceed the amount of the tax imposed[ by this chapter for the taxable year reduced by the sum of the credits allowable under sectio n 33 (?elating to foreign tax.credit)., section 35 (relating topartiallY tax-exempt interest), seCti°n 37 relating to retirement income), and section 38 (relating to invest-ment in certain depreciable property). (3) VraumC_TXO_.--The credit allowed[ by subsection (a) shall[ be allow'ed, With respect to any political contribution, only i:l! such political contribution is verified i[n such manner as the Secretary or his delegate shall prescribe by regulations. $ $ Sec. 218. Contributions $ $ to candidates $ for public $ $ office. (a) ALLOWANCEOF ])EDUCTION.--In the case of a n individual, there shall be allowed as a deduction any political ,contributio n (as defined 169 74 in section 41(c)(1)) payment within the taxable year. (b) of which is made by such individual LI3IITATIONS.-- £ (1) A_OUNT.--The deductiorL under subsection (a) sh ail1 not exceed $50 ($100 in the case of a joint return under section ,i;013).] (1) A_orr:v_'.--The deduction under _ubsectit,n (a ) stroll no:flexceed $100 ($200 in the case of a joint return under _ection 6015) (!2) VrmmCATiO_.--The deduction under :mb:section (a) shah be allowed, with respect to _my political contribution, only if such political contribution is ver'ified in such nmnner as the _5(ecretary or his delegate shall prescribe by regulatiors. $ * * CI-IAPTER Subehapter Subchapter A. Returns and B. Miscellaneous SUBCItAPTER Part Part Part Part Part Part Part [Part I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. Part * 6}--INFORMATION * AND RETlYRNS records. provisions. A--tt;ETURNS AND Rt_CORDS Records, statements, and special returns. Tax returns or statements. Information returns. Signing and verifying of returns and other documents. Time for filing returns and other documents, Extension of time for filing returns. Place for filing returns or other documents. Designation of income _,;ax payments to Presidential Election paign Fund.] VIII. Designation [Part VIII--Designation Campaign Fund] Part * VIII.---Designation of income tax payments Campaign Funel of Income of i_c_me campaign Tax Payments tom payments fund tc Federal to Elect:_!_a Presidential i!o Federat Cam- Electh)n e ic,:'_tio_, Sec. 6096. Designation by individuals [(a) In General.--Every individuM (other than a nonresident alien) whose income tax liability for' the taxable year is $1 (_.rmore may designate that $1 shall be paid over 1;othe Presidential t].lection Campaign Fund in accordance with the provisions of section 9(i)06(a). In the case of a joint return of ihusband ami wife having an incon}e tax liability of $B or more, each spouse may designate that $1 stqM1 ib_paid to the fund.] (a) Ii_ GEz_Rar,--Erery individv_l whose incbme tax liab_g,!ityjot the taxable year iz $2 or more is co_sidered to have designated t)_at $2 shall be paid o_verto the Federai! _Election Campaign Fund esto',blished under sectian 506 of the Federal I_ lectio_. Ua_r_pai.qn Act of 197I _,_less _ elects not to make that designation. I,_ the case of a joi_ retu_,n of a husbaq_cl and wife haz,ing an i_wome tax liabilii_y of 8/_ o_,_r_o_'e_ each spouse shall be considered to ],ave designated that $£ _hall be paid over to such fund unless heelects not to make such designat_ion. (b) tax Income of subsection (a!.,,,mount tlhe in· come liabilityTax ofLiability.---]_ any individualor purposes for any taxable year is the 170 75 of the tax imposed by chapter I on such individual for such taxable year (as shown on his return), reduced by the sum of the credits (a:, shown in his return) allowable under Sections 33, 37, ,_8, 40_ and 41. (c) Manner and Time of [Desig_ation.--A designation] Election.--An election under subsection (a) may be made with respect to any tax:able year-(1) at the time of filing the return of the tax imposed by chapter 1 for such taxable year, or (2) at ally other time (after the time of filing the return of the tax imposed by chapter 1 for such taxable year) specified in regulations prescribed by the Secretary or his delegate. Such [desig-nation] election shall be made in such manner as the Secretary or his delegate prescribes by regulations excep[ that, if such [designation] electio_, is made at the tJme of filing tl_{_return of the tax imposed by chapter 1 for such taxable year, such [designation] election shall be made either on the first page of the return or on the page bearing the taxpayer's signature. [SUBTITLE [Chapter [_Chapter H--FINANCING 95. Presidential 96. Presidential [CHAPTER [Sec. [Sec. ][Sec. [Sec. [Sec. [Sec. [Sec. [Sec. [Sec. [Sec. I'Sec. [Sec. [Sec. 9001. 9002. 9003. 9004. 9005. 9006. 9007. 9008. 9009. 9010. 9011. 9012. 9013. OF A PRESIDENTIAL [CAMPAIGN S election election campaign campaign 95---PRESIDENTIAL fund. fund advisory ELECTION ELECTION board. CAMPAIGN Short title. Definitions. Condition for eligibility for payments. Entitlement of eligible candidates to payments. Certification by Comptroller General. Payments to eligible candidates. Examinations and audits; repayraents. Information on proposed expenses. Reports to Congress; regulations. Participation by Comptroller General in judicial Judicial review. Criminal penalties. Effective date of chapter. [See. 9001. Short title. [This chapter may be cited as the "Presidential Fund Act". _UND proceedings. Election Campaig n [See. 9002. Definitions. [Forpurpos es of this chapter-[(1) The term "authorized committee" means, with respect to the candidates of a political party for/)resident and Vice President of the United States, any political committee which is authorized in writing by such candidates to incur expensel to further the electi °n of such candidate s, Such aut]iorization Shall be addressed to the chairman of such politicM committee, and a copy of such authorization shall be filed by such candidates with the Comptroller General, Any withdrawal of any authorization shall also be in wiqting and shall be addressed and filed in the same manner as the authorization, 17 1 76 [(2) The term "candidate" means, with resr)ecl_ to anv m'esidentim election, an individual who (A) has been '_nominated ' "_ l'or_ eleci tion to the office of President of the United _tates ;_ or the office of Vice President of the Unfiled Stal]es b'_ a maj>r party, or(B) has qualified to have his Imm¢_ on th_J eleLtion b_,llol; (or to have the names of electors pledged to hire on the election ballot) as the candidate of a political party for election to either suclh office ill 10 or more States. For purposes of paragraph,s (6) and (7) of this secticn and purposes of section 9004(a)(2), the teton "candidate" means, with respect to any preceding presidential e_ection, an individual who received popular votes for the office of President in such election. [ (3) The term "Comptroller General" means tk.e Comptroller General of the United States. [(4) The term "eligible candidates" raeans the candidates of a political party for President and Vice President (,f the United States who have met all applicable conditions loc eligib::lity to receive payments under this chapter set forth in section'9003. [(5) The term "fund" means the Presidential Election Campaign Fund established by section 9006 (a)_ ....[(6) The term major party means, wxth respect to any pr_sidentml election, a pohctml party wBose c._xndMate fo]' the office of President in the preceding president i[al election_ received, as the candidate of such party, 25 percent or more of the total :auraber of popular votes received by all candidates for such office. [ (7) The term "minor party" means, with respect to any pr,3sidentim election, a political party whose c%ndidate for the office of Pres:ident in the preceding presidential election receivE_, as the car_didate of such party, 5 percent or more but ].ess than 25 percent of tkLetotal number of popular votes received by all candidates for such office. [ (8) The term "new party" means, with respect to any presMential election, a political party which is neither a major party nor aminc, r party. [ (9) The term "political committee" means any committee, associa,tion, or organization (whether or not incorporal;ed) which accepts contributions makes expenditures :for theor purpo:_e or attempting to orinfluence, the nomination election ofofinfluencing, one or more individuals to Federal, State, or local elective public office. [ (10) The term "presidential election" means the election of pres]-. dential and vice-presidential electors. [(11) The term "qualified campai_', expense" raeans an expense-[(A) incurred (i) by the candidate of a political party for' the office of President to further his election to such office or to further the election of the candidate of such political party for the office o_ Vice President, or both ('ii) by the candidate of a political party for the office ,0f V'ice President to :further ih]s election to such office or to further the election o:_ the candidate of such political party for the office of President, or both, or (iii) by an authorized committee of the candidates of ,t political party for the offices of President and Vice President to further thii_ election of either or both of such candidates to §uch offices,, [(B) incurred within the expenditure report period (as de· treed in paragraph (12)), or in[curred before the beginn!kng o:_ 172 77 such period to the extent such expense is for property, services, or facilities used during such period, and II(C) neither the incurring nor payment of which constitutes a violation of any law of the United States or of the State in which such expense is incurred or paid. [An expense shall be considered as incurred by a candidate or an authorized committee if it is incurred by a person authorized by suc]h candidate or such committee, as the case, may be, to inc,ur such expense on behalf of such candidate or such committee. If an authorized com.mittee of the candidates of a political party for President and Vice President of the United States also incurs expenses to further the election of one or more other' individuals to Federal, State, or loc'd elective public ofiic% expenses incurred by such committee which are not Specifically to further the election of such other individual or in-dividuals shall be considered as incurred to further the election of such candidates for President and Vice President in such proportion as the Comptroller General prescribes by rules or regulations. [,,(12) The term "expenditure report period" with respect to any presidential election means-['(A) in the case of a major party, the period beginning with the first day of September before the election, or, if earlier, witlh the date on which such major paucityat its national convention nominated its candidate for election to the office of President of the United States, and ending 30 days after the date of the presi.dential election; and i'(B) in the case of a party which is not a major party, the same period as the expenditure report period of the major party which has the shortest expediture report period for such presiden-tim election under subpargarph (A).] [-See. 9003. Condition for eligibility for payments. I'(a) section IN GE_r:nah.--In order to of be gel:igible receiveill .any paymenJ:s under 9006, the candidates politicalto party a presidential election shall, in writing-[[(1) agree to obtain and furnish to the Comptroller General such evidence as he may request of the qualified campaign ex.penses with respect to which payment is sought, [-(2) agree to keep and furnish to the Comptroller General such records, books, and other inf(,rmation as he may request, [-(3) agree to an audit and examination by the Comptroller General under section 9007 and to pay arty amounts required to be paid under such section, and [[(4) agree to furnish statements of qualified campaign expenses and proposed quMifiied campaign expenses required under section 9008. [ (b) Major Parties.--In order to be e][igible to receive any payments under section 9006, the candidates of a major party in a presidential election shall certify to the Comptroller General_ under penalty of perjury, that-[(1) such candidates and their authorized committees will not incur qualified campaign expenses in excess of the '_ggregate payments to which they will be entitled under section 9004, and 173 78 _ [(2) no cont_lbutmns to de._vay quahfied carnva_ml exmms,:,s ha_e been or will be accepted by such candidates or any of their authorized connnittees excei)t to the extent necessary to make up any deficiency in payments received e.ut of the fm(d on _ccour:.t of the applicationofsectioil 9006(d), and no contributions to defray expenses which would be qualified eampa! gn expenses ::mt fcr subparagraph (C) of section 9002(11) have been or will be accepted by such candidates or any of their authorized committees. [Such certification shall be made within such time prior to the .day cf the presidential election as the Comptroller Gener'tl shall presc:dbo by rules or regulations. .[(c) Minor and New Parties.--In order to be eligible to receive any payments under section 9006, the candidates of a minor or new party in."a presidential election shall certify to the Comptroller General, under penalty of perjury, that--_ [(1) such candidates and their authorized :ommittees will not incur qualified campaign expenses in excess o,f the aggregal-e payments to which the eligible candidates of a r:mjor party _.re erLtitled under section 9004. and [(S) such candidates _and their authorized committees will a,> cep.t and expend or retain contributions to defray qualified can:tpa_gn expenses only to the extent that the qua;lifted car:lpaign expenses incurred by such candidates and their authorized committees certified to under paragraph (1) exceed the ag_ffegate payments received by such candidates out of the fund pursua_>t to section 9006. [Such certification shall be made within such time prior to the day 6_ the presidential election as the Comptroller Gener_,l shall presc_:ibe by rules or re_fiations.] [See. 9004. Entitlement of eligible candidates to payments. [(a) Ix Gr_rERAr_.--Subject to the provisions of this chapter .... [(1) The eligible candidates of a major party in a presidential election shall be entitled to payments under s,ction 9006 equal i:a the aggregate to 15 cents multiplied by the total number of res:i-dents within the United States who ha:_e attained the age of 18_ as determined by the Bm'eau of the Census_ as of the first .:gay of June of the year preceding the year of the presidential election. [(12) (A) The eligible candidates of a minor party in a presidential election shall be entitled to payments under section 9006 equal in the aggregate to an amount which be_,rs the same ratio to the amount computed under paragraplh (1) for a_major party ss the number of popular votes recefved by the (andidate for Pres:i-dent of the minor party, as such candidate_ in 1;heprecedin2' pres:i.dent, iai election bears to the average number of populai; votes received by the candidates for President of the :major parties in the preceding presidential election. Ii'B) If the candidate of one or raore pclitical parties (n(:,t including a major party) for the office of President was a candidate for such office in the preceding presidential election and received 5 percent or more but less than 25 percent of the total number of popular votes received by all candidates for such offic_, such candidate and his running mate for the sffice of Vice Presi- 174 79 dent, upon compliance with the provisions of section 9003 (a) and (c), shall be treated as eligible candidates entitled to payments under section 9006 in an amount computed as provided in subparagraph (A) by taking into account all the popular votes received by such candidate for the office of President in the preceding presidential election. If eligible candidates of a minor party are entitled to payments under this subparagraph, such entitlement shall be reduced by the amount of the entitlement allowed under subparagraph (A). [(3) The eligible candidates of a minor party or a new party in a presidential election whose candidate for President in such election receives, as such candidate, 5 percent or more of the total nun:Lber of popular votes cast for the office of President in such election shall be entitled to payments under section 9006 equal in the aggregate to an amount which bears the same ratio to the amount computed under paragraph (1) for a major party as the number of popular votes received by such candidat,_ in such election bears to the average number of popular votes received in such election by the candidates for Pres:tdent of the major parties. In the case of eligible candidates entitled to payments 'under paragraph (2), the amount allowable under this paragraplh shall be limited to the amount, if any, by which the entitlement under the preceding sentence exceeds the amount of the entitlement under paragraph (2). [(b) LmiTX_O_s.--The aggregate payments to which the eligible candidates of a political party shall be entitled under subsections (s) (2) and (3) with respect to a presidentiM election shall not exceed a,n amount equal to the lower of-[(1) the amount of qualified campMgn expenses incurred by such eligible candidates and their authom'zed committees, reduced by the amount of contributions to defray qualified campaign expenses received and expended or retMned by such eligible candidates and such committees, or [ ('2) the aggregate payments to which the eligible candidates of a major party are entitled under subse, ction (a)(1), reduced by the amount of contributions described in paragraph (1) of th.is subsection. [(c) REs_ic_oNs.--The eligible candidates of a politicM parLy shM1 be entitled to payments under subsection (a) only[ (1) to defray qualified campaign expenses incurred by such eligible candidates or their authorized committees, or [(2) to repay loans the proceeds of which weri_ used to defray such qualified campMgn expenses, or otherwise to restore funds (other than contributions to defray quMified carnpMgn expenses received and expended by such candidates or such committees) used to defray such qualified campaign expenses.'l [See. 9005. Certifieation by Comptroller General. [(a) Initial Certification.--On the basis of the evidence, books, records, and information furnished by the eligible candidates of a political party and prior to examination and audit under section 9007, the Comptroller General shall certify from time totime to the Secreta W for payment to such candidates under section 9006 the payments to which such candidates are entitled under section 9004. 175 8() £(b) Finality of Certifications and Determinations.--Initi':tt cel'_l:ifications by the Comptroller (}enerM under sut_,_ection (a), and ,all determinations made by him under this chaptei, shall be fi_lal akd conclusive, except to the extent that they are subject to examiinatkm and audit by the Comptro]ler (}eneral under secti_m 9007 and judiciM review under section 9011.] [Sec. 9006. Payments to eligible candidates. ['(a) Establishment of (]anq)aio'n Fund.--Thm'e is hereby established or,. the books of the Treasl_LrV of the United _¢tates a spec):'L1fund to be known as the "Presidential Election Campaign Fund". The Se,> retary shall, as provided by appropriation Acts, t.ransfer to tt:_e fund an amount not :in excess of the sum of the amount_; designated (subsequent to the previous Presidential election) to the fund by indi'viduais under section 6096. I'(b) Transfer to the General Fund.--If, after a President. iM election and after all eligible candidates have been paid the amount, which they are entitled to receive under this chapter, there are mom:_ys remaining in the fund, the Secretary shall1 transfer the mol-leys ,':;o remaining to the general fund of the Treasury. £(c) Payments.. From the Fund ...... .....Upon receit t of a certitlcaticn from the Comptroller General under section 9005 for payment to the eligible candidates of a political party, the Secretary shall pay to suclh candidates out of the fund the arno/mt certified i)y :Lhe Comptroller General. Amounts paid to any such candidates shall be under the con.trol of such candidates. I'(d) Insufficient amounts in ]?unds.--If at the time of a cert:ification by the Comptroller General under section 900_ for payment: to the eligible candidates of a political party_ the Secretary' or his delegate determines that the moneys in the fund are not, or may not be, sut!ficient to satisfy the full entitlements of the eligible candidates_ of all political parties, he shall withhold from s-ach payment such amount as he determines to be necessary .to assure that the eligible candidates of each political party will recmve their pro rata share of their full entitlement. Amounts withheld by reason of the preceding sentenc,, shall be paid when the Secretary or his delegate determines thai: there are sufficient moneys in the fund to pay ,tach amounts, or portions thereof, to all eligible candidates from whom amounts haw., been withheld, but, if there are not sufficient moneys in the fund to satisfy the full entitlement of the eligible candidates of all political parties, the amounts so withheld shall be paid in such manner that the eligible candidates of each political party receive their pro rata share of their: full entit][ement.] [Sec. 9007. Examinations and audits; repayments. [[.(a) Examinations and Audits.--After each p::'esidential election the Comptroller General shall conduct a tlhorough examination and audit of the qualified campaign expenses of the candidates of_ each political party for President and Vice President. [[ (b) Repayments._ [' (1) If the Comptroller General determines 'Shall any portiion o]1! the payments made to the eligible candidates of a political party under section 9006 was in excess of the aggregate payme:nts tc, 176 81 which candidates were entitled under section 9004, notify such candidates, and such candidates shall pay retary an amount equal to such portion. [(2) If the Comptroller General determines that candidates of a pohtical party and the!Lr authorized he shall so to the Sec.the eligible committees incurred qualified campaig'n expenses in excess of the aggregate payments to which the eligible candidates of a major party were entitled under section 900t, he shall notify such candidates of the amount of such excess and such candidates shall pay to the Secreta .ry an ammmt equal to such amourLt. [(3) If the Comptroller General determines that the eligible candidates of a major party or any authorized committee of such candidates accepted contributions (other than contributions to make up deficiencies in payments out of the fund on account of the application of section 9006(d)) to defray qualified campaign expenses (other than qualified campaign expenses with respect to which payment is required under paragraph (9)), he shall notify such candidates of the amount of the contributions so accepted, and such candidates shall pay to the Secreta W an amount equal such amount. [(4) If the Comptroller GenerM determines that any amount of any payment made to the eligible candidates of a political party under section 9006 was used for any pm:pose other than-[(A) to defray the qualified campaign expenses with respect to which such payment was made, or [ (B) to repay loans the proceeds of which were used, or otherwise to restore funds (other than contributions to defray qualified campaign expenses which were received and expended) which were used, to defray such qualified campaign expenses. ]/e shall notify such candidates of the amount so used, and such candidates shall pay to the Secretary an amount equal to such amount. [(5) No payment shall be required from the eligibl e candidates of a political party under this subsection to the extent that such payment, when added to other payments required from such candidates under this subsection, exceeds the amount of payments received by such candidates under section 9006. [(e) Notification.--No notificatioh shall :be made by the Comptroller General under subsection (b) with respect to a presidential election more than 3 Years after the.day of such election. [(d) Deposit or Repayments._All payments received 'by the Secretary under subsection(b) shall be deposited by him in the general fund of the Treasm3r. [(d) DErosTT OF REPAY_ENTs.--All[ payments received by the Secretary under subsection (b) shall be depositted by him in the general fund of the Treasury.] [See. 9008. Information on proposed expenses. [(a) Rr_roR,s By CANou)._TEs._The candidates of a political party for President and Vice PreSident in a presidential election shall, from time to time as the Comptroller General may require, furnish to the 1['77 82' Comptroller General a detailed statement, in such form as the (?o_m_Jtroller General may prescribe, of--I(1) the qualified campaign expenses inc':_rred bv t}_c-_uand their authorized committees prior to the date of sm:h statemelt (whether or not evidence of such expenses has been fu_:uishe_l for pm'poses of section _)005), and [(9) the qualified campaign expm;ses which they a_(:[ their' attthorized committees propose to incur on ar after the date cf sqch statement. [The Comptroller General shall require a statem:mt under t llis sul::-section from such candidates of each political party a:Lleast om.? eqcli week during the second, third, and fourtl_ weeks'Preceding tl:_e da¢ .of the presidential election and at least twice during the week l':,l'eced'ing such day. [(s) Comptroner ¢efra] shah,as sible af_,r he r_.ceives each statmnent un&r subsection (a), pl'epar,e and publish a summary of such state:meat, together with any cthe,' data or information which he deems advisable, in tl] e Federal R]:_!_,:iste_ ',. Such summary shall not include any information which identifiiis an',7 individual who made a designatioz_ under section 6090.] "' [Sec. 9009. Reports to Congress; regulations. [ (a) REVOnTS.--The ComptrOl]er (i;enera! shall, as soon as p:_'_:cl:ica. Me after each presidential election, subnait ::; full r,_po:rt to the: k'!,enat_:_ and House of Representatives set.ting forth-[(1) the qualified eampaig m expenses (shown in such (Icl:ail as the Comptroller (?reneral dete:nnines necessary) incurred 1(_ th_: bandidates .of each politica], party and thei::, authorized eom. mittees; [(9_) tim amounts eertifiefi by him under section 9005 fo:_'pay, ment to the eligible e'mdidates of each polit, ie,_l party; ami [(3) the amount of payments, if any, required from sue]:: can-. didates under sectio._ "' _' and the reasons for each pa?:ment ,,00_., required. [Each roi>om submitted put_uam, _- , ' to this section shall be print:e:[ ::.tsa. Senate document, [ (b) RuounAwroxs. ETC.-il'he on pt roller Gene:al :is authori:;::ed tc, prescribe such rules and regulatibns., to conduct _mch examin:ttions and audits (in hddition to the. exlmfinations and audits required b':,'see.. tion 9007(a) ), to conduct such investigations_ and to require the }:eep-lng and submission of such bool;s, :,'ec0rds, and information,, as he deems necessary to carry out the functions a.nd duti[_s imposed o]: ]timt by this ehapter.] [Sec. 9010. Participation by Comptroller General in judicial! pro., ceedings. [] (a) AvvEAn^xcn ny Cot:xs_,:n.--The Comptrol] er General is au-. thorized to appear in and defend against any acti(m filed under' section 9011, either by attorneys employe(l in his office or, by eounsei! _'l_om he may appoint without regard to tho provisions of title 5, United States Code, governing appointments in the, competitive servi,::,e,,and whose compensation he may fix without regard to the provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of such tide. 178 83 [(b) RECOVERY OF CERTAIN PAY_n_X, Ts.--The Compkroller General is authorized through attorneys and counsel described in subsectkm (a) to appear in the district eom'ts of the United States to seek recovery of any amounts determined to be payaMe to the Secretary as a result of examination and audit made pursuant to section 9007. [(C) ]DECLAIIATORYA_D I:_arYXCTIVE R nLxnr.---The Comptroller General is authorized through attorneys and counsel described in subsection (a) to petition the courts of the United States :for declaratory or injunctive relief cencerning any civil matter covered by the provisions of this subtitle or section 6096. Upon application of the Comptroller General, an action brought pursuant to this subsection shall be heard and determined by a court of three judges in accordance with the provisions of section 2284 of title 9.8, United States Code, and any appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court. It shall be the duty of the judges designated to hear the case to a.ssign the case for hearing at the 'earliest practicable date, to participate :in the hearing and deterruination thereof, and to cause the case to be in every way expedited. [ (d) ArrnAn.--The Comptroller General is authorized 'on behalf of tine United States to appeal from, and to petition the Supreme Court for certiorari to review, judgments or decrees entered with respect' to actions in which he appears pursuant tc, the authority provided in this section.] [See. 9011. Judicial review. [ (a) REVIEW or CImTIrlCATION, DI,:T:YJl_nX_\XSOX, OROTIIER ACTION ny Tnr_ CO_PTaOHmR GENEmXL.--Anv certification, determination, or other action by the Comptrdler General made or taken pursuant to the provisions of this chapter shall be subject to review by the United States Court. of Appeals for thc I)istrict of Coluinbi'[ upon petition filed in such Court by any interested person. Any petition filed pursuant to this section shall be filed within thirW days after tlle certi}ica_ion, determination, or other action by tile Comptroller General for which review is sought. [(b) SUITS To I31:PLE3[ENT CI{APTER.'-- [(1) The Comptroller General,, the rtationa! committee of any political part3,- , and individuals eligible to vote for P, esident are authorized to institute such actions, including act;ions foi' declar;xtory judgment or injunctive relief, :as may be appropriate to implement or construe any provision of, this chapter. [(2) The district court s of the United States shall have jurisdiction of proceedings instituted pursuant to this subsection and shall exercise the same without regard to whether a person asserting rights under provisions of tMs subsection shall have exhausted any administrative or Other remedies that may be provided at law. Such proceedings shall be heard and dei ermined by a court of three judges in accordance with the provisions of section 2'284 of title 28, United States Code, and any appeal shall lie to thc Supreme COurt. It shall be the dllty of t Pe judges designated to hear the case to assign the case for hearing at the earliest practicable date, to participate in the hearing and determination thereof, and to cause thc case to be in every way expedited.] 1'79 84[Sec. 9012. Criminal penalties. [(a) :ExcEssCA rAi' ExPExSES.--[ (1) It shall be unlawful for an eligible candidate of a political party for President and Vice President in a presidential dection or any of his authorized committees knowingly and will:l!Ully Lo incur qualified campaign expenses in excess of the aggregate payments to which the eligible candids_tes of a major I:,a::'ty are entitled under section 9004 with respect to such election. [(2) Any person who violates paragraph (1) shall be fined not more than $5,000, or imprisoned not more th:m one year or both. In the case of a violation by an authorized committee, any officer or member of such committee who knowingly and willfully consents to such violation shall be fined not more than $5,000.-0r imprisoned not more than one year, or both. [(b) (.yOI_'TRIBUTIONS.-' [(1) It shallbe unlawful for' an eligible c_ndidate of a major party in a presidential election or any of his authorized corem:ittees knowingly and willfully to accept any contribution to defr_y qualified eampai_ expenses, except to the extent necessary _o make up any deficiency in payments received out of the fund on account of the application of section 9006(d), or to def::_ay expenses which would be qualified campaign expenses but for subparagrgph (C) of section 9009(11). [,(2) It shall be unlawful for art eligible cardidate of a political party (other than a major party) in a presidential election or any of his authorized committees knowingly and willfully to accept and expend or retain contributions to defray qualified campa!gn expenses m an amount which exceeds the qualified campaign expenses incurred with respect to such elect!on by such _,ligib]e candidate and his authorized committees. [(3) Any person _2-hoviolates paragraph (1) or (2) shall be fined not more than Sa.000, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. In the case of a violation by an aubhorized committee, any officer or member of suclh committee who knowingly an d wil lfu]iy consents to such violation slhall be fined not more than $5,000, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. [ (C) UNLAWFUL USE OF PAYMENTS.--- [(1) .It shall be unlawful for any pexson who receives arty payment under section 9006, or to whom any portion of any payment received under such section is transferred, knowingly and willfully to use, or authorize the use of, such payment or such portion for any purpose other than .... [(A) to defray the qualified campaiga expenses with respect to which such payment was made, or [(B) to repay loans the proceids of which were used, (>r otherwise to restore funds (other t]han contributions to defray qualifed campaign expenses which were received and expended) which were used, to defray such qualified carq_,aign expenses. 180 85 [(2) Any person who violates paragraph (1) shall be fined noi; more tha n.$10,000, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.. [ (d) FALS_STATEM_STS, ETC.[ (1) It shall be unlawful for any per,mn knowingly and will.fully- [ (A) to furnish any false, fictitious, or fraudulent evidence, books, or information to the Comptroller General under this subtitle, or to include in any eviden.ce, books, (Jr information so furnished any misrepresentation .of a material fact, or to falsify or c°nceal any evidence, books, or information relevant to a certification by the Comptroller General or an examina.tion and audit by the Comptroller General under this chapter; or [ (B) to fail to furnish to the Comptroller General any rec.ords, books, or information requested by him for purposes oJ_ this chapter. [(2)than Any$10,000, person orwho violates paragraph (1) five shallyears, be fined nol_ more imprisoned not mor_. than or both. [(e) KICKBACKSAXDILLEOALPAY_aESTS.--[(1) It shM1 be unlawful for any person knowingly and will.fully to give or accept any kickback or any illegal payment irt connection with any qualified campaign expense of eligible candidates or their authorized committees. [(2) Any person who violates paragraph (1) shall be. fined not more than $10,000, or imprisoned nol_more than five years, or both. [(3) In addition to the penalty provided by paragrap, h (2), any person who accepts any kickback or illegal payment m con-nection with any qualified campaign expense of eligible candi-dates or their authorized committees shall pay to the Secretary, for deposit in the general fund of the Treasury, an amount equal[ to 125 percent of the kickback or payment received. [(f) USAUTaOmZ_.Exr_smTrmEsA_DCOSTm_UTrO,XS.-- [(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful[ for any political committee which is;not 'm authorized committee with respect the eligible l_f a political partyknow-. for President andto Vice Presidentcandidates in a pre_fidential election ingly and willfully to incur expenditures to further the election of such candidates, which would constitute qualified campaign expenses if incurred by an authorized committee of such can-. did ates, in an aggregate amount exceeding $1,000. [(2) This subsection shall not apply to (A) expenditures by a broadcaster regulated by the Federal Communications Commis-. sion, or by a periodical publication, in reporting the news or in taking editorial positions, or (B) expenditures by any organi-. zation described in section 501 (c) which is exempt from tax under section 501(a) in communicating 'to its members the views of that organization. [(3) Any political committee which violates paragraph (1) shall be fined not more than $5,000, and any officer or member of such committee who knowingly and willfully consents to such vio.. lation and any other individual who knowingly and willful!v violates paragraph (1) shall be fined not more than $5,000, or imprisoned not more than one year, or bo:Lh. 181 86 .[(g) U_ArrTHOmZED D_SCLOStml,: Or I]_ro2_Anox.-- [(1) It shall be unlaw!'ul for ally individual to dis any information obtained un&Jr the provisions o:! this chapter except as may be required by law. [ (2) Any person who violates paragraph (1) shall be fined not more than $5,000, or imprisoned not more than one year_ o:' both.] [Sec. 9013. Effective date of chapter. [The provisions [CHAPTER [Sec. 96. of this chapter shall take effect on January PRESIDENTITAL FUND ADVISORY 9021. Establishment of Advisory FLECTIOX BOARD 1,197').] CAMI:;'AIGN Board, [(a) ESTAm:m_.XT O_ Bo,x_m---There is hereby established an advisory board to be known as the Presidential Election CampM.gn Fund Advisory Board (hereinafter in th!is section referred t(:, as the "Board"). It shM1 be the duty and functior-of the Board to counsel and assist the Comptroller General of tlhe United States in the performance of the duties and functions imposed on him under the ]Pres[dentim Election Campaign Fund A.ct. [(b) Co_ros_zmx oF BoxRm---The Board shall, be composed of the following members: [(1) the majority leader and minority leader of the Senate a_d the Speaker and minority leader of the House of Represent:atiw!_s, who shall serve ex officio; [.(2) two members representing each political party which is a malor party (as defined in .section 900!2 (6)), which members sh_',I1 be appointed by the Comp/roller General from recommendatio:l_s submitted by such political ]?arty; and [(3) three members represent:in_ the ge:'teral public, which members shall be selected by the members des( ribed in pal_'a_.?aphs (1) and (2). [The terms of the first members of _ihe Board described in pa,azr_phs (2) and (3) shall expire on the sixtieth day after the date of ti[re first presidential election following January 1, 1978, a:ad the terms OJ. - *_Sllt)sequent members described in paragraphs (2) and (3) shall begin on the sixty-first day after the date of a presidential election and expi::e on the sixtieth day following the date of the subsequent pres_denti:d election. The Board shall elect a Chairman from its members. [ (c) Co_trr. XSATm_.--Memb¢_rs of the Board (other than mc.mbe cs described in subsection (b) (1) shall receive compensation at: tim ra-e of $75 a day for each day they are engaged in pe::forming duties ard functions as such meml_ers, including traveltime, and, wh:de aw::,v from their homes or regular places of business, shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, :as authorized by law for persons in the Government service empl>yed interndl:tent.]v. [(d) SvATus.--Service by an individual as a lrem ber of the Boa J::d shall not, for purposes of any other law of the United States be co:nsidered as service as an officer or employee of the Un![ted Sta_ie.i!',.] 182 ROLLCALL VOTES IN CO1ViS:[ITTEE In compliance with sections 133 (b) and (d) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946_ as amended, the record of rollcall votes in the Committee on Rules and Administration during its consideration of the original bill (subsequently S. 3044] is as follows: 1. Motion by Senator Griffin to delete Title I and substitute therefor a proposal to provide candidates for Federal office in general elec-tions with certain amounts of television time t;o be paid for from funds in the United States Treasury, and to prohibit such candidates from purchasing additional television time. Rejected: 3 yeas; 6 nays. Yeas--3 Mr. Allen Mr. Griffin Mr. Hatfield x lqays--6 Mr. Cannon Mr. Pell Mr. Robert; C. Byrd Mr. Williams Mr. Cook Mr. }Iugh Scott _ _ 2. Question posed by the Chairman: Shal![ the Committee Title I as contained in the draft bill (Committee Print Adopted: 7 yeas; 2 nays. Yeas--7 Mr. Cannon Mr.Pell Mr. Robert C. Byrd _Mr. Williams Mr. Cook Mr. Hugh Scott _ Mr. Hatfield _ approw_ No. 3)? Nays--2 Mr. Allen · Mr. __rlffin 3. Motion by Senator Griffin that the bill be reported to the Senate without recommendation (offered as a substitute for Senator PelFs motion, which follows). Rejected: 3 yeas; 6 nays. Yeas--3 Mr. Allen Mr. Griffin Mr. Hatfield x Nays--6 Mr. Cannon Mr. Pell Mr. Robert C. Byrd _ Mr. 'Williams Mr. ,Cook Mr. Hugh Scott _ 1 Proxy. (s7) 1 c,.3 88 4. Motion by Senator PeU ths_t the draWLbill be favorably to the Senate. Adopted: 8 yeas; Jinay. Yeas--8 Mr.Ca_non Mr. Pell Mr. Robert C. Byrd _ Mr. Williams Mr. Cook Mr. Hugh Scott x Mr. Griffin Mr., Hatfield _ x Proxy. 184 l_'ay,,;--1 Mr.Allen report6d ADDITIONAL VIEWS ()F MR. PELL It is particularly gratifying to me as Chairman of the Subcommit-tee on Privileges and Elections that the Committee is reporting legis-. lation in which public financing of elections is such a strong component. The public financing features of the, Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974 stem from comprehensive hearings before the subcommittee which I conducted on September 18, 19, 20 and 21, 1973. Many constructive recommendations emerged from these hear.. ings. They were distilled into my own bfil, S. ,,718, which I introduced on November 16, which was reported to the Committee :for considera.tion, and which formed the basis for our deliberations. I am pleased that the legislation contains principles which I had advanced. Among these are: coverage of all: Federal elections, pri.mary and general; a threshold amount to be raised in small contrl_bu tions by candidates in primary elections to ensure each candidate's. seriousness of intent; and the concept of matching these small contri.butions with federal dollars. I am also pleased that the legislation contains provisions which I recommended in Committee. Among these are: an accelerated report.. lng procedure by the Federal Election Commission to permit completion of examinations and audits of campaign expenditures at the earliest practicable time; a greater limitation on the amounts which an individual candidate may contribute to his or her ow n earn.. paign; and a new method of implementing the dollar check-off, whereby this check-off becomes automatic unless tho taxpayer indi.cates an objection. The Committee is reporting to the Senate legislation of historic significance, in accord with those Jeffersonian principles which place abiding confidence in the wisdom of the individual and in the individual's fundamental role in the development of an enlightened. democracy. We have witnessed the tragic perversion of these principles--in. terms of a misuse and corruption of power and a misguided depend-. ence on the influence of large political contributors. This le_slation is deeply concerned with the ending of such abuses.. It removes the temptation of seeking or of accepting the large com-. promising gift. It returns to our people, to our individual voters a rightful share and a rightful responsibility in the choosing of their candidates. And it can serve to establish that climate of public trust in elected officials which this country so earnestly desires. C%_BO_NE PELL. ADDITIONAL VIEWS The astute political observer, homely wisdom with a reporter's OF MR. GRIFFIN David S. BrodeL mixed a dash of cynicism when he wrote: "The only (89) 185 90 thing more dangerous to democracy than corrul_t politicians may be politicians hell-bent on reform,'" In many minds, the idea of "public financing" [:las somehow become synonymous with'"campaign reform." I a_n concerned that thc. reality may be very different. :Even though I have serious doubts about the public financing aspec:tS of bill, should I joinedhaxine voting to report toit be_cause I believe as this a whole an opportunity del_ate _nd. decide th_ tl:c_Semite issues raised by Title I. Furthermore, except for Titlei, the bill contains many campaign financing reforms which are clearly meritorious. For example, I str°ng]y support such provisions'as those in other titles of the bill to create an independent; FederM E'leetion Commission, to place strict dollar' limits on 'the an:tount an indR idual can conti:ibute to a candidate or to campaigns in any year, to.linfit the amount a candidate can contribute to his own campaigr, to restrict the s!ize of cash ,contributions; to impose ceilings on overa] 1 campaign expenditures; and to require each candidate to use a central campai_im co:mmittee and depositorY. Such provisions truly represent campaign fin:racing reforms, and they should be enacted on their own merit. I_'nfortunately, public understanding ihas not fully penetral;ed a facade of attractive slogans that has surrounded the promise o1!pubilic financing for campaigns. As more and more light is focused on the approach of Title I in this bill, the more realization there will be that it does not really represent "reform" a,t all. That will be part:icularly true as the and people "publ!c means "taxp'..:_ver financin_; whenlearn t ey ti-mt see that Title financing" I would _,ctually incre,'_% not decrease, the levels of campaign spending, part:.eularly in races J!or the House of Representatives. It should be noted also that a number of needed, real reforms have not been included in this bill. For example, I believe everyone .... cam!tidates andvoters alike--would weleo:me steps to shorten the duration of campaigns. R')BE][_T f_ 186 P. GI13:FFII_. SENATE FLOOR DEBATES ON 5.3044 March 26, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--SENATE S 4437 at companies_with large capital and sophistl_ted equipment, like t!_ tall timbe_ that once covered the moUntains_most of[the more profitable mines here,.were del_leted by the end of World War lX,_lknd the Dig corporations moved the_ equlpmen_iaew_ere, Since that tim,,the[economy of Bueh_nan County has eped _ed[ largely on the independent truck m_.-_O-called beeaues their mines were too_[nail to rate individual railroad spurs. There[ light industry in tors to buy equlp_ mt that wouidr put them in compliance wit L the 1969 Federal Coal Mine Health and S _ety Act. A safety complisa ce panel within the lnterlor Department hi 5 agreed to pOStpone closure if a mine ope] _tor applies for and wins approval of an SB_ loan. The law called for the installation )f the equipment by March 30, but the _ mall mine operators have virtually ignored fJ _ four-year-old deadline, As a result of the recent agreement, James M. Day, admlnistra or of the Interior's Mine p_ cent methane in the air near the min.. ins aA-es. Howew ,,, no decision has been _xade on the own_ _'request. The law require thatmtnesbeahutdo_._ v_he n there is 2 er cent methane in the air. Exploaions o_ ar when there ia 5 to 15 per cent of the odo lees gas. The U:nited Mi] s Workers, which repre.. sents a!x_ut 10 per '.ent of the affected work.. ers, said It suplx _s the m_me clceures. A union spoke-_r_ [said: "Th_ law is very clear. We're not going to tolerate endanger.- Grundy and in to of it is devoted EnfOrcement dieted that lng miners' but manumos_ facture, The waning of mines and attacks on critical issues that the editorials almcat daily Department. It is does not agree. The Rev. Murphy Presbyterian Church was at work last entitled "Coal and sermon was an attack, seemed bent on "Coal is a religious light of life and a Christianity is," said problem is one more trying to muscle in stroying the will of bread, The small miners the March 30 deadline association, the Operators Association there is little chance truck are such , Interior find Miller First Buchanan a Sunday He said outside forces the coal because it is the resource, Just like "The equipment xample of outsiders our way of life, deto earn their daily to appeal through their trade Independent Coal MESA officials say succeed ex- cept in cases where ope show they already have the new _ipment on order. MESA said last any small mine which did not have the: apply for a Small Bus Administration loan, and use the loan the basis for an exten_on tc Per the first tIme the lives of many miners, the future is an unavoidable topic of and when they speak of it, they speak [ke Eugene Hughes, 42, a a fifth-grade education, seven and 22 years of coal mining behind Si _ety noandmo] _ thanAdministration, 150 of the premines will be ordered sbu by fede/al mine lnspectors. Originally as ] _ny as 500 small mountainside mines face an April 1 shutdown. But as the deadl eral Energy Office o the mines, which 3 per cent--_16 to nation's coal supp needed to ease the mines should not be is no danger to mln Moreover, Sen. Cc with Interi and with tor small declared the mine The 500 area but ne approached, the Fed)Jected .to the closures of _nnually produce about 20 million tons---of the F, FEe said the coal is energy shortage and the closed needlessly, if there _rS working in them. )k, according to an aide, ,r officials to delay the the SBA to assure the which SBA said will for up t 30 years at the current 6_ cent. aide that in 1969 the senato have the above the water table and thus exempt from provision for sparkover a 12-state in the Appalachian hills of Virginia and eastern Kentucky, employ to workers. The key section _e 1969 law prohibits use of dig. glng and hauling at after March 30. This essentially that is not enclosed to sparks from igniting methane The claIm - that cost of the is greater--some estl mates high as $500,000 per mine---ti zan the coal In the mines. These operators sal that their co a"I'm It's gonnathe let me, with found small seams of ble _oal to that dig, bigger buddy. onlythe _I know to feed do, and nies unprofit: are u )sm_a-u_y when they get tired of eding me and a lot high on mountainsid s above the water tabl_ of others who will be _ Welfare with me, Gaseous conditions _ _e usually found sbelow_ maybe they'll let us go :k to work," Hughes the water table, whe most large mines are_ said. located, they claim. Were he a younger maz Hughes might conThus, the operat say there is little sider working in a larl ;, union mine, for danger of a gas expl( _ion in the small mines, higher wages, but those cbs are scarce, and which usually empl¢ _ from 5 to 30 minutes with 22 years' worth of rock dust accumuand often are family mterprises, lated in his lungs, Hug_. ;s could never pass "Since the law Wa passed there has been the physical examinatior for employment in only one fatality fro n a methane explosion a big mine. above the water le_ d," said Louis Hunter, Per the first time in h s life, Hughes now executive vice presidl mt of the National Inthinks that he would :onsider some Job dependent Coal Ope_ ators Association. "It's other than coal mining if _e were starting out all very foolish anywl y. They'll let these peoagain, but that would h mire moving from ple take a burning t Drch into the mines to here. repair equipment, k _t then they say all "In Buchanan Count ," he says, "coal equipment has got _o be sparkproof and mining's about all you h ye to look forward watertight." to.,, The number of miz _s that actually will be __ forced to close is dlt icult to ascertain. The [From the Washington ,st, Mar. 25, 1974] mine safety act set Lp an independent interim compliance ps _el to review appllcaSBA To M__K=.E_ureMm_Ti ,OANS----Am_AnACH_ tions from mine o_ ers to stay open past MZNE CLOSURE S?AYEV March 30 without tle required equipment, (By Kenneth Br_ lemeler) The panel has he rd 256. cases, denying About 400 small Appal ,chian coal mines, 168 bids to stay opel and granting 88. Tile which for four years have ,een on notice that only criterion for p( 'mission to stay open, they will be shut down ; the end of this according to an Interl )r spokesman, has been month unless they inst 1 explosion-proof whether the mine ha _ proof that it has ormachinery, have been gl' en more time to dered the necessary equipment to comply acquire the equipment, with the new safety st ndards, With a considerable ass: _t from Sen. MarIn lieu of buying e new equipment, the low W. Cook (R-Ky.), a I )ngtime friend of coal operators have ked that they be perthe small mine owners, t :e Small Business mltted to install me ane monitors on rainAdministration has agret to grant longlng equipment that would automatically term. low-Interest loans the mine Operashut off the equipmt _t when there is 0.25 · lives."[ CONCLUSImr. OP BI_SINESS The PRESIDING/ MORNING OFFICE I.EN). _me for morning business lng business is of NATIONAL OF The LEN). At the the Senate which tlhe clerk The ,'Lecond l_d as follows: S. 2893, to ameIld ice Act 1_ ImproVe gram and to e,uch program for The objection to the the bill? There being no proceeded to been reported I_abor and amendment to R (Mr. AL.. routim; Morn,. ACT AMEND1974 OI_J_ICER (Mr. A_,,', in accordance with the Chair lays befog; No. ?10, S. 2893:, state. legislative clerk Public Health Servnational cancer pr(iappropriations for next 3 fiscal years. OFFICER. Is there consideration of the Senate the bill, which had the Committee on Welfare with K[i ()ut all after the eh.- acting clause That this Act may ! cited as .the "National Cancer Act of 1974". S_c. 2. Section 3011 ) of the Public Health Service Act 201) the is amended by striking the (42 words fiscal year ending June 30, each of the eight ccecding fiscal ". of the Public Health SEC. 3. Section 402_ _rvlce Act is "in 'i_) by striking sanounts not to (1) and insert.exc_d $1_5,000" in lng l/_le,u thereof "if I _e direct costs of such researc_ and training not exceed $35,000, but onl_ and (2) by _lklng out '_n amounts exceeding $35,000" in_argaraph[(2) and inserting t'[z lieu thereof _f the di]ect costs of such re.. search and trai_ing exceed $35,000, but only". SF_. 4. (a) Sec_on 4q_(b) (?) .of .the Public Health Service Act_s an[ended by striking ou_ "where appropriate_ [ (.b) Section 407(_[4) of such Act is amended by insertlng_fter the word "data" "( lncll the following: Ling where apprc.. prlate nutritional pr, ,_ms for person:_ under treatment for c_ _c_"_". (c) Section 407(b)(_ (A)_f such Act is amended by inserting , 'ter t_ words "Na.tional Cancer Program, .the w_ds "lnelud.lng ,the number and typ _of .persd_nel neces.. sary to carry out such ] 'ogram,". (d) Section 40_(b) (f '(B) of suc_ Act Is amended by inserting i_r _ediately bef_e the period at the end ther( )f .th fe ollowi_Igt: ", and the allocation of pe ?onnel_requeste.._to car ry om; the National ',ancer Program" _, (e) Section 407(b) of ach Act is amendei_ by adding the foUowing _ew paragraph: "(10) 'I"ne Director of he National Cancer Institute shall condu(_ r contract for pro.. grams to disseminate am interpret on a cur.- 191 S 4438 CONGRESSIONAL rent .basis for practll professionals, sctentL llc, scientific and oil ing the cause, pre, treatment of the disc leto to which the ac are directed. The D Cancer Institute shai as are necessary to ( SEC. 5. Section 408 Service Act is ami "fifteen". .oners and other health ts, and the general puber information respectention, diagnosis, _ _nd se or other health prob-' lvities of the Institute rector of the National issue such regulations rry out this activity.", _) of the Public Health Lded by striking out SEC. 6. Section 409(_) of the Public Health Service Act is amendE I by striking out "and" before "$40,000,000" _ nd by inserting before the period at the en4 thereof a comma and the following: "$50,00 ,,0O0 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 19q i, $65,000,000 for the fiscal year ending Jun 30, 1976, and $85,000,000 for the fiscal year _nding June 30, 1977". SEC. 7. Section 410 of the Public Health Service Act is amend d-(1) by striking ou "fifty" in paragraph (l) and inserting lieu thereof "one hnndred"; (2) by striking on' "and" _t the end of paragraph (7); (3) by strLking out ;he period at, the end of paragraph (8) and i sertlng in lieu thereof "; and"; and (4) by new addingpanagra aft( :paragraph (8) the following : "(9) to .award gran s for new construction as well as altera' ions and renovations for improvement of t _sic research laboratory facilities, includ ag those related to biohazard control, as leemed necessary for the National Cancer Pr gram." SEC. 8. _ection 41(_,(a) of the Public Health S_rvlee Act is mended by inserting the word ", contras ;," after the word "grants" SEC. 9. Section 410C )f the Public Health Service Act ts amended _ striking out "and" before "$600,000,000" a_ by inserting before the period at the end tl_ 'eof a semicolon and the following: "$750,0 k0,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 197 ; $830,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1976; and $985,000,000 for the fiscal y :ar ending June 30, 1977". SEC. 10. Part A of ti Le IV of the Public Health Service Act is al _ended by adding at the end thereof the fo: owing new section: "AVAILABILFrY' OF kPPROPR[ATXONS "Sro. 410D. Notwlthsta vision of law, unless en of enactment of this secJ ltation of the provisions appropriated for any fis_ any. program for which al thorized by the Public (42 U.S.C. 201) or the Facilities and Commur Ac centers construction xding any other procted after the date on expressly in liraf this section, funds _1 year to carry out propriatlons are auHealth Service Act Ylental Retardation tyof Mental 1963 (42 Health U.S.C. 2661) shall remain avai _ble for obligation and expenditure untfi ti_ ._end of such fiscal year." SEC. 11. SeCtion 454 O: the Public Health Service Act is amended x) read as follows: "DIRECTORS OF _TSTrr_TES "SEc. 454. (a) The Institutes of Health the President; by and Dire sha with for of the National _ be appointed by ;he advice and con- sent of the Senate. Appel _tees shall be eliglbls for reappointment. "(bt) The :Director of _e National Cancer Institute shall be appoir ted by the Presi- dent. Except as provided ir section 407(b) (9), the Director Of the Nation ,1 Cancer Institute shall re_ort directly to t _e Director of the National Institutes of H_ _lth. TITLE II--BIOME_IC SEC. ServiCe 201. Act Title 'IV is amended of b_ _L RESgARCH he Public Health _dding at the end thereof the following new motion: "SEc. 455. (a) There _,_ established the President's BiomediCal Res ,arch Panel (here. inafter in this section ferred to as the 192 RECORD--. SENATB MarCh 'Panel"} which sha_ be cor_pose,d of' (1) the Chairlnan of the _reslden ?s Cancer Panel; and (2) four me_abers appointed by the President, who by [virtue _f their training. experienoe, and background are exceptionally qualified to app,'ais_ the bl_medical researcl_ program of the National Institutes of Health (including the rese[arch pr)grana of the Na.tional :in.,;titute of [Mental Health). At least three of the memb_ra of tae Panel shall be distinguished sc[enJistsorl)hysiclans. "(b) (1) Appointdkl members ,of the Pane: F.:_,'Iq_SION TEE who are appointed: ursuant to clattse (2) o.:_' subse_tion (a), sha: be ap]_)int,sd for three.year tetras, except t Lat (1) in the case of the tour members first _ppolni ed after the date on which t_hls scott n becomes effective, tw,o shall be appointed ior a ;erin of one yea.::' and two zhall be ap _ointed for a term of two years, as deslgnatec by the Pre_,;ldent at the time of appointmm t, and (ii) any member appointed to fill a _ _ancy DCCU]Tin_ prior to the expiration of tht term for which his pred-_ ecessor was appoir ;ed sh_ll be appointed only f,_r the remain, er of such term. "(2) The Preside t shall designate one of the appointed mem ers to .,erve as Chairma:: of the :Panel for a trm of ,)ne year. "(c) Appointe_ rr ;mbers of the Panel shall each be entitled to receive the daily eouiv.. objection, aleut foro.f grade the annua ratethe o: General basLc pay in el.. fect G'_-ll of Schedule for each day (lnclu_lng t_aveltime] durinc which they are eot aged in the actual performance of duties _ested Ln the Panel, an,5 shall be allowed ira, el expenses (including a per diem allowance unde: section 5703(b) of title 5, United Sga es Code. "(d) T_he Panel s _all m._et at _he call cJ the Chairman, but r )t less often than twelve times a year. A ira _script shall be keDt oi the proceedings _f e_ eh me(_tlng of _he Pane[. and the C:hairman sl all ma:_e such transcrip'[: available to the :_ub: e. "(e) The Panel sk _11 monitor the develop_ ment and executio_ of tt.e biomedical re-search programs, of the N. xtional Institutes of Health (incluclin_ the re_earch program of the National Instil lie of Mental _ealth) under this sectian, i_ad sh:_ll reDort directly to the President, An ' dela]_s or blockages i_.. r_pid execution of Pie bi_medLcal research progrsuns of the Natl ual Ir stitutes of Health (including the ]_sea ch pr)grara of the Na., tional :[n_titute of !_ _ntal ?Iealth) shall lmmediately be brough to th. · attention of thc _Tesident and the Sex ate Ccmmi_;tee on Labor e,nd Public Welfare, ' ae House Committee o:L Interstate and F_reif x Commerce, the Senate Committe on Approq rlatio:_s and the House Committee on App oprialions. The Panel shall submit to .the _resident periodic prog-. . ress reports on the 1 [omedLcal research programs of the N_tiox _1 Institutes of Healmh (including In,_titute the resea the National of ] ch :entalprogram Health) of _nd an.. nually an evaluatio] of the eiqtcacy of .the biomedical research p rogra_ as of the National Institutes of Health (including the research program of the :_Tatic _al I_stltute of Mental Health' and suggest _ns f_r improvements, and shall submit su_ h otker reports as the President shall direc_ At the request of .the t_resideht, it sh_dl sn )mit ::or his conslderatlon a fist of names f per_;ons :for consider_tion for appointmen; as Eirector of the National ][ns'titutes of I-I _a]_th." Mr. ROBERT C.: _YRD. Mr. President; ]: suggest the abse_ ce of a quorum, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll, The Second asst., ;ant legislative clerk 'proceeded to call i _ roll. Mr. ROBERT C. _YRI). MI'. President_ I ask unanimous cc nsen, that the order for the quortma cal be :_esci:aded. The PRES]:DIN, _ OFFICER. (Mr, . '). Without (.LARK )bisection, it is so ordered, TO OF ' _ FII E ITS 26, 1974 FORCOMMITREPORT :_r. :_tOBERT C BYRD. Mr. President, :[ ask _imanimous ( _nsent that the Cornmitres on Interio ' and Insular Affairs ]:lave _;:lltU midol _t of March 28 of file report on S. :Determination al lis Act. The )17, the Indian SelfEducational Reform PRESIDIN OFFICER. it is sc_ Without dered. :M:EDE]{,AL ELECTION A]_ENDMENTS CAMPAIGN OF 1974 ACT [VIr. :_OBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, :[ _sk tlnanimous consent that the Sen_te proceed at this time to the considerati0n of. the unfinished business. The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, it is so ordered. The bill will be stated by title. The assistant legislative clerk read as :[o]low_;: A bll2 (S. 3044) to amend the Federal Eaec=ion Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for ]publiccampaigfis tnancing of Federal primary elective and general ':ion for office, elecand '_o amend certain other provisions of law ::elating to the financing and conduct of such campaigns. :.V_r. :lieBERT C. BYRD. ][ s;uggest the absence The VICE _3a:[1 the roll. PRESIDENT. of a Mr. President, quorum. The clerk will The second assistant legislative clerk :.0rocecded to call the roll. :Mfr. PELL. Mr. President, l ask unani:_()US consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The 'VICE PRESIDENT. Without objectiol'., it is. so ordered. :Vfr. PELL. Mr. President, as chairman 0J! the ,Senate and EIections, Subcommittee on Privileges I wish to ,emphasize the importance of S. 3044 to the future of our de:ffloe:cacy. In particular, ]: wish to stress _5]:le importance of title I of this legislati0n, d eaUng with the public financing of _le_ti0flS. Thi_,_ is historic legislation. Let me ]_],i_ceit briefly into a framework of recent ]:l_;t0r:v. In mid-September last year our _;ubcor_lmittee conducted 4 days of public he:arings on this most important subject area, _Iembers of Congres deeply concemed with election reform were among the more than 40 witnesses who testified and presented their thoughtful views and recommendations. My bill, S.2718, resultil_, _ from these comprehensive hearings, WS_ reported forward to the Committee on Rules and Administration, and its ftradamentals formed the basis of our committee deliberations on public financir:g. '_re have th,us worked with careful and detailed consideration on the development of this legislation. We h_ve weighed a variety of alternatives, as set ,_0rth lin the very thorough, and Informatire report our chairman has submitted. :Yin. President, it was just over 2 months ago, on December 3, 19_3,_that 'the able and distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules and AdminlStmtion (Mx. CANNON) gave assurances to tile Senate In this chamber that every effort q4ould be made, so that this report March 26, 1.974 CONGRESSIONAL could be SUbmitted'within 30 days after the begln_g of the second session of the 93d Congress. li wish to commend the chairman for the successful meeting of this target date. _ In submitting this report we have _aken full cognizance of historic precedents and historic forerunners to public financir_ concepts. Let me praise, especialb in this connection, my senior colleague from Rhode Island (Mr. PASTORE) for his Pioneering work in this area, In essence, I believe we have prepared legislation which goes to the very heart of our democratic process, and which will enable thai heart to beat once again with confidence, It can be argued that we cannot legislate morality, cannot mandate an end to dishonesty, an end to venality, cannot by public law eliminate all the shocklng abuses which have so plagued us as a nation and, in particular, this administration, But we can, through enlightened legislative action, create a climate which minimizes the cause of abuse, and we can return tx) our voters their rights to choose candidates who are not beholdela to the large, and so often compromising, political contribution, As the committee report points out, the amount to be contributed by each individual taxpayer in the public flnanclng of elections is modest---S2 per year for one individual, $4 on a joint return. That is an investment which I believe will benefit each individual, in terms of more responsible government and in terms of a government responsive to human needs r_ther than to special interests. There are those who will say that this bill goes too far; and others who maintain it does not go far enough. I believe it goes the right distance. It provides the advantages of public financing and yet leaves them optional. It limits the contribution any individual can make to a campaign to a meaningful yet moderate' sum. It covers all Federal elections, including primaries, In those primaries, it establishes the basis for serious, not frivilous participants. It provides incentives for minor party candidates to enter the mainstream of political life. It preserves the constructive role of the political party in our Nation. We will debate the details of this legislation, but I set them here within a framework of the goals which I .believe this bill can enable us to attain.. We may not eradicate all future Watergates, but certainly we will discourage the perpetuation of a climate in which power is abused by the clever at the expense of the unwary, where power is perverted by a calculated deception which--in Richard Sheridan's words---we might call a "school for scandal." Mr. President, I urge passage of this legislation. AS I:have stated in our cornmittee report, Ii believe it is in accord with historic Jeffersonian principles which place abiding confidence in the wisdom of the individual and in the individual's fundamental role in the development of an enlighten.ed democracy. :Ali this time, let me comment on ._ie RECORD--SENATE 8 _3 _) proposals recently offered by President Nixon under the heading of "Campaign reform." I would point out that a number of them are scarcely original. One authorized political committee per candidate, contri_butlons openly identified as to individual donors, a limit of $3,000 for individual contributions to candidates, no loans as possible contributions, a bipartisan Federal elections commission-these are examples of provisions already in our Senate legislation today and in S. 372, passed by the Senate months ago. The President takes _trong exemption to the concept of public financing. He talks ._bout "diverting hundred_ of millions of tax dollars away from pr6ssin_ national needs" in order to underwrite campaigns. I submit that the individual taxpayer's investment is very modest, that the return is to be measured in terms of honesty in government, that this is a most pressing national need, and that American taxpayers are paying far more out of their own pockets now to finance campaigns and an administration which has achieved the dubious reputation of being the most purchasable of any since Hardin's Teapot Dome one. I would also point, out that when I conducted the public hearings on this legislation last September, I expressly asked the administration well in advance to provide us with an app,_opriate witness who could educate us on the administration's position on election reform, I inquired of the witness, an assistant attorney general whom the administration selected for this purpose_ as to whether he spoke for the White House, for the Justice Department or for the whole administration, His reply was: I am trying to speak for our best understanding of what may be the Administration's position on a matter we frankly have no final position on in detail, This was about the extent of our Senate education in this regard, It seems a bit surprising under these circumstances that we should now receive Presidential recommendations, this long after the hearings, this long after Senate adoption of S. 372, this long after requests for elucidation, this long after committee action and deliberations, We may not always be noted for celerity of action in this body, but this time, compared to the White House, we have been like a veritable greyhound compared to a snail, Perhaps we should be pleased and say, "Better late than never, Mr. President," but I for one believe that if these administration proposals were to have received serious consideration_as were the recommendations of more than 40 witnesse's at those comprehensive September hearings--they should have been transmitted to us at the appropriate time, and certainly, long before this. Let us, therefore, not be diverted in our deliberations. Let us give our approval to the soundness and wisdom contained in the bill we have before us, which is truly in the best interests of all our citizens, Mr. AIJ,RN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. PELL. I am glad to yield. Mr.' _T,L_.N. First, I commend the distinguished Senator from Rhode Island for his ,dedicated and diligent efforts in the directio n of. campaign reform legls.. lation. I should Like to inquire of the distin.. gulshed Senator ff he .feels that publk; fluancing is a neces_u? feature or ele., ment of campaign reform. Could it not bi; reformed and still leave the campaigrt expenditures in the private sector, rather than calling for public support? Mr. PELL. There are two separate ap-. proaches. Two separate, parts of the same ch)th, like the warp and the woof. I am not sure they can be separated. If we were .people of complete morality and[ complete conscientiousness they could be. But being, as we are, frail people, and human people, there is an lntertwin-. trig here of the two, just 'as there is in the warp and the woof. Mr. ALLEN. I noticed a provision h_, the Ke:anedy-Scott rider offered last year that does not seem to be carried for.. ward in the Senate .committee bill, S 3044, the pending bill, and that was that the matchable contributions had to haw been made within a certain time limit before the general election. I wondex why that provision was not carried for.ward in the Senate bill. Mr. PELL. The Senator has pointed out---I will not say a flaw, but an aren not cowred in our legislation intention.. ally. We considered many problems ariel did not believe we should approach th_ question of the time limit in this legis.. 'lation. Mr. AY,I,EN. As far as it appears, then contributions may have been made 4, 5 6, 7, or 8 years prior to the convention and I speak now of Presidential preference primaries leading up to the convert. tion; contributions made many year., before the convention would be subjec_ 'to being matched by the Federal Treasury. Is that not correct,? Mr. FELL. That is correct in the bill m presently drafted. Mr. A]ff,_.N. Then, as quick as the bil becomes law, the various candidates Wh( send up trial balloons in the Presidentia race could come in and present a state. ment to the public treasury, assumin! they reached the $250,000 threshoh amount authorizing the matching o their contributions, and they could say "I have been running now for Presiden for 5 or 6 years and collected thes4 amounts of money and I want these s.um matehed." IS that permissible unde_th, Senate bill? Mr. PELL. My understanding is'that i is permissible under the Senate bill. Mr. ALLEN. So that there would b quite a nice little payment by the Feders Treasury to catch up with the politlc_ campaigns of various candidates fc President just to bring them up to dat_ Mr. PI,_-T,L.In other words, a Harol Stassen could reap a windfall. Mr. AIJ_EN. But anyone who colleete, $250,000 would be eligible, not only t have that matched, but up to the time c the conwmtion he would have his contri buttons matched dollar for dollar out c the Federal treasury provided they wer $250 or leas. Mr. PELL. He could raise the sum, s the Senator has pointed out, but it woul 19 3 S AA40 CONGRESSIONAL mean he is a serious candida te and eartying his argument .to the American people. It ]may be from the point of view of the public interest and the national interest, a man like Harold Stassen over the years running for President served an important role and purpose, Mr. ALLEN. I have an amendment ! expect to offer later providing that no contribution could be matched unless it was made not more than 14 q_onths prior to the general election. Would the Senator feel inclined to go along with that amendment? Mr. PELL. Not as floor manager of the bill, but speaking for myself as an individual I think that particular amendment of the Senator from Alabama makes good sense to me and I would accept it. _ Mr. ALI/EN. I thank the distinguished Senator. Mr. PEIJ_. But I hasten to add that I am speaking only for myself, Mr. ALLEN. I understand the Sen-ator's statement but I do know his influence would go much further than that and I feel that with his support; we will get that amendment agreed' to, at least, So under the bill there is no starting point beyond which contributions would be ruled out. Then, looking prospectively, would it be possible for a candidate for the Presidential nomination to say, "Well, I do not believe I can run in 1976, but I will be able to run by 1980 or 1984." Under this bill would it be possible for a candidate for the iaresidential nomination to start collecting matching funds from the Federal Government for a nomination far orr down the line in terms of years? Mr. PELL. It would be. Mz. ALLEN. I see. So we get a set of candidates, then, running for the Presidential nomination in 1976, and the Government footing one-half of the bill, and then another set of candidates running for President in 1980, and the Government footing one-half of those bills, and then another set of candidates running for the nomination in 1984 and the Government footing one-half of these bills. Would that be possible under this bill? Mr. pg[,T_: It would be possible under this bill, but it would be hard to find many people interested in contributing to the potential candidates of 1988 or 1992 at the present time. I cannot imagine many private citizens do'rog so. Mr. AI.J.,EN. But still it would be possible for a college student to say, "I always have had an ambition to be Presi-. dent. I want to run in 1990." Mr. PELL. 1992. Mr. ALLEN. 1992, then. He could say, "I have raised this $250,000 among my fellows, and now I want the Government to start matching my contribu-, tions to my campaign." That is possible under the bill, is it not? Mr. PEL,L. It is, And ff he is successful in raising that amount of money from his fellows, he might be President long before 1992. Mr. ALI_Tq. Another thing that dist urbs me i_;the fact that every candidate 194 RECORD -- SE:NA._]_ March 26, 1974 for _he Presklenttal no:ninatlon can re-, ceive up to $'L5 million from the public Treasury to further hi_,: candidacy. And it is not reuired that _ candidate par-. ticipate in a single Presidential prefers. ence primary in order to ,,;tart getting this money fram the Federal Government, is it? Mr. PELL. That wotld be correct, but 'just thinking back, we have had Presidents elected who have not competed in Preside:ntial primaries under our pres-, ent system. Mr. ALLEN. That is tae very point the Senator from Alabama is getting to. We are speaking of reform legislatiom We want to reform the elec,tion process and make it less suscep ;ible to improper influences. Yet under the bill it would be possible for a caladidate for the Presidency, fcw one, two, three, or four_ or more, for that matt,,r, _c, collect $7.5 million in ma'tchable contributions from the public arm thegn $7.5 million each from the Federal Government, and then go to the convention, _ach one armed with a $15 million cam])aign fund, corn_ peting for the votes of ';he various delegates to the convention. Is that possible under the bill? Mr. 1:'EIb. :it is possible, if the cand]_ dates were _,;erious er ough and were successful in raising private money. The idea :here is that if they raised private money, they would rai:;e public money, but they would not receive public money' without first receiving l;.riva'_e money, Mr. ATJ,k_N. Would i; not be possible to go to the convention with a campaign fund of $15 mfilion? Mr. PELL. ]:t would l_, possible, just as it is possible now for a candidate to do the same thing, only he would have to raise it out of the private seetor_ Mr.. ALLEN The candidate would have to raise $7.5 million fro:n private money in order to get $7.5 million from the Federal Government? Mr. ?ELL. 'ires. Toda:_ he has to raise $15 million fr_)m the plqvate sector, Mr. ALLEN. Is not $7.5 million enough to run for a Presldentis.l nomination? Mr. PELL. According to the witnesses who came before us, it is not enough lbo run a serious campaign, Mr. ALLEN. $7.5 million is not enough? Mr. PELL. That is right, The select committee sh_L1 have authority tc_rec,_mmend the enactment-This is on page 13, section 4--ol! au7 new congressional legislation which Its lm,esttgation considers it is necessary or d,._s_raJoleto safeguard the electoral process b:r which the President of the United States is cho:_.n. Th_. Watergate Committee is on the w._rgeof winding up its affairs and maklng its report. Would it not be of interest to the Members of the Senate and the N.[embers of the House :and the p_blic generally to find out what, the Watergate Committee is going to recommend with regard to election reform'.,' Mr. PELL. But, as the Senator has s_lgge,sted, the language there is permissive. :it has the authority to do it; it is not n:_andatory that it must make a recommendati_n. I would t 'hinkthe first respormibility for such legislation should come from our own Rules and Administration Committee, whicll is the standlng committee where this authority has been ?ested as a matter of course through the years. Mr. ALLEN. Yet the Senate adopted this resolution setting up the Watergate Committee. Mr, PELL. And giving it the permissieve at_thority to recommend legislation. f_v fa(.' I see no signs of such permissive authority being exercised. Mr, _r,r._. Would the Senator be interested in knowing that five out of the seven Watergate Committee members are opposed to public firraneing of elcotions'? Mr. pgr.T. What was that again, may I ask _he Senator? Mx..:TJ.gN. Five out of the seven members of the Watergate Committee' are opposed to public financing of elections. Mr. PELL. That could 'be. I simply do not ko.ow what the results of a poll in the Watergate Committee would.be, but I do know that under rule XXV the Senate C_mmittee on Rules and Administrati(m is given jurisdiction and whatever i{egislation the Watergate Committee recommended wo_ld have to come before it for action. I'believe I am correct ir,. that. Mr..AT,T.W.N, I believe Senate bill 3044 goes one step further than did Mr. tLLJ.iEN. So the bill, instead of cutting down campai_,m expenses, is going to make it possitle to have more expensive campaigns drive for the :_resident_in the nomination Pell-Cranston the I_lennedy-Scot"t-Mansfield-Mondalerider last time, in that that rider did not provide for public fin:mci:ng in House and Senate primary races. Did it? 1Vie..PELL. It-did not apply, and our attention was called to that omission, j_st as the Senator from ,.alabama called to m:_ mind the possible omission that we di.t not have a cutoff date for past contributions. As we discussed it in comrnittee, it seemed that we should include prim_ies for all Federal elections. Mr. ^T,T,_T. I believe the Washington Post is for campaign reform and even for some 'assistance of public financing of elections. I notice that that publication ti'As :morning, in referrin_ to the rider w:mict:_ failed of adoption last year, said in its editorial: Tod_,y the Senato begins debate on a very ar.abit_us bm to extend pu'_lic financing to Mr. PELL. :it could. ]t could result in that. It would, depend (n the individual and his appeal how mu( h he would raise in the private sector. Ia my own small State, in my last campaign, I regret to say I had to spend m,)re than half a million dollars in a Stl.te t:hat has less than 1.5 percent of the vote. In the other States---I believe the S_natc,r frmn Alabama is in one of the more fortunate States---such_,:ums go a much longer way. I would hope that would apply more generally, Mr.._£rJ,l_.N. I notice fcom Senate Res_ olution 60, setting up the Watergate Com_mittee, this provision: March 26, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL all federal primax_Yand general-election campalgns, If the goal of reforms Is to make federal _Ml_paigns more open ltl every respect_ above-boar_, bro_!ly based and genuinely competitive--then some degree of public fi* naneinc is an important complement to limitations on private funds. Outlawing large prtva_ contributions will reduce, or at least make more perilous, the domination of the political marketplace by well-heeled individuals and spsoial interests. Publio financing, direct or indirect, will broaden public partlcipatlon In campaigns and enable challengers to combat the large advant_es which incumbents now enjoy. That principle lies behind the existing dollar check-off and provisions for tax credits or deductions for small private contributions. It is an approach worth expanding in a sensible and incremental way. The problem with the latest Senate bill is that it tries to do too much, too soon, and is either feasible or workable. beyond For onewha_ thing, the bill provides for full public financing of congressional general-election campaigns, and that is clearly mdigcetibl9 in the House this year, eince the Houso leadership even chokes on the more moderate matching-grant approach embodied in the Andereon-Udall bill. involve The more de!eGis in the Senate bill the serious inclusion of pr/mar/es. No a_pect of _he federal elections process is more motley and capricious than the present steeplechase of presidential primaries. Injecting even partial pub1lc funding it into without rationalizing in anythis other process, way, makes little sense. As for congressional primaries, they are so varied in size, cost and significance among the states that no single system of public aupport seems Justifiable without much more careful thollght. I am just wondering if there is now a wide difference of opinion among those who support public financing of elections, Apparently the Washington Post does not think too much of this bill, and certainly does not think anything of the presidential preference primary subsidy or the congressional subsidy. I am just wondering if there is now a kind of breakup in the group that has been pushing for public indicative financing ofofthat? elections. Is this editorial Mr. PELL. I think there are certainly differences of view among those who belleve in public financing, differences of gradation, differences of emphasis. Although I usually find myself in agreemerit with the Washington Post, sometimes it has an idea with which I am in disagreement. Basically, the Washington Post, or the liberal establishment, or the middle-of-the-road establishment, who I think are tired of the role that money has played in election decisions and campaign contributions for elections, inclines to some kind of public financing, What kind Of public financing, is o_en to argument, just as we are doing now. As far as being "indigestible" with the House, the Washington Post may be accurate. That is what the purpose of conferences is--to see how much they will accept and what is not palatable, Mr. ALLEN. I thank the distinguished Senator for the information he has given me with respect to this bill. Mr. CRANSTON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a unanimous-consent request? Mr. PELL. I yield to the Senator from California. RECORD -- SENATE S 4441 Mr. CRANSTON, M r. President, I ask unanimous consent that two members of my staff, Roy Greenaway and Jan Mueller, may be accorded the privileges of the floor during consideration of this meas- .Mr. C.&NNON. the absence of a The PRES_ DoMzs_:x). The, The second _ ure, including rollcalls, The PRESIDING O_XCER. Without objection, it is so ordered, Mr. PELL. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk wfil call the roll. proceed_._l to ca_ the'roll. .Mr. MANSFIE ,D. Mr. President, X as_: tmanimous cons_ it that the order for the quorum call be r ,zcinded. The PRESIDI] 'O OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ,rdered. Mr. MANSYlE_ 13. Mr. President, whal_ The second assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr, MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDIN_ OFPICER (Mr. CLAaK). Without objection, it is so ordered, is the pending b_ [ness? The PRESIDI_ 3 OFFICER. . RECESS ._ 1 15 P.M. 1Vl'r.MANSFIELI}. Mr. President, I ask unanimous conser[t that the Senate stand in recess unti[ the hour of l :lS this afternoon. [ The PRESIDINq OFFICER. Without objection, it is so or[leTed, Thereupon, at 11:45 p.m. the Senate took a recess until 1[:15 p.m., when it was called to order by he Presiding Officer (Mr. HaTHAW&Y). Mr. MANSFIELI ,. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING _FFICER. The clerk Will call the roll. The legislative cl k proceeded to call the roll. Mr. GRIFFIN. r. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be r _scinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so orc ;red. RECESS 'O 2 P.M. Mr. GRIFFIN. M: President. approval of the di_ inguished with the majority leader, I move that he Senate stand in recess until the hour ff 2 p.m.. The motion was at _eed to; and at 1:31 p.m. the Senate t_ k a recess until 2 p.m.; whereupon the Senate reassembled when called Officer (Mr. DOME_X( to ord_[).by the Presiding Mr. President, I suggest uorum. rolo OFFICER (Mx', lerk will call the roll, dstant legislative clerk NATIONAL CA ICER MEN_ OF Mr. MANSFIEld. Mr. unanimous conse4t that finished business, _e laid ely and that the [3enato S.consideration2893. The will be stated t The assistant foUows: s. zgp:_, _o amend toe Act '_oimprove gram and to such pr(_ram for The Senate _.he bill. Mr. suggest the The clerk will call the The second :proceeded to call Mr. unanimous quorum c_ll be The objection, it is so Mr. for the yeas and The a sufficient second? The and Mr. S, 3004. ACT AMEND1974 President, l ar;k S. 3044, the un.aside temporar.proceed to the Calendar No. 710, OFPICER. The bfU for action here this a special pleasure Nation's1 Cancer of the the Committee on Welfare. We come afternc_on with the of the committee, MESSAGE FRO: i THE HOUSE I think: has been A message from he House of Repnamlc and resentatives by Mr. Berry, one of its that have been reading clerks, annou reed that the House in recent years. had disagreed to the _mendments of the To trace the Senate to the bill (H. _. 7130) to improve the benefit of'the congressional control _ver budgetary outislatlon initially lay and receipt total _, to provide for a special panel of Legislative Budget C _ce, to establish a tablished by the procedure providing congressional concommittee on Heal trol over impoundm_ _.t of funds by the former Senator Ral executive branch, an(/for other pmq_oses; Texas. This cancer agreed to the confer _nce asked by the brought Senate on the disag_ _ing votes of the in the 'biomedical two Houses thereon, md that Mr. BoLhad worked Lng0, Mr. SINK, Mr. Y ,u_ of Texas, Mr. dedicated laymen, Lo_ of Louisiana, _ _. Maa_xN of Nemendations to the braska. Mr. LATTA, an_ Mr. DEL CLAWSON Senate. were appointed maria :ers on the part of 1971 the House at the conf, rence, tending and clerk read as Public _e_t& Ser_. national cancer proappropriations fcc next 3 fiscal years. consideration of Mr. President, I of a quorum. ' OFFICER. The legislative cleI_k roll. Mr. President, I ask order for the OFFICER. Without Mr. President, I ask on final passage. OFFICER. Is there were ordered. President, it is the for me to presen_ of 1974, on behalf on Health and Labor and Public the Senate tbis unanimous support will continue what of the really dy-. health prograrr_ by the Senate very briefly for the cancer leg-. developed after a had been ef_of the Subin the Senate, Yarborough, of of consultants _of the finestmtn¢is those who as well as made recomand to the the basis of the . which we are extoday. 195 4442 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --- SENATE I want t_ pay _ special tribute to the chairman o_thaq panel and the chairman of the Pi_sid_nt,s Cancer Panel, Mr. Benno C. Sch_fi_lt. His willingness to work cea_elessly_n this public interest program'is an ¢ which is un- But roughly 2(_),000 new chemicals are :introduced into[the ervironment each year.-_-costly 'm _dustrial countries--and :_boUt 1.0,000 of[these are produced in quantities capable of coata.'_linating the environment--.al_ut bne'ton 0r more. paralleled. The islegislation today a before the which we took ministration,, the Candle consumer groups To counter t,hi:_ chemi :al onslaught, in 1;he Stat_s ridswea year. are ]._ow :_boutUnited 500 compo_ Just 'testing to test _commending, we have had on Health, in from the adpanel, the area, the leges, as wellof as Association ColSociety. Mr. President, I would to comment on the Cancer of 1974, which I in the Sen January 24, 1974. Many of you at first hand enormity of the problem. Many of you have experienced the fear and helplessness eashed by this family of more than lC clinically distinct diseases, But for those who have been fortunate enough to confront this second major killer f Americans I would like to present facts in suppo_ of the new National Act. I hope'that these facts will you--as they have me--that as of the U.S. Senate we all have mandate to hasten the of cancer, and that in S. 2893 we proper legislative instrument which to help forge this accomplishmont. Cancer is a term more than 100 clinically distinct which kilt someone in this every 1_2 minutes. This year it is that 655,000 Americans will new cancer cases and 355,000 die; that is about 975 persons a day. out of every three American will be stricken with cancer overthe The annual cost these diseases is more than $15billior cost in human suffering s, their friends and families/is tff cancer was one we might expect a single cure dramatic breakthrough. But it is not. cancer is far more corn than all of the infectious diseases in the long march of medicalpro Cancer is a biological phenomenon with incidences, appearances, and It is induced by widely different physical, and biological agents, of which are unknown, To find the causes cures 'of cancer may indeed the innermost biologic secrets life Itself. I_t me give You example of the scope of the ' to which we must address Scientists have long had many, if not the cancers,are caused by environmental chemicals are. now cancer in animals have been cancer, 196 to believe that of human or other About 1,000 to induce chemical agents human one chemical re, 400 animals of w Irbout $70,000. ( _te cannot cate] older chemicals ( i_he yearly inund_ Therefore, the gram :is continUi] develop what mi screen" to bio_ matter of month present cost and as might cause of the m Cance the natio] aires rouglfiy 2 years, rious species, and costs bviously, a'b this level up _ith testing the r even make a dent m tion ol th e new. natiorLal cancer prog a su:;tained effort to _ht be called a "mini-. say compounds in a :, at a fraction of the hopefully, with better o whe];her the chemicancer in man. )st cri,;ical aspects of Inst:.tute activities al cancer program is resul';s to the people, to the manwe must insure that in cancer provenand rehabilitc_ all of the If we date of the latest rich, ration are m people, The cancer has ]moved for_ward in this area _h the establishment of nine cancer centers and tkte numerous cancer control ,_fforbsmust be continued, Simply the best in cancer to xthe people ~_ \-_ ....... cchwherever they ar_, aha- a_u_,_na_ · b_rs of excellence _re avafiabl_through-. out the country. _ Although signii cant progress_,gamst· cancer has been s ;mevec .......... uncLer m_ _-- _a-, _. of 197_ changes_ave tional Cancer Act ! in th ._ pr'(__-l_tl-_w ' been recommer,.de law to enable the I .irector Nat,ional. Ca_l_ cer Institute, to :arry cut h_s m]ssm more effectively a Ldto p:rovid Cancer Institute _ith the tools which we believe are n_ )essary for successful accomplishment c ' the objectives of the national cancer pi )gram. The major feat_ res are-as :_ollows: First need for: dditior_l cancer conrets. The Nations: Cancer Act of 1971 limits the numk_r )f new comprehensive cancer Centers t_ 15. q'his limitation severely restric_s he go_,ls o:_ the cancer program to ge_ the 1al;est methods of prevention, detectJ m, 'tres.tment, and rel_bilitation out tc practitioners and the people. I believe _e Nat:.on requires 30 Lc. 35 such center., to brir.g high-quality comprehensive cl ruer cz.re within the reach of everyone I can see no reason w:hy any family sh, uld be tie,led the best pi_ssible diagnosi_ and treal_ment for some forms of ('ar :er sir_.ply .because of w:_ere they live. Second, need to assure the continued education of biom_ fiical researchers. It is an obvious md al_a)lu_ essential that training and'fellow_hip programs must be provided r the r,atio:aal cancer _rogram at love:ts leauate to ifisure attractlng the brig: _st young scientists March 26,. 1974 arid clinicians. ,_ continuing influx of I new scientific tah_nt is necessary to insure progress both lin cancer and in medical research in gt eral. The cost of these programs is mini iai compared with the value of lives Lt will ultimately-be ,saved. Third, funding: _vels. Funding for th_ national cancer program has more thl n doubled since enactm_mt of the Natio: sl Cancer Act of 1971. _he authorization_ in the .new bill provide for further i Lcreases at levels fccommended by bot:L the President's Cancer panel and the National Cancer Advisory Board. The committee !eels these authoriza_:ian levels are sari factory to assure cont;irLued maximum progress of the ha~ t:,tcnal cancer progr Lin. _Pom.th; cancer c4 r_trol program. The cancer cont 'ol program, through its efforts to insm _ rapid and effective dissemination of t] e latest; research advaJaces and km wledge of cancer, strengthens the get oral practice of medicirLe in this countr_ _The program should cievelop into a mai( r demonstration once f'or the rapid ap_ ication of improved disgnostic, treatmE at and rehabilitation methods. For this reason, S. 2893 increases funding a' thorizations for the cancer control pro ram for the nex.t 3 yes,rs. tqft_., need to : tbmit :personnel requirements with b_ lget requests. q_he National C _ncer Institute has been severely limiled in its efforts to secure _bhenumbers and kinds of personnel necessary to fiministerexpanded programs because if inadequate super grade positions, l_ sonnel ceilings and reductions imposed on the institute by '_ ...... 'me aommhs_rauon _ -' . Recognizing that at,qua ce personnel are essential for an 'E:ffeetive '_ ....program , 5. 2893 provides a meonamsm Ior, me., lational cancer pro" ; :gram to mage _n_ se personnel needs ]:mown . . .... to Congre_ By requiring Nat;:tona4 _:ancer Insu .ute to submit per, :)uaget _'equest, _t x_ intended that Conli[rezs will be informed of and able to act ul_,n mese personm [ needs. _ AVAILABrLrr3 OF FU:_VI)S 'r_l_ medical facilit es construction and mode_ization amen lment Of 1970--the H:fil-Bu_ton amend aent--con_ained a provision_designed ) assure the avail._:bi]ity an_ we of appropriated _:malth _rhls ms amended, would ,-:_xpire on , 1974. S. 2893 :_,_o_Lld xtend it. The cornmittee has' felt il _ropriate to do this :irt view of _dministration rec,:,rd of , _of funds and the _:.dministration s ex_.q_ desire to terrain.ate many health pl_og_ams prior to c:on:gressional review _f tl_in. The provision whi _h requires obliga_;ton.and expenditure bf the _pprol_riated ds 1 I; _.mendrnents of 1970 (Public Law 91-296) ,12 12LS.C.A. sections 201 note and 2661 not_._-section 601. Section 601 reads as :l!ollows: N0tw_thstandtng any other provis/on ,',fflaw, unless enacted after the enact- March :26, 1.974 CONGRESSIONAL this area was 29, 1974, When .he re our cancer Cancer Institute. Interest remaIns steadfast, rdet me many l_enators who hard cn this vital immediate continuation and national Mr. there his commitment to at the National CongreSSional and our support with the long and in urging insure the of our KENNEDY. are other on this I Will ask for a short uorum call we cam vote bill. Mr. President, I s the al_sence a quoruln. OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative proceeded to call the roll. Mr. KENNEDY. President, I ask unanimous consent hat the order for the quortun call be The OFFICEI%. Without objection, it is so The question is on tgreeing to th_ committee amendment amended. The amended, was The PRESIDING tion is on the reading of the The bill was for a third readin third time. The PRESIDINO tion is, "Shall the amendment, to. and and called the roll. I announce Arkansas (Mr. from Alaska from Min- nesota (Mr. Missouri (Mr. from :Missouri (Mr tot from Michigan SenatOr from Utah essarily absent, I further announce voting, the Senator the Senator from the Senator _the SeneHAST), and the Moss) are necif present Missouri each (Mr. and (1Vfr. Michivote "yea." that the HATFIEL0) is ; the Senator from is _bsent because that the (Mr. Senator and the HRUSKA) t mt, if present voting, the Senator _ HATFIELD) Would vote The result was nays 0, as follows: [No. 88 Abourezk Allen Baker Bartlett Bayh Beall Be!lmon Bennett Bent_m Bible quespass?" 2893) Yeas and nays the clerk will call Mr. the ROBERT that Senator C. FULBRIOHT), the (Mr. _RAVEL) the from Oregon (Mr. Senator from are I further announce third to be engrossed was read the (S. On this have been ordered the roll. The legislative EAOLETON) and the gan (Mr. HART) Mr. GRIFFIN. I Senator from absent on official I also announce Vermont (Mr. AIKEN] of illness in th_ I further as lUes- Oregon Blden Chiles Brock Church Brooke Clark Buckley Cook Burdlck Cotton Byrd, Cranston Harry P. t C. Curtis Dole Cannon Domenlcl Case Domlnlek and (Mr. 89, Eastland Ervin Pannln FoHg Goldwater Griffin Gurney Hansen Hartke Haskell Hathaway Helms HoUlngs Huddleston Hughes Humphrey Inouye Jack,on Javlts Johnston Kennedy Fulbrlqht Gravel X SO th_ Long RECORD SENATE Rlbtcoff Magnu_ _ Rotll Manafie Schweiker Mathla Scott, McClell m Scott, Hugh McCltu William L. McGee Spark:man McOov, m Stafford Mclnty] Stennis Metcalf Stevens Metzenl _um Stevenson Montoy Taft.' Muskie Talmadge Nelson Thurmond Nunn Tower Pastore Tunney Pearson Weicker Pelf Williams Percy Young Proxmir Randoll; x NAY ,-4) NOT VO_ lNG 11 Moss Hart Hatfield Packwcod Hruska Symington Mondale bill (S. 28 _3) was passed; as S 4453 ¢'_nducted l[or the diagnOSis (.'er". (b) _.,ctlon 40{ f_/'vice Act is amc I_afore "$40,000,00 the period at the t21e following! "$_ ending. June 30, fiscal year endlnt 900,000 for the 1977". SEC. 7. Section Service A[ct is ames (_) b_ striking (1) and inserting dred"; _. of uterine caxt- (b) of' %he Pul_tic Health _led by strikin_ou-t "and" "and' by Inserting before ;nd thereof a comma and ,,000,000 for the fiscal year 1975, $72,000,000 for t_te June 30, 1976, and $92,cal year ending Jane 30, kl0 of the Public Healtih ded out "fifty" tn paragrap:h n lieu thereof "one hun-. (2) by striking paragraph (7); b:t striking (8 of- (3)paragraph thereof "; and"; a2 (4) icy adding following new _ ' (9) to award out _s well as alter: improvement includi: of facllltle_, ions and renovations for )aslc g thoseresearch related laboratol7 to bio.- X X s. 2 93 Be it enaef_ by the Senate and House o! Representative_ o! tl _ United States to AmerCe in Congas as. tabled, That this Act may be cited as_he qatlonal Cancer Act .Amendments of 19_4". SEC. 2. Section 301_h of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.(A 201) is amended by striking the words "d ,the fiSCal year ending June 30, 1966, each of the eight succeeding fiscal sec. 3. Section 402(b) Public Hea_th Service Act is (1) by striking out not to exceed $35,000" in and insertlng in of such research and training $35,000, but only"; and (2) by striking out "il amounts "and" at _the end of )ut and the inserting period at the end in lieu d after paragraph (8) the 'agraph: ants for new construction follows: hazard control, al deemed necessary for the National Cancer P ogram." SEC. 8. Section 410A(a) of the Pub]'.tc Health Service Ac Is amended by inserting the word ", con xacts," after the word "grants". SEc. 9. Section _10C of the Public Health Service Act is a[[nended by striking ou-_ "and-" before "$60_],000,000" and by inserting before the period It the end thereof a semicolon and the fo]lowing: "$750,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1975; $830,000,0O0 for the fi_cal year ending June 30, 1976; and $985,0( ),000 for the fiSCal year ending June 30, 19 7". SEC. 10. Part A of title IV of the Public Health Service A_ is amended by adding at the end ther4 the following new scction; "aVAXLABXLZ OF APPROPRIATIONS $35,000"lnpargraph thereof "if the direct(2) of such and training exceed $35 but only". SEC. 4. (a) (7) of the Health Service Act is E by out "where appropriate" (b) Section 407(b)(, of such Act is amended .by inserting aJ the word "data" the following: "(includi_ where appropriate nutritional programs for under treatment for cancer)". (c) Section 407(b) (A) of such Act is amended by Program," the words "National Cancer words "including the number and ,types o! to carry out such . . (d) Scotion 407(b)(9) of such Act Is amended bl before the period at the end the following: ", and the allocation of requested to carry out the Nation: Cancer .Program". (e) Section 407(b) of Act is amended by adding the new paragraph: "(10) The Director of t Cancer Institute shall conduct contract for programs to disseminate interpret on a "SEc. 410D. Nc ;wit:hstanding provisie,n of law, unless enatced heal.thcurrentprofesslonals,basis for andandthe°thergeneral public, scientific other information respecting the cause, diagnosis, and treatment of the ,se or other health problem to which ,the act vlties of the Institute are directed. The E rector of the National Cancer Institute shall issue such regulations as are necessa y _o carry out this activity.", Szc. 5. Section 408(a} o the Public Health Service Act is amende( by striking out "fifteen". SEC. 6. (a) Section 4_. ia) of the Public Health Service Act is am nded by inserting before the period at the _ _d thereof a cornma and the following: "l _cludlng programs tb provide routine exfolis ;lve cytology tests shall any other after the date of enactmenl of this section exprem31y in liml'_ation of t: e provisions of this sectlon, funds approl .qated for any fiscal year carry out for which appr,0rations are by the Public Service (42 U.S.C. 201) or the Retardatl, Facilities and CommunConstruction Act shall remain avallandyear." expenditure until the SEc. 11 Service Act "SEc. 454. 0 Institutes of the President by consem_ of the eligible "(b) The Institute shall be s Except as Director of the n_port of the Public Health to read as follows: or n_sTrruTrs of the Natioztal ._hall be appointed by with the advice and Appointees shall be th_ National Cancer the President. 407(b) (9), the Institute of the TITLE I_SEARCH SEC. 201. Title of the Pul_Ic Health Service Act is ame: deal by adding l_ the end thereof' the follow ag new section: "Sins. 455. (a) _her_ is establish_ _;he President's Biomed cal Research Panel O_ereinafter in this si ;lion referred to as\_he q_anel') which shz I be composed of (1) '_e Chalrnmn of the _re$1dent's Cancer Pan,?]_ and (q) four mE nbers appointe_ by 'the President, who b_ virtue of their training, experience, and b .ckground are exceptionally q_Lallfied to a praise the biomedical research program o_ the National Institutes of Health (including the research progriam 197 S 4454 of the At least tln_ of the shall clans. be distinguished "(b) (1) Appointed who are appointed of subsection (a), three-year terms, of the four members date on which this sect', two be appointed l and shah two shall years, as time of apt appointed to fill a to the expiration of predecessor was only for the remainder -(2) The President tho appoint_M members of the Panel for a term CONGR_SSION'AL KECOI_,D --- SENATE of Health). of the Panel scle_tlste or physiof the Panel to clause (2) be appointed for (i) in the ca_ appointed after the becomes effective, a for term of oneofyear a term two President at the (ii) any member occurring prior term for which his shall be appointed term. designate one of serve as Chairman year. "(c) Appointed of the Panel shall each be entitled receive the daily equivalaut of the rate of basic pay m effect for grade of the General Schedule for traveltlme) during which they in the actual performance of duties in the(includPanel, and shall be allowed expenses ing a per diem under section 5703(b) of title 5, States Code. "(d) The Panel shall at the call of the Chairman, but not often than twelve times a year. A shall be Itept of the proceedings of meeting of the panel, and available the shall transcript to public.make such "(e) The Panel shall the development and execution of .biomedical research programs of the National Institutes of Health (including the program of the National Institute Mental Health) Under this _ection t and report directly to the President. Any blockages in rapid execution research programs o._ theof the Institutes of Health (including the _ program of the National Institute Mental Health) shall immediately be to the altontlon of the Presiffeht an the Senate Cornmtttee on Labor Welfare, the House Committee on and Foreign Commerce, the on Appro_)riations and Senate the Committee on Appropriations. The shall submit to the President periodic on the biomedical research of the Nstional Institutes of (including the _reeearCh program of National Institute of Mental Health) and an evaluaprograms of the Institutes of Health (lncl'ading the r program of the National Institute Mental _ealth) and suggestions for and shall submit such other as the President shall direct. At the of the President, it shall submit for his a list of names of consideration for stitutesapp°lntmentof Health."asDlrect°r National InMr. _C_VNEDY. Mr. to reconsider the vote was passed, Mr. JAV_FS. I move ' on the table, The motion to lay agreed to. Mr. ROBERT C. dent, may we have The ate. will be in order, , which I move the bill lay that motion the table was Mr. Presiin the Senate? The Sen- PEDERAL _,b'_TION CAMPAIGN ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19_4 The Se_al_ resumed the cvnslderation of the bill (S. 3044) to amend the Fed- 198 oral Election C,ampaign Act of 1971 to provide for public finarcing of primary 9J;/d general election can_palgns for Fedoral elective office, and to ante_d certain ,other provisions of law relating to the financing and conduct of such campaigl_5, The PRF__IDING OFFI:CER. The. Chair lays be,fore the Semite the un_ :Snlshed business, which is ,qenate 3044, ..and which the clerk will react by title, The legislative clerk read the bill by _tle. MX. CANNON. Mr. tq'esident, I ask _manlmous cor_ent that during consideration of the public financing bill, S. 3044. James H. Puffy, of the stuff of the Cornmlttee on Rules and Administration, and Jeffrey Dorar_;, assistant; to the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. W_;_.LX_MS),be per-mitred the privfiege of the koor. The PRESIDINO OFFICER. Without chJec_ion, it is so orden.q, Mr. CANNON. Mr. l_'esid_nt, I yield iD the, Senator from Cmnecticut (MJb. '_VEICI4.ER). Mr. WEICKlgR obtain _ the floor. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. Pr/_ident, wtli the Senator yield? Mr. ,WE[CKI_. I yield, Mr. MANSFIELD. Mx. l_sident, roi t_le ln_o_,/natio_ of the Senate, I wish to lglnounce, on behalf of the joint leadership, that there will be no f_a'ther votes t_day. We are getting started on the 6_mpaign financing bill. :: anticipate that there will be a number o_ speeches. I am - sure there will be an emendment laid before the Senate tonight by the distin_mished Senator from Alabama. It is my iatention at tbls time tc see ff it would r_ot be possible to have a rolleall vote on this amendment at the hour of 3:30 tc_ _:_lorrow. However, I haw; to touch some bases, and later today w:ll make an an.rtou_c_nent, I thank the l_enator fr)m Conneeticu_ for yielding to :me at this time. Mr. WEICKER. Mr. Pr_ident, the current debate over the Government fillancirlg of Fe_fleral elec_ior_ has come _0 resemble a replay of "Beauty and /he ]Beast? On the one hand we have the sup-porteI_; of S. 3644 who view Government financing as a sparking alternative - which p:romises to clean up electoral abuses with a speed an i thoroughness previously attributed only to the most expensive solutions. Oll the other hand, we have the stanch opponents of Government financ-. lng, who view it as an l_corriglble "beast," an intolerable riid on the Public Treasury, and a prest',riptJ[on for the end of't_he two-party systtm, Both these views are simplistic, ex-. aggerated, and unreallstk, I do not thh_k there i_ a Member in thls Chm_ber who does not realize the necessity--indeed, the urgencytfor campaign reform, not in a cosmetic sense, but reform that will get to the practical abuse; within our election syst_:m. Because I disagree with advocat e_ of public financing does not mean we are not striving for a similar goal: A l_lltical system, tha/c is clean, that can involve a_ybody, any man, any woman,' in this country, regardl_s of his or her Mare,_ 26, 1974 meatus:. These are the n_tters of overriding importance on which we all agree. The truth about Government financlng of elections is that it would have some advantages. Nevertheless it would have many more serious and inevitable problems. Government fin_nncing is not a magical Clorox guaranteed to end forever the dirty laundry of Watergate. It does _ot cut the cost of campaigns; it just shifts the cost. So the gut question about the Governnrmt financing of elections is not, "Is it ptague ,or panacea?" For we know it is neither, but rather, "Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?" And more lrnLpor_uat, "Are the altemaatives lnsufilcient '[o do the same job?" My answer to both questions must be "No." _9_ederal financing only acknowledges _tle s 'i_eof the problem; it does not refm:m it. There are several ways to effectively ._-eform campaign spending without remorting to Government financing. One :iS to :_educe the length of campaigns. ¬her is to require full disclosure be:Fore the election, rather than after. An= other ts to limit campaign financing to one comwAttee per candidate, to end the jtu_gled books and "laundered" contribulions. And yet another is to eliminate the ,J._e of cash in campaigns. The substitute bill I am introducing today includes not just one or two of these _deas, but all of them. My amendment would provide for: F.lec_ion campaigns beginning no earlief than the first Tuesday in September, with no collections or expenditures before that period of time. ]',et _s take a closer look at that proposal. 'Cae Federal election process would commence with.each of the candidates filing a statement of candidacy on the lh_;t Tuesday in September. The qext step in the campaign would _, a si._gle primary on the first Tuesday in October, and then the election itself on ih(; first Tuesday in November. So we are talking about a period of 60 days, a period before which there can be no ex, penditlrres or collections. In other words, we are using "time" to cut down the cost of cam_yalgns. ]Jy own State of Connect._cut is typical of what is now going on in the United ;St_tes. In the ],ast election there were M_m$14,000 registered Democrats, about 14,000 registered Republicans, and about .i5,000 registered independents. We have ,seen, f_)m the most recent Gallup polls, the decline of both parties and the grc,wth of independents. On the one i_and, we have a traditionally strong twoparty system that has served us well. On the other hand, we have people who are not willing to commit themselves to one :pa_y or the other, who wan_ to Judge :l;_rson_, without expressing party labels. We should be able to r_oncile those two. O_te way is a selection prOCess open tv ifil the People. In.the case, of the President of the United States, it means a l_lationwide primary on the first Tuesday on October, to let the people speak as to whom they want. _cOthe calendar, I repeat, sets a filing deadline, by the first Tuesday in Sep= t_mber, in order for a candidate to be March 26, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE S 4455 eiigible for election. Then there would be of campaign financing, I would like to tuned ()ur political machinery to the a single primary the first Tuesday in Ocrefer to a passage from S. 3044 which times. tober. Then the regular election on the reads; Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-. first Tuesday in November. If the Secretary of the Treasury detersent that my amendment be printed h:_ IL is clear that this will result _in a mines that monies in the fund are not, or the RECORD at this point. saving of money and a reduction of costs, may not be, sufficient to pay the full entitleThere being Ilo objection, the amend-. Atthe minimum, it would cut campaignment to all candidates eligible to receive ment was ordergd to be printed in the ing expenses in half, and perhaps there payments, each hecandidate shall reduce the amount to RECORD, as follows: which Is entitled .... could be even greater savings. On pe4:'e 2, line 1, strike all through page In addition, and I emphasize this, there Now if that does not scare other Sena86, line 17, and insert In lieu thereof thE; would be only one report, 2 weeks before tops, it certainly scares me. I think that following: the eleetion, reporting every campaign one of the principal lessons of Watergate TXMEPERZODFOR F_;DERAL' ELECTIONS expenditure and colleCtion. When people is not only that Government can comSEC. 2 The Federal Election Campaign went to the polls they would know what mit illegal acts to suppress dissent but Act of 1971 is amended by adding at the end rolemoney played for the particular canthat Government has enormous legal thereof the following new title: didate for whom they vote. pawers to suppress dissent and to play "TITLE V--TIME PERIOD FOR FEDERAl[, This proposal provides for no colleCpolitics with the system. ELECTIONS tions or expenditures after _he report is So it is not the fact that money is "F_LmG DATE submitted, except expenses "budgeted involved. It is the amount of money. All "sEc. 501. (a) No later than the first Tues.for' and duly reported, we have done is shift the cost to the day of September preceding a regularly Today a good portion of the campaign Federal Government; we have dropped scheduled election, or 60 days preceding a funds come in after the election; in other it into the laps of the taxpayers of the special election, each candidate must file a registration statement with the State Secrs.wordS, not as a tribute to the individual, United States. I do not think I have ever tary Of S_at e or the equivalent State official, but to the power that resides in the office, seen anything involving the Federal in order to be eligible to appear on the priThat cannot be justified. A candidate Government that cost less and less as mary or election ballot _n such state or should be backed before the result is in. time passed. In addition, everybody will states. The registration statement shall Campaign deficits would be a violation pay, whether they want to or not. include-of law, to be paid off only under the I believe that whether it is politics, "(1) the identification of the candidate, supervision of the ComPtroller General. business, or unionism in this country, and any individual, political committee, or That may sound harsh, but, again, it we have to earn our way. We have to- other person contributions or make authorized expendituresto receive on behalf of the will only make campaigns more honest, earn respect and support, candidate in connection with the campaign; both for candidates and constituents. Everyone is complaining about how "(2) the identification of any campaign No cash contributions of more than power in Government is lined to perpetudepositories to be used. In connection with $50. ate itself. Here we have a bill to give the campaign; NO more than $10,000 of an individual Government even more of tha4 power. "(3) aa affidavit stating that no collections candidate's personal funds. Let us have something that will stand or expenditures have or will be undertaken NO more than one campaign eomthe test of time. I hope Senators and in connection with the campaign prior, to mittee. ' their staffs will take the time to read the filIng deadline; The real problem in campaign reform the amendment I am presenting. It will "(4) the identification of the party whose is not that campaigns cost money, but shock some. But if we looked at it with an nomination that the the candidate seek,seekor toa statement candidatewill will that campaigns cost big money. PresIopen mind, I think it will respond to appear on the primary and election ballot as dent Eisenhower's camt, aign cost $8 milsome of the criticism tha_ has been made a cand._d_te independent of any parl;y il0n, while President Nixon's campaign with respect to incumbents. Any legislaaffiliation. cost, as far as I know, was $82 million, tion that passes wfil not get rid of the "PRn_AR_r_ECTm_ NO one complained when a campaign incumbent advantage. Maybe it should "SEc. 502. (a) All candidates for Federal cost $8 million. That is not a difficult sum be that every incumbent automatically elective office shall be nominated by means of for a political party to raise over 4 years, becomes a candidate as of the first of a primary election to be held on the first Last year alone, a difficult year for the the year in which the election is held. Tuesday of October preceding the election, or Republican fundraisers by any yardstick, That would mean cutting down his exthirty days preceding a specialballot election. Thereof .,;hall be only one primary or list the Republican National Committee posure, and maybe that is good. There possible nominees for each party and one raised $5 miqion, of whiah 85 per_ent are many steps that can be taken if we primary ballot or list for all nonpartisan was from Contributions of $100 or less. really try to balance out the advantage - candidates, and no candidate may appear on Both parties can raise thatkind of money an incumbe/x-t has over a challenger. But more than one such bMlot or list. Each voter from small contributions. The real probwe will never get rid of the problem in shall be entitled to vote for candidates from lem was the advent of long campaigns its entirety. We can legislate on the only one ballot or list. with heavy media expenditures, subject, but the real problem will still "(b) Qualification of voters, determination Consequently, the best way to cut down confront us. of ellgtblLeparties, as well as rules and proceon the influence of big money in a camWe can drive out the bad money withdures for the conducting the primary shall be responsibility of the election States. paign is not to dump the bills in the out resorting to tax money. We can cut Presidential electors and alternates shall be Government's lap, but to shorten the down the length of the campaign. We nominated by State political parties. campaign itself. And that is precisely can replace political conventions with "rR_ARr ELEC_OiVRrSVLT the cornerstone of this campaign reform direCt primaries. We can require full dis"SEc. 503. The person receiving the greatest legislation, closure before, rather than after, the number of votes at the primary as a candiMy legislation could mean giving up election, date of a party, for an office shall be the one of our most cherished rituals, thS' The result of these reforms will be c_ndidate of the party at the folle'.wlng elecnational political conventions. These responsible and reasonable elections, tion: Provided, That any candid_,'te Who :is circuses have become the political dinoconducted in full view of the people, the sole candidate for that office at the prisaurs of the modern age, and it is time . I honestly believe that in these promary election, or who is only opposed by a we let them go the way of the big city posals, we have a chance to reform the candidate or c_ndidates the same ballot or list of nomineesrunning and isonnominated political machine and the smoke-filled system in two important ways; First, by at the primary shall be deemed and declared room. Instead, every candidate for Fedreducing the role of money in campaigns, to be duly and legally elected to the_ office eral offiee will have to appeal directly to and seCond, by involving the American for which such person is a candidate. Any the voters in order to get their party's people in the selection process, independent candidate receiving at least 10 nomination. This is the kind of reform That is the. greatest guarantee against per centum of the total votes cast for the office for which he is a candidate at the pr:iwhich will be meaningful and effective corruption, our system is 50 percent sema_y, or'a vote equal to the lowest vote rewithout turning to a program of GovernleCtion and 50 percent election. It is the ¢_lved by a candidate seeking a party nomimerit financing, selection process which is now being nation who was nominated in the prima_.y TO those who are not convinced abOut denied to a majority of Americans. If shall_also be a candidate at'the following election." the dangers of a Government-run system' we resolve these two issues, we will have ' 199 S 4456 ¢OI_IGR1/SSIOHAL I_CORD LxM_rA_rsoNco_txm_-,ZO_S_m inn, m_t_m 8gc. 3. Section 608 of Title 18, United b_at_ Code, _ amended to read a8 follown: "1 a06. Limitations on contributions and expenditures "'(a) Nopern°nwlxOtsmebecOmesacandl' date, or political _m!ttee for such c_,_dldate, in a mm_im_ for nomination or tn a camp_ for elect_on to Federal elective office may, directly ce indirectly, tn any way "(1) ac_q_t or arranipe for any contribution, or expend or contract for _mny obUEation, for the election;prioror to the filing deadline "(_) accept any cash contribution in exesm of $50; or "(3) s_cept any contribution, contract for any obligation', or make expenditures not budlwted aud reported as provided by Section 434 of Title 3, United _tates Code, after a date two weeks prior to the scheduled eleclion date; or "_&) make expenditure_or contrinuttonsin excess of $I0,000 from his personal funds, or the personal funds of his _mmedlate faalay, or from such funds being contributed or expended through the use of a third.party, "(b) Any deficit incurred in connection with a campaign for nomination or election to Federal elective office Rball cohstltute a violation oI this asotion, and such deficit shall be paid only by mean_ of contributions received under the supervision of and according to a procedure which shall have the prior approval of the Comptroller General. "(c) Violation of the provisions of this section is p,_n!_bable by a fine not to exceed $1,000, imprisonment not to exceed one year, orboth." S_c. 4. Title 18, United States Code, is amended b7 adding the following _2ctions: "! 614. Contributions by political cornmittees "Political committees shall not make any contributic_a to any candidate, political cornmlttee, or other campaign for Federal electire office: /,roy/dog, That such committees may 9fimtnister or solicit contributions, so long as such contributions are given directly by the initial contributor to a candidate or political co'mmtttee, "§ 615. No more than one political cornmittee "A candidate may establish no more than one political commtt_ee, which shall be in suCll candidate's own name; Prov/gec/, That the name of the committee, as well as the name of its chairman and treasurer, shall be filed with t_he Comptroller General _mmediately upon its formation; and should such a committee be established, all contributions received or expenditures made in connection with the campaign for nomination or eleclion to Federal elective office shall he received or 'made by such committee and not by the candidate." am, oaTs Szc. 5. Section 434 of title 2, United States Code, is amended to read es follows: "§ 434. One report by political committees or · candidates "(a) _ treasurer of a political committree supporting a candidate or candidates for F_!eral elective office--or each candidate, should such candidate not establish a polltlca1 comml_ file a _ _.t.th the Comptroller General two weeks prior to a scheduled election date for such candidate or candldalkml. "Contents of Reports "(bj The report shall be cumulative, .h_l reportwith respecttoany activity in connec, tlon with the candidacy, and shall disclose,-"(1) the filll name and. social security number of _J1 person who has contributed to the campaign, to,ether with the amoun, t of such contributions; 200 -- S_ATZ March 26, 19_4 "(2',p the full mmie and mall:mg &ddrem of each person to whom a debt or oblllpttlc_a ts owed; "(3) the full n_ne and ml!l:tng addre_ _f, each pere_n to whom expeadit_umm have bash made, topthmr with the an_)unt of mxpendltur_; x "(4) _J_m toi_l s_ cd Idl contelbutio_ received; "(_) the to t&l sum of ,dl ezpe_dl_ure_; "(8) t_e tohd sum of Idl de,b_ ami ob_ gat$_r_" alememmmT leo. l_! ]M[r.BU/_.K,_'.]_r. pJrqt_/_lj_m__ __ _ tillgu/shed _ from (Mr. _)baa Jumt spoken of the ing_Pu_able _dvantages of hact_lbe_ l would like at th_ time tO fOCUB 011 Just IBsc. Code, 8. (a) is Election of title 2, United Steles t_nended 441 to read ms foUown: '! 441. Penalties for violat:_ns o]le /reliCt fin/racing of the propo_l t/'utly lllichl_ _nl_t!_Gm now unde_ d_;bat_. X believe that S. 3044 might well "Any person who violatgs any of the provtsions of this subch&p_ gaall be fined in an amotutt at lea_t equal _) tlu_e times _ amo_nt of any monetary _lolation, or. in the case of nonmonetary vl0la_onS, such amount as will satisfy the provisions o!_this subseclion. The mone'ys collected from. the fine shall be spent by the, violator for general publlca_ lion or transmission, to the widest possible extent irt the _ographical area in which the campaign or election was held, of at least the content of the Comptroller General's findings. The meamt of such t_msmlssion or publication shall _ determined by the Comptroller General, and shall req_tire the cornplete expenditure of the fine, unless the Comptroller General deter, nine_ that a lesser amount, delermtned by hll_l, will achieve complete publication and irsasmisslon of the nature of the violation. _m 9_iditional fine may be levied if the Comptroller _eneral shall determine that, due to the nature of the violation, ah additionS, amount is needed to properly publish the rio [ation." (b) Title lB, United Sta_2s Code, :_ amended by adding the following section: "J 616. Penaltie_ for violet: one "Any person who violate ! any of the provllelons of _his su'_)chapter sl_all be fined, in an amount at lea_ equal to three times the amount of any monetary violatJlon, or, in the case'of nonmonetary violet tons, such amount as will m_tisfy the provisicns of this subesction. _ITte moneys coll_ from the fine shall be spent by the violator fcr general publicalion or transmission, to t:_e w_.Ldest possible extent tn. the geographical area in which the campaign1 or election was _eld. of at least the content of_ the Comptroller (_neral's findings. 'IT_e means, of such transmission or pubilcatlon shall be determined bF the Comp_roller General, and shall require the com.plete expenditure of the fine, unless the Comptroller General determines; that a lesser amount, deterrgined by ::lrn, will achieve complete publication and t.,ansmission of the :nature of the violation. /.n additional fine :may be levied if the Co:nptroller General shall determine that, due to the nature of the 'violation, an additional ar_ount is needed to property publish .the viola ;Ion." COM_:RO_L_R _rmman Src. 7. The Yc_ieral Election Campaign Act ,yf 197:[ la amended by in_erting the words "'Comptroller General" wl erever the words '_'supervisory officer" appear. The Comptroller ,General ,_hall make such r_tles cr regulations as may bo necessary or advtsabla for carrying out the provisions of ._his A _t: Prov/ded, That any rules or re_llations so promulgated shall tm published in the Federa_ Re81ster not later than Dec.tuber 31, 1975. be termed the Incumbent Protection Act of 19_4t. While X do not believe that those who drafted the bill intended to do 80, they _ave nevertheless come up with a schelIle whose practical effect will be to h,;lp _S insulate ourselves from effective EFFECT ON _rATE L_NV S_c. 9. The provisions o:! that Act, and o_ l,'ules or regulations promulgated under.this .&ct, preempt any provision of State law with ]_spect to campaigns for ncmination for elocution, or for election, to Fedoral Office (as such _m _ defined tn section ._01(c' ). _Al_mU_ l_w_m_r 8zc. 10. IfGnyprOvlslon 0fthtsAct, orth_ application thereof to any person or circum_ i_anc_, is hel/l l:3valid, the validity of the r_,mainder of the Act and the application o_ mwhp_vi_ontootl_personsandelreums/miC_ mb,l! not b_ aJ_4f_ _m_by. sm_etvn ma_ 8m_, 11. T_ iX_t_mmd. _ ll_3dllAot ,,_um UI. m_no _ffect_ve m)/De4mmlbe_ ltl, l_&, CIMtllellge. I do not make this statement lightly, bill only after a serious examination of the potential impact of the provisions of S. 3044. The evidence available suggests rather strongly that the spellding linlits i_cluded in this bin would help lncumbents who might otherwise be targets of seriolls challengers. _ iS most readily observed in reintion t_ House races where, figuree can be fairly easily quantified because of the sb_dlarity of the districts in t_rms of l×q3ulatien. In this regard I would direct your attentiort to a Common Cause study of the 1972 elections entitled "The 19_2 CongI_onal Calnpa_ FinaxIc_A Study by CoRunon Cause." Th_ authors of the study are numbered aYfion_ the principal supporters of public finan/)ing and use its results to bolster them case. But I am convinced that they misread their own data; that in fact it argUe/; against public financing generally arid th_ provisions of S. 3044 specifically. In 19_2 more than three-quarters of all House races were decided by pluralities Of 60 percent or more. In these races the average winning candidate spent $55,000 or lea_: and the average loser spent even lt_. Th_ races all took place in what p01itical analysts like to call "saf e'' districts. The districts involved were either so totaUy dominated.by one party that a serf 3US fight for the seat impressed almost ,everycine as futile, or the seat was 0Cctlpieq by a personally popular incumbent who jt_st-was not about to be beaten. 'The authors of the study apparently '_;:[teve that real races might be ran in these districts ff enough dollars are p0urGq:[ into the campaigns of those chalI_lglng now firmly entrenched incumbents. I am not persuaded that this would _apP_. :Lmorreasons OUtlined nix)ye the incum'befits holding these seats are probably impervious to real challenge. Those run_1]_ _ _ hKve not f_Ued, be_wtlse '_hey have htcked ftl_d_; they have lacked[ funds because their campatims 'W_re _0oi3_ted to failure, CommOn ]1aa simplY i_ way that flqend,_ to confused cause with effect in has led Mr. _ and his preciSelY the wrong conclu- _slons. ,SuP oorters of incumbellts 831d chaliler_ers alike in these districts were ap]_arellt:ly reluctant to give to cam,mlans March 26, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL unlikely to be affected one way or the other by their contributions. Thus, as we shall see in a moment, the spending on both sides in these districts was significantly below the spending levels that prevailed in hotly contested races, I must conclude, therefore, that in such districts the $90,000 per candidate allowed under S. 3044 will merely increase the level of spending without having any real impact on the final outcome, The races in which the Federal subsldy and the limits associated with it will have an impact will take place in the 60-odd districts that might be considered marginal. According to the same Common Cause study, only 66 House races were decided by less than. 55 percent of the vote in 1972. These districts could be considered marginal by most standards and the vicfor in each of them had to fend off an extremely tough challenger, Winners and losers alike spent more money in these races than was spent in the districts I have described as "safe." The cost to winners and losers alike in these districts averaged somewhat more than $100,000 each. As both the winners and losers spent about the same amount in these races, it suggests that the rais- RECORD-- SENATE S 4457 ing of funds needed for such campaigns is not too different. I will also admit that the limits imposed by S. 3044 might not have much of an effect in the average close race. The real impact of the limits imposed by this legislation will occur in those races in which an incumbent finds himself in trouble and stands a chance of being defeated. Only 10 House incumbents were defeated in 1972 and in all but tWO cases the challenger had to spend significantly more than his opponent to overcome the advantages of incumbency. mailings after Labor Day in an election year. But I would go even further. At an approprlate time, I will offer an amendmerit to S. 3044 that will allow nonincumbents to operate under a spending limit 30 percent higher than that applicable to incumbents, I firmly believe that such an amendmerit is essential if we are to avoid the charge that we are "stacking the deck" in favor of our own candidacies as incumbents, as in fact we would be if we do not seek to affect our inherent advanrages, Mr. President, I send my proposed amendment to the desk and ask unanimous consent that if be printed of this point in the RECORD. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be received and printed, and will lie on the table, and, without objection, will be printed in the RECORD in accordance with the Senator's request, Mr. BUCKLEY'S amendment (No. 1081) is as follows: AMENDMENTNO. 1081 on page 13, line 16, insert the following after "504.", and renumber, the succeeding paragraphs accordingly: "(al (1) The expendlture limitations under this section shall be applicable to incumbent candidates only (unless otherwise specified). Nonincumbent candidates shall be subject to an expenditure limitation equal to 130 per cent of the limitation applicable to an incumbent for each of the offices specified under this section, 2. For the purposes of this section, an incumbent is defined as one who (Al he is ispresently the office for which a candidate;holding or (B) ls currently holding or has within five years held an office, the voting constituency of which is the same as, or includes the votlng constituency of the office for which the Individual is a candidate, alleged:ly involved i_ the crimes col.lectively known as Watergate. Last summer, I implored my colleagues to withhold final consideration of any significant campaign reform until the duly mandated select committee had had an opportunity to fulfill th-e obligations requlrc_ of it in Senate Resolution 60. However, in view of the delags which may continue for several months, I no longer feel it is reasonable to expect or request this of the Senate. Instead, I am now prepared to express my personal views on what reforms of our electoral process seem necessary. Let rae begin by stating my adamant opposition to the public financing of campaigns for Federal office. I think there is something l_)litically incestuous about the Government financing and, I believe, inevitably then regulating, the day-to-day procedures by which the Government is selected. Obviously, it :is neither reasonable nor desirable to expect _ )_aissez-faire approach to the conduct of political campaigns. The Governmerit has been involved in one way or another in the electoral process since we undert(mk our present form of governmerit; and I have no doubt that the Government will increase its involw.,merit in the future. However, if we continue to delegate resr_nsibility for regulating campaigns to the bureaucracy, as we would do by enacting public finance, then I fear that a situation could arise in which the executive branch had the power to manipulate political campaigns in a manner which would make Watergate pale in comparison. I think it is extraordinarily important that the Government not control the The average spent inby1972 candidates who unseated incumbents was $125,000 as opposed to the average of $86,000 those incumbents spent. Thus, it can be argued on the basis of these figures that a challenger must be able to outspend an incumbent opponent by a significant margin if he expects to beat him and that he will have to spend in excess of $100,000 to stand a realistic chance, BUt what effect will the $90,000 limit imposed by S. 3044 have in these races? It is not at all unrealistic to assume that it will prevent challengers in marginal districts from overcoming the advantages inherent in incumbency. It is not at all unreasonable, in other words, to assume that those limits, had they been in effect in 1972, might have saved most, if not all, of those 10 incumbents. If we are to enact legislation of this kind I believe we must either eliminate unrealistically low limits such as those incorporated in S. 3044 or eliminate the advantages of incumbency, To help eliminate or at least minimize the advantages of incumbency I have decided to cosponsor legislation being introduced by the Senator from Delaware (Mr. ROTS) that would allow candidates to send free mailings to all voters during the course of their campaign and at the same time deny incumbents use of the franking privilege for additional mass Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, for the third time in less than 9 months, we find ourselves debating fundamental, and some say radical, reform of our electoral process. In the wake of Watergate and the events of the past year, it is not surprising that considerable support has developed within the Congress for new concepts such as public financing of campaigns for Federal ofrice. In fact, having listened to months of testimony about abuse and circumvention of existing statutes, I can sympathize with the temptation to abandon that system altogether in favor of some other approach. Public financing is clef-, initely new, and it appears pure and absolute; but is it right ? Just over a year ago, the Senate voted unanimously to create the Select Cornmittee on Presidential Campaign Activities. That committee was charged with the responsibility of investigating any and all potential wrongdoing associated with the 1972 campaign for President of the United States. It was also mandated to report its findings and recommendations to the Senate no later than Febl-aary 28, 1974. That date has passed, but the committee has yet to submit its report. The reason, as most know, is because of the possibility that our findings might prejudice the trials of individuals litical whether it applies po_ to that a contributions, statutory prohibition against primarY[es, general election campaigns, or both, may abridge tile individual's first amendment right of freedom of political expression. It is one thing to impose a limit on the total amount of an indtvidual contribution, for it can be argued that You are, in effect, equalizing everyone's opportunity for expression. However, wiaen that opportunity is completely eliminated, then I believe that the Congress has exceeded its responsibility to protect the integrity of the electoral process. In rural jargon, we are burning down the barn to get rid of the rats; and in so doing, we are also eliminating an important form of public _articipatlon in our political process--.participation whiclh is already at an all-time low. I realize that a Gidlup poll published last September showed that 65 percent of the people interviewed thought public financing was a "good idea." But I also realize that a recent poll showed :a majority of Americans had more confldeuce in their trash collectors than they did in the ability of Congress to effectivelv deal with the problems confronting this country. So. at a time when neop'le are becoming increasingly skeptical about the use of their tax dollars, we are considering bankrolling political candidates to the tune of several hundred mfilion machinery by which the public expresses the range of its desires, demands, and dissent. And finally, I genuinely believe 2O ! S 4458 CON'GRB:SSIONAL dollars each election. I admit that in a Federal budget of over $300 billion, $300 million for political candidates is not that much. However, at the first indication that an individual who is supposedly running for :public office is using tax dollars for anything other than that campaign, that is, assuaging his or her ego or generating customers for their business, I submit that a great many Americans will justifiably lower their estimation of the Congress even further, But, having expressed my views on the evils of public financing, as I see them, it is fair to ask, "What do you plan to offer as an. alternative, or how do you intend to reform our ailing electoral process?" ][ propose that we continue a system of private financing of campaigns for Federal office, but that we amend that system so as to broaden the base of participation and prevent the abuse of earlier campaigns. We could do this, in my judgment, by adhering to the $3,000 limitation on individual contributions included in S. 372 and S. 3044 and applying it separately to each primary, runoff, special, or general election campaign as provided for in both bills. Although many will contend that this would make it wirtually impossible to raise enough money to run an effecrive ca_-npaign, especially for the relatively unknown chs21enger, we should look briefly at the facts, Let us assume hypothetically that a_ expenditure limitation of 15 cents times the voting-age populs_tion of the country was imposed on each nominee for Pratdent during the general election campaign. According to my calculations, that comes out to around $24,000,000 per candidate. If $3,000 was the maximum an individual could con,tribute to a Presi.dent:al nominee, that candidate would have to find 8,000 people to contribute $3,000 each in order to meet the expend:ture ceiling'. There are over 210,000,000 citizens of this count, ry; and obviously not aU of them are old enough to vote, nor can afford to contribute $3.000 to a vol:ileal candidate. However, I submit that there are far more than 8,000 podpie out there who would be willing to contribute $3.000 to a nominee for Pres:dent; and it shonld not be that di_cult to find them. I suspect that many believe it is difficult because we have normally aimed our fund-ra/sing efforts _t the people most capable of giving large arnounts---the so-called fat-cats. But is that the proper approach? I do not believe so, for' I am sure we could reap far better results by developing an effective method of broad, low-level solicitation, I referred earlier to the terribly small amount of confdence a majority of Americans seem to have in their major governmental institutions. This is a problem which, 'bhough Watergate did not cause, it certainly has exacerbated, Moreover, it is a problem which could prevent even the most involved citizen from responding to the needs of a combination of Federal, State, and local candidates for public office. Consequently, ][ would propose that a clear and effective incentive be provided for those who are hesitant to contribute, and those 'who are not. I propose that 202 RECORD -- SENA'i"_; the present tax credit cf 50 percent of all political contributior_ made during' a calendar year, up to $ £2.50 for an in.. dividual return., or $25 for a joint return, be increased to $50 for an individual return and $100 for a j¢int return, and that the figure of 50 percent be increased to ,00 percent. That ,hearts that an individual can credit e_.ch dollar con-tributed to a political aampaign in a calendar year, 'ap to $50 far art individual return and $100 for a :oint return. Irt this way, the contributor can control who receives the mono3 and for what campaign it is used. Moreover, the Treasary Department is removed from any direct irvolvement in financin{,_ campaigns, thereby reduaing the poten-, tial for bureaucratic ntanipulation or abuse. Obviously, the key to the success of this new tax credit lcroposal is edu-. cat:eno The American people must be made fully aware that ,';uch an incentive [or political contributions exists, as well as how that incent!ve works when they file their individual or joint tax returns. And if, in the near future, it appears that a 100-per_:ent tax credit is no longer necessary id prompt adcquate private financing, then we should consider reducing that credit back to the. 50-percent level. Ho'aever, for now, I would only urge that this proposal be given the most serious consideration as s_ viable, and in my ju, tgraent prefer_ able. alternative to public financing, I would also propose t:aat the present dollar checkoff system [,e repealed eh.. tirely. Wherem_ an effective tax credit, system would remove thc U.S. Treasury from direct involvement in financing political campaigns, and would permit in-. dividual contributors to designate the :recipient of their money, the dollar checkoff system does ju,:t the opposite, In fa_ct, in S. 3044, unless an individual taxpayer specifies otherwise, $2 is automatically' paid over to the Federal elec-, tion campaign fund for u,;e in campaigns in accordance with the prov!sions of the bill. The American taxpayer :is not ever, allowed to designate the party that should receive the cont:ribution, much tess the specific candidate; a:ad it is for this reason that I shall p_opose that this system be abandoned altogether, I shall also propose th:_t ordy :nd:vid-. uals be _ermitted to make contributions to political campaigns. Only individuals can vote, and only individuals can deride who is on the balbt in the first place; so why _;hould not only individu-. als be allowed to make political contri-. but:on,;? I do not think s. corporation or a union should be allowefi to contribute. tlhev cannot now; but they do through AMPAC, BIPAC, COPE, and a half dozen other devices. ;goreover, I dc, not think associations, committee_, caucuses, or any other organization which aggregates funds from its members _nd gives those funds in the name of a _'ause or interest should be permitted to do so. After a full year of service on the Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, I am convinced that this would do more to elimina';e the distort:ye effects of special-intere;t groups than any other proposal I hsve seen which permits private financirg. This is not March 26, 19 74 meant to imply that I oppose or in any 'wt_ywish to diminish the persuasive eapa_:ity of lobbyists, whether they repre;sent corporations, unions, or public interest groups. On the contrary, I have al'ways felt that the most convincing argument available to the lobbyist, besides the individual merits of the particular issue, was not the lure of substantial tnant:al support for sympathetic canal:dates, but rather the strength of a large i:Jlocof voters which might be influenced by a stand taken on a particular issue. It should, instead, be totally incumbent t.tpon the candidate to solicit the sup!port of the individual voters and not specfiqc groups; and it is for these reasons that ]i believe that only individuals should be permitted to contribute to politiaal campaigns. Essential to the success of any system cf private campaign financing is cornplete ]_ublic disclosure. S. 3044 deals very effectively, in my opinion, with the probitems of disclosure and multiple campaign committees, treasurers, and depos:tortes, cash contributions and ex:;,enditt:res, and an effective enforcement ::r_eehanismfor prosecuting alleged violations of campaign statutes. However, there t._;one additional step which I con_ider important to the fulfilment of the i>ublic':s right to examine the source and amoun'_ of individual contributions. That step is to establish a time certain before the election, say 10 days to 2 weeks after which no further contributions can be received. And then 3 to 5 days before the election, require that each candidate re!:_)rt completely the sources of his or her contributions. In this way, the public is _idwen the full benefit of examining the candidate's sources of funds and draw:ina their own conclusions regarding the breadth of the candidates' appeal prior I;o the election rather than after the electioll has taken place. As it is now, candidq'tes can withhold potentially damaging :[:nformation on contributions until after the election has taken place, thereby hindering the public's ability to Judge :._upport until after it is t()o late. However, under my amendment, contributions received after the time certain wo_ld have to be returned, and no further funds could be solicited or received antil after the elect:oh had taken place, m_ndthen, only if it were necessary to defr,_ycampaign debts. I shall also propose that the lowest ,:mit rate provisions of the Communtca1;ions _.ct of 1934, as amended, be re_ealed completely. I find something inherent]y unfair and inequitable about '.'equirhlg local radio and TV stations, and the major broadcasting ne_works to offer advertising time, particularly prime time or "driving time," at the same rate that it is offered to their top commercial 0uyers..-buyers that advertise 365 days a year and legitimately earn the lower ::'s.tes. litdo not question the right or autlh0rity of the Congress to regalate broad.cast ra_es, for the history and record of iFeileraL regulation is well established. What '[ do question, howew_r, is the fair._ess to the broadcaster and to the other _,dvertisers. If it is absolutely necessary I;o attempt to offset the extraordinary cost of broadcast advertising, then I March 26, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL propose that we do so at the prevailing rates and not at the lowest unit costs. In this regard, I would propose that a minimum amount of broadcast time be provided each legally qualified candidate for Federal office. Any candidate who wishes to purchase beyond the guaranteed amount would do so at the prevailing rate. In this way_ the challenger would be afforded an opportunity to gain a moderate amount of public exposure without having to allocate an inordinate share of what are likely to be scarce resources just to approach the recognition factor of the incumbent, Moreover, while guaranteeing a modcrate amount of TV and radio time to qualified candidates, it would discourage the p_n'chase of additional time by requiring the respective candidates to pay the prevailing advertising rates. In order for a candidate to qualify for this "guaranteed time," I would plagiarize the formula used in S. 3044 for major and minor party candidate eligibility. That formula requires that House, Senate, and Presidential candidates reach specific thresholds before public funds are made available on a dollar-for-dollar basis. I would require that the respective threshold be met before any advertising time was made available; and even then, I might require that an additional threshold be met later in order to insure the true intentions of the particular candidate. However, the thrust of such an amendment would be to help overcome many of the obstacles, primarily that of recognition, confronting the candidate who chaUenges an incumbent. In general, I oppose any form of public finance; and I realize that such a proposal might create some of the problems which I alluded to earlier. But, I am also aware of the inherent disadvantages facing a challenger in relation to an incumbent; and if anything is to be done in the realm of public financing to reduce those disadvantages, then I would prefer to see it done in the manner I have just described--at the prevailing rates and not at the lowest unit costs, I shall also propose that overall expenditure limitations be eliminated if a system of private financing is retained with individual contributions strictly liraired and fully disclosed. The reason, very simply, is that as long as the size and source of contributions are adequately controlled, particularly at the $3,000 level, then overall exPenditure limitations, in effect, penalize the candidate for attracting a broad base of support. I do feel that we spend too much on campaigns and that something should be done to prevent the unnecessary expenditure of funds in political races which are not even close. However, in most cases, it seems that limits favor the incumbent, are arbitrary, and do not accurately refiect the changing costs of campaigning from year to year or from State to State. Thus, if we retain significant private financing, with the aforementioned conditions, then I shall propose that we elfininate the overall expenditure limitations. I referred earlier to my concern that public pal_icipation in our electoral process appears to be at an all-time low. I should like to elaborate on that concern, RECORD-- SENATE It stems from the fact that in 1972, only 55.6 percent of the eligible voters in this country actually turned out to cast their ballots for President and Vice President of the United States. Obviously, different Presidential campaigns generate varying degrees of interest and enthusiasm among the voters; and races that are not even close, seldom attract a large turnout. However, a turnout of 55.6 percent, particularly at a time when the Federal Government is increasingly involved in our daily lives, is, in my mind, tragic. It is the c_earest indication of all that a substantial number Of Americans have grown disenchanted with politics and the electoral process; and it is one of the primary reasons why broad reform of that process seems warranted, Such reform, in my judgment, should include not only campaign finance and so-called dirty tricks, but also the selection process itself. I believe we should examine voter registration requirements, the present primary system, national party conventions, the official length of political campaigns, election-day procedures, and even, perhaps, the electoral college--not all necessarily in conjunction with S. 3044, but rather as part of the overall debate on campaign reform, As part of that debate,'I would urge that serious consideration be given automatic registration of voters in Federal elections at age 18. The history of the United States has been a history of the extension of the voting franchise. Yet, even today, a significant number of our citizens are effectively prevented from participating in elections by complex and often archaic registration and residency requirements. The postcard voter registration bill passed by.the Senate last year was an effort to deal with this problem, but I opposed it because of my concern for the potential for mail fraud and abuse of such a system. Several Western nations, however, have already successfully implemented a form of automatic voter registration. In the Scandinavian countries, for example, and in Switzerland, every eligible citizen is registered ex officio in a voting register. Lists of voters are published by the elections authorities in advance of the election date. Any citizen whose name has not been irlcluded in the list then has until approximately a week before the election to correct the situation, In the United States, however, citizens still must contend with what amounts to a perpetual registration process. I fully realize that some difficulties will arise in translating automatic registration to the realities of the American experience and attempting to reconcile it with State registration procedures. Perhaps social security numbers could be utilized to standardize this procedure, since more than 95 percent of eligibIe voters are already registered with social security. In any event, the concept deserves consideration, in my view; and, if workable, it could provide a valuable incentive to increase citizen participation, I would also urge major reform of our present spasmodic system of Presidential primaries. There are essentially three alternatives in this regard: a refinement of the present system requiring the 25 S 4459 States 'who hold Presidential primaries to do so on four or five specific dates at :_.- or 3-_eek intervals; a single national primary for each party with a subse.quent runoff unless ()ne candidate polls :more than 40 percent; and a system of regional primaries also held at specific intervals, but encompassing all of the country. Of these three prop(_sals, I am mo,_t inclined to support the one for a system of regional primaries in which every eligible voter who desires to participate in the selection of a party nominee cain do so by voting in the regional primary which includes his State. This would permit the millions of Americans who support candidates who never get the party nomination to express that suppol_ in a meaningful way. It would also give them a personal stake in the election and increase the likelihood of their particJi~ pation in the subsequent general election campaign. Specifically, I would propose dividing the count:fy into four geographic regions, largely along the lines of time zones so as to avoid holding a "Southern" or a "New England" primary with a distinct ideological slant. I would make those regions of roughly equal population and would hold the four pri.. maries at 3-week intervals beginning :in early June and ending in early August. The respective primary candidates would compete for State delegates who would 'be won according to the proportion of vote received in each State, rather than on a winner..take-all basis. Although I am aware Of the high cost involved in running in regional prhnarle_, the basic idea is to vastly expand the public participation in the nominattrig process and to significantly reduce tl_e official length of Presidential campaigns. As i_ is now, the first Presidential primary normally takes place in early March with the general election 8 months later, in November. But as I see it, there is absolutely no reason why that process must take that long. It exhausts the candidates, costs exorbitant sums of money, and eventually bores a great many people. The British do it all in less than _; weeks, so why cannot we do it in less than 8 months? In this regard, I pl_m to offer an amendment to require that all primaries for Federal office be held i._o earlier than the first of June and no later than the 15th of August. This would significantly shorten the official length of campaigns for Federal office and permit the Congress to work at relatively full strength for a good 4 months before, most Members are forced to return to their States or districts to campaign full time for the nomination. I recall that before Senator Margaret Chase Smith left this body, she propo_'_,d that Senators be required to maintain a voting attendance record of 65 percent or better. Her argument was that o_lce Presidential primaries began, the Senate found it difficult to obtain a quorum. I am not necessarily proposing that. I am proposing that we shorten the official length of campaigns and enable the Congress to accomplish as much as possible in the first few months of the year while attendance is still high. With regard to the actual election day, 203 S 4460 ........ CON _,RESSIONAL I recommend that we open'and close polls all across the country at a uniform time and that they be opened a full 24 hours, The arguments for this are simple and well known; but briefly stated, this is the best way I know of to prevent the harmful effects of broadcast networks projectlng the outcome of elections, based on very early returns, when polls in the Western States are still open. Moreover, 24 hours would maximize the individual's opportunity to vote before, after, or durlng work. I would also recommend that the debate on the electoral college, that 18th century vestigial remnant, be reopened. Although I have no strong views one way or the other, I have long felt that in a democracy such as ours, there should be no alternative to the expressed will of a majority of the people; and the electoral college, as conceived and utilized for the past 200 years, constitutes just such an alternative. How can we ask for greater confidence and participation in our political process when we are not willing to entrust the American people with the ultimate decision? It is a difficult queslion to answer, but one which we should consider nevertheless. .In conclusion, Mr. President, seldom, if ever, has the need for a thorough reexamination of our electoral process been as great. Seldom, if ever, has the opportunity for reform been as ripe. We should seize that opportunity to greatly expand the suffrage and to encourage unprecedented participation in our political process, Forty years ago, A1 Smith said: All the ills of democracy can be cured by mor_ democracy. I share that view and hope that we will apply that principle as we consider the pending legislation, ORDER Mr. my _nderstanding Senator call up an approval and that bill, after guished Re imous consent amendment (No. at the hour of The objection? The is SOordered, TO VOTE ON NO. 1064 Mr. President, it is (Mr. ALLEN)will today. With his the manager of the with the distinleader, I- ask unaa_the Allen _64) occur precisely ).m. tomorrow, OFFICER. Is there none, and it AGREEMENT ON TREATY MINIMUM WAGE CONFERENCE Mr. Mr. President, some time tomorrow the will take up Executive Iff, 93d Ce first session, a Treaty on with Denmark, which has been reported unanimously by the Committee on Foreign Relations. I ask consent that on Thursday 'of 12 o'clock, there be a vote on the treaty with Deltmark and that that vote the conference on the minimum wage bill 204 The objection? The it is so ordered, ORDER FOR 12 Mr. _manimous ate cempletes its iii adjournment morrow, The TOWER). Without dered, RECORD -- SEN A [ E OFt'ICEFt. Is there hears none, and UNTIl, TOMORHOW Mr. PresJLdent, I ask that, when the Sentoday, it stand 12 ()'clock to-. OFFICER (Mr. ection, it is so or- ORDER FOR WEDNESDAY THURSDAY Mr. unanimous con._ent ate completes its stand in Thursday. The PRESLDING objection, it is so FROM ll A.M. ON Mr. _?resident, I ask when the Sentomorrow, it mxtil 11 a.m. on Without -- FEDEi_,AL ELECTION C_aYrPAIGN ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1974 The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill (S. 2044) to amend tile Federal El_mtion Campaign Act of 1:)71 to provide for public financing of primary and general election campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other p:rovisions of law relating to the financing and coaduet of such campaigns. Mr. CLARK. l_[r. Preside at, I ask unanimous consent that two of my staff merebers, Andrew Lc_wi and ]_rady Williamson, be allowed to the p::ivilege of the floor during the consideration _f S. 3044. The ]?RESID]:NG OFFICER. Without objection, it is sc, ordered, Mr. CI_RK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that amendments :Nos. 1013 and 1014 be considered as having met the reading requirements of :cuae XXII under the stalxding rules of the Senate. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is sc ordered. Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, tlhe bill before us today--the Federal Election Campaign _ct Amendments of 1974--is without question one of the most significant pieces of legislation the SEnate has considered in the last 2 year_,. From Theedore Roosevelt to Henry Cabot Lodge to John F. KennedF, the effort to establish pu.blic financing of Federal elections has continued throughout mu(h of this century. Under the leadership of Senators 1-C,Naand PASTORE,the Congre_;s has ehacted public financing fcc Presidential genera] elections beginnin_,_ in 1976. But now, through the considerable efforts of Chairman HOWARDCANNONand the Rules Committee, we have the opportunity to provide :public financing fo._ congressional campaigns as well. This legislatio;a (S. 3044) wfil provide fei' matching payments to primary candidates, for optional full funding for candidates in the general election, for strict contribution and expenditure limitations, March 26, 1974 :for fair treatment of minor party and indLependent candidates. The bill incorporates the many sound provisions el S. 372, the campaign reform bill passed by the Senate last summer. These include the establishment of an independent :l?ederal Election Commission, strength_:;ned reporting requirements, full fi:aanciail disclosure for Federal officials and candidates, tough penalties for vio:[at.ors, and repeal of the equal t',_ne provision of the Communications Act. This legislation is sound, the need for it i;_obvious, and I certainly will support i.t. lVlyonly concern is that it does not go :gar enough, and I do plan to offer amend:,.ne:etsto the bill. No one contends that passage of this legislation--with or Without strengthenlng amendments--will somehow automatically bring an end to all of the ftbuses that have come to light in the past 2 years. But surely this bill will help :'.kange a political process that in many ways has become the private preserve _):C the _ealthy and special interests, and :Lt'_dll help us return to a Government responsive to all of the people. Mr. President, at a time when public ,::o_fidence both in the Congress and the ,:::hiel Executive are below 30 percent, at a time when a substantial majority of _he American people favor public financi.ng of elections, the failure to enact this :egi_31ation would be wholly irresponsible. In one sense, President Nixon was right when he said that "1 year of Wa: tergate is enough." We must never again ,';ubject this country to the kind of conduet. that characterized election year :.972. It is time to bring a halt to the t;::_rs,nny of the private dollar in the publie's business, and the passage of S. 3044 x_,ill be a very significant step in that direction. Mr. HATHAWAY. Mr.. President, I ask _ma:aimous consent that two members of my staff, Ms. Francie Sheehan-Brady, _mcl Mr. Angus King, be given the' privilege of tine floor during debate on S. 3044. The ]PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. HATHAWAY. Mr. President, I call UlPray amendment which is at the desk a(ad ask that it be stated. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The _v. meladment will be stated. The legislative clerk read as follows: 0:_ page 75, line 19, redesign_te subsection "(a)" as strbsectlon "(a) (1) ". _Yapage 75, line 19,thestrike word "pers(:n" and substitute wordthe"individual". On page 75, line 22, strike the word "pers,n" and substitute the word "individual". on page 75, following line 9_3, add the feiio',ving new subsection: "(2) No person (other than an individual) may :a_ak_a contribution to, or for t;he benefi._ of, a candidate for nomination for eleclion, or election, which, when added to the s.m of ali other contri_butlons made by that persetx for that campaign, exceeds $6,000." on page 75, line 25. strike the word "perso:tv, and substitute the word "individual". on and page sfibstltute 76, line 2,the strike the"individual". word "per_:m?' word On page 76, line 9, strike the period and add the following: "': ,or from any person (other than an Indlvidual) which, when added to the sum of all ot:i_er contributions received from that persen for that campaign, exceeds $6,000." March 26, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-- SENATE S 44t];1. Mr. HATHAWAY. Mr. President, the purpose of my amendment is to correct an inequity in S. 3044 by distinguishing between individuals and organizations with regard to contribution limitations, As reported, the bill places a $3,000 limitation on what a person---defined as an individual or an organization-may contribute to a candidate for the House or Senate in any election. Only a candidate's own campaign organization and the national and State party committees are exempt from this provision, Obviously, the intent of the limitation is to eliminate the specter of bought elections and to lessen the role of big money in politics, In effect, though, the limitation equates one wealthy contributor with an organization of hundreds or thousands. Thus it discriminates against the modest contributors who choose to give through an organization that reflects his philosophy or views, The role of broad-based citizen inforest groups--whether conservative-such as the Americans for Constitutional Action or the American Conservative Union--liberal--such as the National Committee for an Effective Congress or the Council for a Liveable World--or Single issue---such as the League of Conservation Voters--is to heip elect persons who support the group's views or tdoologY. The citizens who contribute to such organizations often do not have the time or expertise themselves to find out which candidates most nearly share their views, are most qualified, have real chanee_ of winning, and so on. By giving through such committees, they participate in the most intelligent way in the election process. It is important to point out, too, that the limitation of the Senate bill does not greatly restrict large business interests or labor union participation. Individuals within a corporation or company may each give "voluntarily" as they do now, or they may establish committees in several cities or States, as many as they wish, and each may contribute the full amount to any single candidate. Since most labor organizations, many trade associatlons and business groups already have State, local, and regional affiliates, they have an existing network to support candidates, and each of these committees may contribute the maximum to each candidate, In contrast, large citizens' groups usually raise funds by mailings to the general public. They are known by their name and their reputation, and cannot suddenly split into many different cornmittees with different names, A legitimate political committee should be allowed to contribute at least twice as much as an individual. Some, including the New York Times in an editorial comment, have suggested that such organizations be allowed tocontribute three or four times the amount a single individual can contribute. It has been pointed out that, under the present proposal, Mr. and My amendment would partially remedy this inequity by distinguishing between an "individual" and a "person," and by allowing an organization to contribute twice as much as an individual, In effect, my amendment would allow that an organization could contribute the same amount that a married couple can now contribute under the pending bill. Mr. President, I urge the adoption of my amendment, Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I have gone through this amendment and I would ask the Senator from Maine, do I correctly understand that his amendment would not change in any way the limit now imposed on an individual, which says that an individual can contribute not to exceed $3,000 to a political candidate? Mr. HATHAWAY. The Senator is correct, Mr. CANNON. That means that a husband and wife, therefore, could contribute $6,000, because each, as an individual, coulc_ contribute $3,0007 ' Mr. HATHAWAY. That is correct, Mr. CANNON. The Senator's amendment, then, would simply be that an organization, being defined as a person, would be in the same contribution category as a husband and wife would be, insofar as the limits were concerned. Mr.' HATHAWAY. The Senator is absohitely correct. Mr. CANNON. So that an organization that has many members which may be contributing small amounts could, then, insf_rad of being limited to $3,000, the proposal now in the bill, would be limited to $6,000, the same amount a husband and wife together could give to a candidate. Mr. HATHAWAY. The Senator is correct, Mr. CANNON. This makes no other changes in the bill, then, is that correct? Ma-. HATHAWAY. It does not make any other changes in the bill. Mr. CANNON. I thank the Senator. Mr. GRJ._'r'xN. Mr. President, will the Senator from Maine yield? Mr. HATHAWAY. I yield, Mr. GRIFFIN. Obviously, if the Senator's amendment were to be adopted, the situation would be better than what we have today Where organizations such as those having milk funds can make unlimited contributions. Bu$ I suggest that even with the Senator's amendment, it is disturbing that we would be delegatlng to some organization the decision as to who is to be supported to the extent of Mr. ltATHAWAY. The Senator is par-tially right, and I hope to see the day when all individuals in this countw take so much interest in our political process that we can have a s:ystem in which only individuals will be allowed to make con.tributions. However, in the meantime we are faced with the reality that most individuals do not have that much interest or do not take the time to find out about the qualifications of ail the candidates who are running 'for public office. With some exceptions, the orgmlizations to whic:h many of these same people belong are ideaiisl;ic, legitimate organizations. They are not necessarily out to get someboclV or have an ax to grind. They do operate conscientiously to further the interests of their raembers, and they provide a good vehicle for contributions which probably would not otherwise be made to political campaigns. Certainly, the limitation of $6,000 is not a very large one to be placed upon such organizations. I mentioned in my earlier remarks organizations such as the Committee for an Effective Congre',_s, which has 80,900 members. A $6,000 liraitation, for suclh an organization does not seem to be (mi; of Iirle. Mr. ORlr'r'lN. I might agree with the Senator ii1 terms of a Presidential election or a Senate election in a big Stal_. But when we are talking about a congressional election in which the total amount of the funds is much smaller. I would suggest that l;wo or three of these organJLzations which are essentially in league with one another could have a great _Lmpacton a congressional election. Witla this amendinent, it seems to me that we are right b_ck again to the special interest control of elections. I thought that is what we are trying to move :_way from with this legislation. While I regret to do it, I think we should have a roUca]l vote on this amendmont. Since the majority leader has announced that we will not have any rollcall w)tes today, ;[ suggest for the ecnsideration of the m_mager of the bill and the sponsor of the amendment that perhaps we could agn_ to have a rollcall vote on this amendment tomorrow, either before or afte_ the 3:30 vote that is already scheduled. Mr. HATHAWA_'. Yes; I would be happy to agree to that. Mr. CANNON. Would the Senator desire to withhold his amendment at this time? The agreement that is in effect permits Senator ALLE_r to offer an $6,000, If we really want clean elections and clean campaigns, we would strictly insist that all contributions be made by individuals to the candidate of their choice. To me, that is the way it should be. So I am opposed to the Senator's amendment. I believe he moves in the wrong direction. I think we should be moving away completely from elections that are supported and financed by special interest groups. This amendment amendment, to call it up this even]L_._g, and il; will be voted on a_ 3:30 tomorrow. Would the Senator be willing to wll_hdraw his amendment? Mr. HATHAWAY. I would be happy to withdraw the amendment until the amendment ,of the Senator from Alabamaisvotedonat3:30tomorrow. The Pi%ESIDLNG OFFICER. T:he amendment of the Senator from Mad:ne is withdrawn. Mrs. Clement Stone could legally contribute twice as much to a House or Senate candidate as could the Nationalan Cornmittee for an Effective Congress, organization of 80,000 persons. would allow the special interest groups to be able to pick and choose in sup-. porting candidates rather than in-. dividual the citizens. Am I wrong in that assessment? SENATOR HU?_ES TOMORRO_N Mr. ROBERT C. _YRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous c(_asent that on tornorrow, after the two _teaders or their des- ORDER i_()R _ECOGNITION OF 205 S 4462 CONGRESSIONAL RE(_ORD -- SENA Tl!: ignees haw. · been{ recognized raider the standing order, t I[e Senator from Iowa (Mr. Hva_ES) be recognized_for not to exceed 15 minutes! The PRESIDIN I OFFICER. Without objection, it; is so o: flered, March 2 6, 19 73 do with public financing _f Federal elco.. tions. There is :much good in the bill and ff we can prune this publiir: financing provision from the bill then there would be no objection to rapid (onsideration of the features of the bill ahd an early vote on the bill. Mr. Ih'es]dent, S. 3044 i., an original bill. coming from the Committee on Rules and Administration, coming _hs tlne result of and in compliance with an agreement; reached on the floor of t/ne Senate back in December of last year when the public finance rider to the debt limit authorizetion hill was under discussion. The disC]ngu]shed Senato:: from Ne-ada (Mr. CANNON) and other members of the committee agreed that :if that ridE,r were dropped or if further insistence or its acceptance not be made that the Rules Committee would report a bill in some fashion to provide a vehicle for the Senate acting on the public financing of Federal elections idea. The bill was reported to the floor of the Senate, conside::ed in contmittee, passed by a vote of sorae 8 to 1, although some l_[embers who voted for the bill stated that they were doing sir only because commitments had been made that a bill would proceed from the R_fies Committee to the floor of the Senate. The Senator from Alabama voted against the reporting of the bill. He made no commitment on the firor of the Senate agreeing to a bill to be reported from the Rules Committee to th_ Senate. :E>enditt:res would be just as large or poss:ibly mt:ch larger than in the feld of media advertising. What about travel expenses; what about cars; what about brochures; what about campaign office staff, mass mailing, stationery, and postage? _,_.11 these types of advertising have no limit trader the present law, under the :[9'71 law. But, Mr. President, the Senate was mindfui of that deficiency and on July 30 of last :.,.rearpassed S. 372. That bill would i:_lmze a_x overall limitation on campaign ._xpenditures of all types, and whereas t;he pre_ent law makes no effective Urn]lation on the amount that can be eonIribute_. by one contributor, as we wit:aessed, contributions in the hundreds of ':ho_Jmands of dollars were made in the 1!)71>`campaign; S. 372 significantly leaves :he campaign expense field in the private :meter, and would place a limit of $3,000 !:,er person per election. 8. 3044 carries :;hal; same $3,000 limitation. So if ,S. 372 places a limit on all types of _.'xpendimres, not just the media, if it l:,uts an effective limit on that, if it lin]its campai_m contributions to $3,000--and it does--and if it sets up an independent election commission--and it does--and if it. limits cash campaign contributions to $50--and it does--it has gone a long way toward effective campaign reform. There are many atrocities committed in tiae x_ame of campaign reform, and I submit [hat public financing is one such _;_rocity. Every change does not neees- Mr. ROBERT C. 1_ krRD. Mr. President, I suggest the absen, e of a quorum, The PRESIDING )FFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The second assist nt legislative clerk proceeded to call th_ roll. Mr. ALLEN. Mr] President, I ask unanimous consent Cleat the order for the quorum call :be rescil_ed. The PRESIDIN(_ OFFICER (Mr. OR:tFFIN). Without,, _tbjection, it is so Mr. President, this bill goea one step further than does the Eiennedy-ScottMansfield-Mondale-Cranston, and cchers rider. _.q_e rider did not provide for the financing in whole or in part of House and Senate primaries. The Senate bill gees one step fm'ther than doe.,; the Kennedy bill. Mr. President, why pul,lic financing? Why should we have publ:.c financing of Federal elections? Why no; leave it in the _ariiy rnean it is a reform, and paying the bill out 3f the public Treasury is not re:!cfm--it is just shifting the burden to the taxpayer_ Mr. President, the Senate set up the Watergate Committee somewhat over a year ago, and one of its responsibilities vms to make recommendations on the conclusion of its investigation, about iral:roving the election process in Presidential races. ordered. private sector? of Watergate Well, tc_[;he Watergate about wind up its ORDER FOR TR! NSACTION OF ROIJTINE MORNII 'G BUSINESS TO1VrORROW Mr. ROBERT C. 3YRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous c resent that following the recognition of ] Ir. HuoHrs on comerrow, there be a per/ )d for the transaction of routine morning business, of not to exeeed 30 minutes, w: ;h statements therein limited to 5 :minute each. The PRESIDIN( OFFICER. Without' objection, it is so orl ered. m ORDER FOR CCi [SIDERATION TOMORROV[ r OF F DERAL .ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACq _,MENDMENTS OF 1974 Mr. ROB_:RT C. i ['RD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous cc lsent that following the transaction of r .ut]ne morning bustness on tomorrow, the Senate resume consideratio:n of the unfinished business, S. 3044. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so o_ Jered. QUORU: FEDERAL - ff CALL _' ELECTION cAMPAIGN AMFNDMENTSOF 1974 The Senate continued with sideration of the bill (S. 3044) the Federal Election 1971 to provide for primary and general ACT the conto amend Campaign Act of public financing of election campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating to the financing and conduct of such campaigns. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I ask that the clerk please report amendment No. 1064, and that it be made the pending business, 2[T_e PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated, The amendment was read as follows: Amend S. 3944, as follows: Strike TITLE I--IrlIqANCIBIG OF FEDERAL CA_M_AIGNS tn Its entirety, Mr. Alff_N. Mr. President, the title which the amendment would strike is title I of S. 3044, which is the first 24 pages and the first 4 lines on page 25 of the bill. The amendment would strike from the bill all those portions thereof having to _Vell, they ,_ay the lessons indicate that the only answer to the abuses Watergate is to turn paign expenses over to for Federal elections _.[¥easury, rather than Committee is Just work. I assume its p_)inted out by the bill for camthe taxpayer, pay out of the public through eontribu- report will be forthcoming shortly. What does the Watergate resolution l:q:'ovide?' Section 4, page 13, reads: The select committee shall have authority t::, recommend legislation the enactment of _nvestigaany new co:_gcessional which its tions from indiv:.dual citizens, [Mr. President, that magic is ][eft to the public money. ¥Thy shouli th:at be less t:an corLsiders is necessary or desirable to s_.feguarnnecticut, just a few minutes a_[o was speaking on the subject. I am c,:,.nfiden_: other members of that cornmittee will be on the Senate floor in the c,:,ming flays, if not weeks, discussing this very same issue and speaking against public filmncing. What is the big hurry? We have already passed a bill, S. 372, that does not p:r'ovide for any public financing--not a d:!me. Well, that bill passed here on .J_:dy 30 by a vote of 82 to .8, Mr. Pres]al,mt, and the Kennedy-Scott-MansfieldCranston-Mondale-Pell rider was de- March 26, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE feated by a vote of about 52 to 40 when it was offered as an amendment to that bill. That bin is over in the House, and we understand Chairman HAYs/has agreed to act in the matter of campaign reform in the Very near future. Before they act on the bin in the House, an effort is made to change the entire thrust of the bill, change the ehtire position of the Senate, with regard to that legislation. What are our brethren in the House going to think about the Senate sending a bill, providlng for private financing with strict regnlation, and before they even act on it, the Senate changes its mind and sends an entirely new bill with an entirely different thrust? I believe the Senate should be a Httle more consistent than that. If we wanted public financing, it looks like it would have been a part of that bill What does this bill provide? It keeps thatsame provision in there about candidates who seek the presidential nomination of the major parties--and there are quite a number of those. When we have a full Senate here, we have quite a number who are seeking the nomination. ! might say, Mr. President, I have an amendment I expect to call up, before the bill is acted on finally, that would forbid any Member of the 93d Congress from receiving any public funds in aid of a Presidential nomination contest for the Presidency for the term starting Jannary 20, 1977, which would be the start of the next term. We have a number here in the Senate who seek the Presidency or would accept the nomination if it came their way. The bill still provides that a Member of the Senate or a Merebet of the House could seek the Presidential nomination of one of the major parties, and if he were successful in getting $250,000 in contributions of $250 or less, then the Federal Treasury would write him a check for $259,000. It would match that $250,000, and then subsequent contributions of up to $250 that he received would be matched by the Federal Treasury. He could come in every 2 or 3 days and pick up his check or his matching funds. That keeps going until he has collected from the Federal Government some $7.5 million to aid him in his election campaign, If Governor Rockefellerhad contributions of that size and that amount, he could get $7.5 minion out of the taxpaycr's pockets. Governor Connally in the same way. I have collected sc) many thousands of dollam in my race for the Presidency, and I want the Government 'to match that?" I asked ff that were possible under the bill. The Senator from Rhode Island rePlied, Oh, yes; that is possible under the bill. Governor Reagan the same Senator PERCY in thein same way.way. Senator KENNEDY ii1 the same way. Their contributions up to $250 would be matched by the Federal Government up to $7,500,000. In a colloquy this morning or early this That is, S. 3944, the bill before the Senate is that it tries to do too much. too soon, and goes beyond what is either feasible or workable. Mr. President, this is the Washington Post making sound suggestions, such as afternoon with the distinguished Senafor from Rhode Island (Mr. PELL), I_ asked him if there is in the bill anything that sets a time beyond which or back of which contributions would not be matchable or could not be received. I asked how far back it went. He said that there was no limitation[ I have just read. For one thing, the bill provides for full public financing of congressional general.election campaigns, and that is clearly in.digestible in the House this year, since the House leadership even chokes on the more moderate matching-grant approach embodled in the Anderson-Udall bill. The more serfout defects irt the Senate blll involve the inclusion of primaries, That _s something the Senate committee, in its wisdom, added to the Kennedy-, ! asked, Does that mean that a man who has been running for the Presidency for some while coula come in and saY, "In the last five years Then I asked, Looking prospectively, now--looking at future races--suppose a man says, "I do not believe I am ready to run for President in 1976. I want to wait and run in 1980, or perhaps I want to mm in 1984." I asked if it were possible for a candidate to seek the nomination in 1980 and participate in the Federal subsidy? The Senator from Rhode Island replied, Oh, yes, that is all right, I asked, Is it possible,seekingthen,theto 1976 have nomination, one class of candidates another class seeking the 1980 nomination, another group seeking the 1984 nomination, and then anoti_er group seeking the 1988 nomination? The Senator from Rhode Island replied, Oh, yes. Tha_ is permissible. Mr. President, I do not believe that the Senate wants to approve a measure of that sort. I have thought that the Washington Post would be in favor of almost any sort of bill that was said to provide for public financing or that was said to be for election reform. But I have found, to my surpise, that in this morning's Washington Post, the lead editorial said this about S. 3044. The editorial did not call the bill by name. Thus the Senate last summer sent the House a very solid bill to curb private giving and spending and to strengthen the enforcement of the election laws. And today the Senate begins debate on a very ambitious bill to extend public financing to all federal primary and general-election campaigns, I have always felt that the Post had a strong interest in public financing, That bin was passed by the Senate and is in the House today. We do not know that it is not going to be acted on. Either that bin or a similar bill will be acted upon. Let me read further from the Washington Post editorial: The problem with the latest Senate bill S 4463 Scott-Mansfield-Mondale-Cranston-Pel[1 rider approach. I continue to read: No aspect of the federal elections proce:ss is more motley and capricious tha_ thc pre:cent steeplechase of pre_identlal primaries. That is a field which the committee bin is seeking to clarify. Injecting even. partial public funding into this process, without rationalizing it in any other way, makes little sense. As for Congressional primaries, they are so varied 1_ size, cost and significance amotlg the States that no sblgle system of public Support seems Justifiable without much more careful thought. I commend a reading of this editorial in the Washington Post to Senatom, particularly Senators who advocate the public financing aspect of the bill. What the Senate bill seeks to do is similar to a rider that failed of adoption last year. It is a worse bill in some respects, toas include I have the pointed out, campaigns in that it seems primary of Members of the Souse and the Senate. It goes even further than the KennedySCOtt rider of last year. The pending amendment, the amendment on which agreeraent haa been made to vote tomorrow afternoon, is to strike out title I, but to leave the remaining title, "Title II-Changes in Campaign Communications Law and in Reporting and Disclosure Provisions of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971," title Iii, crimes relatlng to elections and political activiti_s--that would be preserVed--title IV, disclosure of financial interests by certain Federal officers and employees, and title V, related Internal Revenue Code amendments. Those four remaining titles would still stay in the bill. The distinguished majority leader this morning sought h) obtain unanimous consent to strike title V in order thai: it might; be considered on legislation which had originated in the House of Representatives, that it might be attached to the legislation originating in the House and referred overto there. the Ways and Means Committee Mr. President, what title V does in the bill before us--and we do not know whether it win stay in the bill or not:; I rather believe when we come to a vote on the majority leader's motion it will be stricken--is as follows: Title V is divided into two partes. One deals with the checkoff. And speaking of the checkoff, this checkoff system thltt we have really prorides the vehicle and the method and system by which the 1976 general election Presidential campaign can be financed. It lis estimated by the fiscal authorities that by 1976 there will be over $50 million in this checkoff fund. It is provided that the candidate of each major party shall get 15 cents per person of voting age throughout the country, which will run about $21 million; so the Democrate and Republicans can be financed unde:c the present check-off laws. We do not need thLs S. 3044 to provide for the public financing of national Presidential elections. We do not need that at a11. The only catcll in it--catch 22, so to speak--is that in order to come under the provisions of the present check-off, the polit!!cal party has to agree that it will make do in 'the campaign with this $21 207 S 4464 CONGRI]SSION AL RECORD -- SENATF. million, and that the candidates will not For that reason, I am especJ!ally pleased accept any private contributions. I rather ix) commend :_enator F.:owAgD CaNNOrr. l_.qieve we are going to see some legislathe cI_L_irman of the Rules Committee. tion later on increasing this amount of and Senator CLA_SORNEP_LL, the chair-, 15 cents per person of voting age through man of _he Elections Subcommittee, for the check-off to a larger amount, so that the far-reaching bill th ey have _ided the parties can run more expensive camto the; I]enate floor, especially title L p.'tigns than a $21 million campaign. But which deals with publ !c financing of $21 million,, Mr. President, will be availelections. Since most ot the debate oJ:. able to the Democrats in 1976 and to the the bill is likely to concern the bill's apRepublicans in 1976, so it is really not proach to public financi:ag, I would like necessary to have this measure ff what to address my remarks today to that, we are talking about is Presidential elecissue. tions. If we want to finance the PresiA detailed summary cf the public fi.dential election of 1976, it is already pronalxcing provls:.ons of S. 3044 is attached vided for. It already comes under the as an appendig to my remarks. In es-provisions of existing Law. sence, the_se provisions dc two things: Now, this check-off provision provides First, the bE1 takes S,mator RUSSELL for double that amount. They do not LoNo's dollar checkoff, the imaginative think it is enough, so they want to doudevice enacted by Congress in 1971 for ble it. That would be $2 for a single perpublic financing of Presidential genera1 son, $4 for a couple, and there is a nice elections, and extends it to ,']ena.te and little gimmick there, Mr. President, that House general, elections. Under the if they do not check it off, it is assumed clheckoff, full pc_blic fund£.lg will be avail-. they did check it off. So, if they do not say able for the ge:aero1 elec:;lon campaigns they do not want it, it is assume that they of candidates o:[ the maj¢,r political pardo want it. , ties, and proportional ptLblic funds will Mr. President, I do not believe we need be available for candidates of :minor parthese changes in the check-off law, and ties. I will be glad to see the majority leadSeccmd, in a genuine br_akthrough, the er's motion carry when it comes up for Rules Comnfittee bill doe; not stop with consideration, public :financing of genelal el.ections. It Of course, under the present deducalso offers public financing for all pritions of' credits allowed_ in addition to :marles for Federal office---President, the check-off, there is something entlrely Senate and Ho_e---through a system of different; on the income tax, you are matching public grants for small prlallowed either credits or deductions for rate contributions. contributions you make to political camThus, S. 3044 propose_; a system of paigns. So under this public financing on. comprehensive public fin_nch_g for all a mixed type deal, mixing public funds Federal elections. and private funds, the Govem_ment Taken together, these provis2ons of the would be paying, through those deducbill can spark a renaissance In American tion and credit provisions of the income political life, because public financing of tax law, what the individual put in, and ch_tions is the answer t(, many of the then the Government will match what it deepest probleras facing the Nation, has already given the taxpayers to put especially the l_;ck of responsiveness of in. govermnent to the people. Only when all So, actually, the taxpayer would r_ot the people pay for electioms will ah the be putting in anything on small con- people be truly _epresente,! in their toytributions up to $50 that it provides, I eminent, believe, for a credit on the tax, and $200 ' At a single stroke, we can drive the for a couple on a deduction. So the Gov- money lenders out of the temple of polleminent, under this mixed plan of the tics. We can en¢[ the corrosive and ocrbill before us, would be matching private rupting influence of priv _te money in funds with public funds when it has al- public life. Once and for all, we can ready given the taxpayers the money to take elections off! the auct.on block, and put in on the private fund basis up to a make elected officials whnt they ought certain amount. It would be the Governto be--servants of all the :)eop]e instead merit paying both ends of it. of slaves to a special few. Mr. President, I understand that one of the distinguished sponsors of this legAmid so much that is negative today_ islation would like to address the Senate, the paralysis oi! our Naqon'.,; highest and I shall yield the floor at this time leadership, the increasing probability and continue with the remainder of my that the President will be impeached, the remarks at a Later time. resignation of a Vice Pres'.dent, the inI yield the floor, dictments of many former highest White Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask House aides, the sick economy soaring unanimous consent that Carey Parker of upward into inflation and driving downmy staff may be present on the .floor durward into recess_ion--amid all these islng the consideration of S. 3044. sties, reform of campail,m :_nancing The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without stands out like a shining beacon, as the objection, it is so ordered, most positive contribution Congress can Mr. KENNEDY. I am pleased to give make to end the crisis over Watergate, my support to S. 3044, the election reand restore the people's shattered conform bill now' before the Senate. No bill fidence u_ t:he integrity of lheir Governin this Congress is more important, merit, In large measure, how we deal with the Most, and probably all, )f the things pending legislation will determine the that are wrong with politics and public long-run health of our democratic sysoffice in this coumtry today have their tern of government in the years to come. roo'_s in the way we floor.ce the cam- 208 Ma rch 2 6, 19 74 ]p:'_igns in which the Nation's highest of_ florals are elected. We _,_etwhat we pay for. As a result, we have t'ne best political system that money can bt:y, a system that has now become the wi)cst national scandal in om' history, a disgc'ace to every basic principle on wt_lch ;he Nation stands. Who really owns America Who owns Congr,_ss? Who owns the administration? ]:s it the People, or is it a little group of big ea:mpaign contributors? Take seven ._,xamp:_es that are obviously current tockay: Does anyone doubt the connection be_;w_._n America's energy crisis and the carapaign contributions of the oil iindustry? Does anyone doubt the connection beI;ween America's reluctance to enforce ,_ffective price controls and the campaign co:n.tribations of the Nation's richest ocr]':_oratioos, especially the $100,000 eorpor_tte capitation tax imposed by the man_tgers of President Nixon's reelection c.ampai_n in 19727 Does anyone doubt the connection be!.wean .Mnerica's health crisis and the c:ampaign contributions of the American _,,_[edica) Association and the private [i:Lealth insurance industry? 13_)es anyone doubt the connection be':ween the massive tax loopholes in the _lnternal Revenue Code and the campaign _'on:_rib_tions of those who enjoy the benefits of such loopholes? Does _nyone doubt the connection be_:ween the crisis over gun control and the e_mpaign contributions of the National ]ii'Afl,__,.;sociation? I)oes _myone doubt the connection be_:;a_eent:ae tra_lsportation crisis and the c',_mpaign contributions of the highway 2obby? Does anyone doubt the connection between the demoralization of the foreign aery:toe _;;nd the sale of ambassadorships for priv_te campaign contributions? _I2_ese areas are only the beginning of t_e Hst. rhe problem is especially urgent and. pervasive todaY, because of Water_ate an(_. the soaring cost of running for p_blie o:_q_ce.But ff 1972 was unique at a].l fm campaign financing, it; was unique o_fiy in the unscrupulous intensity and eificienc:v with which large private contri. butions were so successfully solicited. Corruption or the appearance of cotr_:Lpti.on _.n campaign financing is not a new ph(nomenon. It affects both the V_'hite House and the Congress. In fact, I _ould venture that for at least a generatior., few major pieces of legislation h_ve moved through the House or Sena':e, few major administrative agency act2ms have been taken, that do not bear _he brand of large campaign contributors '_qth an interest in the outcome. Water,s'ate did not cause the problem, b_t it; may well offer the last clear chance tc so]ye _ Through public financing, we csc_ guarantee that the political influence o]_ any c_.tizen is measured only by his wT!.ce ant. vote, not by the thickness of h:i_ pocketbook. q'o the man in the street, as the recent pc,].2s make clear, politics hq. American /[if_ has now sunk to the depths of pub'.[icservice in the heyday of the notorious ju_;t _ t_;_e spoils system finally sank of March 26, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-- SENATE spoils system of the 19th centm_j. And its own scandals, incompetence and corruption, and gave way to the appointed civil service based on merit we know today, so the spoils system of private earnpaign financing is sinking under the scandal of Watergate, giving way to a new era of elected public service, based on public financing of elections to public office. It is clear, however, that public financlng is not a panacea for America's every social ill. It is not a cure for all corruption in public life. It is not a guarantee that those who enter public service will be any wiser in solving America's current problems. What it does mean is that PUblic decisions will be taken in the future by persons beholden only to the Public as a whole, free of the abuses that have landed America in the dock in the eyes of democratic nations throughout the world, free of the appearance of speeial influence and corrnp_ion that have done so much in recent years to bring all government to its present low estate, There are a number of issues which are being raised in connection with publlc financing, and which we will discuss in detail in the present debate, PASTACTJiO/q BY _ SI_TqA_O1_PUBLIC F_A_CXNa First, the bill is not being rushed throUgh Congress prematurely. The principle of public financing has received extensive analysis by Congress over many years, especially by the Senate. In fact, the present debate marks the fifth year in the past decade in which the Senate is engaging in major floor debate on public financing legislation: 1966 saw the birth of the original do11ar checkoff legislation, sponsored by Senator LONG and signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson. 1967 saw that law delayed, caught in the crossfire of the then emerging passions over the 1968 Presidential election. 1971 saw the act revived, and agatn signed into law, this time by President Richard Nixon. And, in the wake of Watergate, 1973 saw the first' attempted extension of the checkoff to other Federal elections, in a measure passed initially by the Senate, But later killed by a Senate filibuster mounted by those unwilling to let the maJority workitswlll. There is a Rip Van Winkle tone to arguments of those opposed to public financing. We already have public finanelng for Presidential elections. It is already a Federal law. It is already printed on the statute books. Surely, Congress is not about to roll hack the clock on the dollar checkoff by repealing its provisions. The issue now is whether to extend the dollar checkoff, by applying its provisions to Presidential primaries and to Senate and House elec_ions/ : I say, if Public financing is the answer t ° the problems Of private money and political corruption in Presidential eleCtions, then it is also the answer to the problems of private money and political corruption in other Federal elections, too. If public financing is good enough for President, it: is good enough for the House and Senate, too, PUBLICFmANCIN¢_IS NOT TAXATIOi_ WrrHOUT RrrarSSNrAr_mv Second, to those who say that public financing of elections is taxation without representation, I reply that taxation without representation is what we have today, with a system of campaign financing that turns elected officiah into vassals of their big contributors, If we want a President and Congress who represent all the people, then all the people have to pay the cost of their campaigns for public oflice. Similarly, to those who say that public fnancing is a raid on the Federal Treasury by candidates for public office, I reply that the real raid on the Treasury is the raid that is going on today, the raid that is costing taxpayers tens of billions of tax dollars a year in undeserved privileges and benefits, bought by the private campaign contributions of wealthy donors and special interest groups. Moreover, under the dollar checkoff method of public financing now being widely used on this year's tax returns, it is clear that no one's tax dollars are being taken for public financing against his will. No tax dollars go into the election fund at all unless a taxpayer checks the box on his return. If the dollar checkoff works, it means that every dolIar in funds for ptlblic financing is coming from an individual taxpayer who has given his consent. That is a complete answer to those who say that taxpayers should not be forced to pay for political campaigr_, and that public officials should not be spending public money on themselves, True, the new Senate b/ll would enable any deficits in the checkoff fund t_ be made up by congressional appropriations, But the allocation of tax dollars for financing elections is no different in principle from the allocation of tax dollars for any other purpose, Not every citizen approves the way every tax dollar is spent. The most obvious example is Vietnam---over a period of more than a decade, America poured more than a hundred billion tax dollars into the Vietnam wax, over the eontinulng OPposition of what began as a small segment of the population, but finally became a majority of Congress and the Nation, To some, public financing of elections may not be the most desirable use of public dollars. But it is a vast improvement over private financing. We do not let wealthy private citizens pay the salaries of the President and Senators and Congressmen. Why should we let wealthy private citizens pay the cost of their campaigns? As with many other Federal spending programs, some citizens may oppose the way Congress decides that particular tax dollars Shall be spent. But to call such spending "taxation without representation" is a distortion of one of democracy's greatest principles and a travesty on one of America's proudest slogans. THE coNsmT_rmr_^Lrry o_ pUrLXCFn_CS_ The third important issue concerns the questions that have been raised about the constitutionality of public financing, I believe that the language of the Constitution and a long line of prec- S 4465 edents :Lnthe Supreme C _rt, going back tO the 19th century, _¢,abIish ample authority for Congress to e: act this legislation. In each of the major areas where fi_,t amenchnent and other constitutional overtones are present, especially in the treatment of minor parties and the gen-. erous role carved out for independent private spending, the senate bill proceeds with clear regard for basic leg_d lights. No one--no candidate or contributor .... has a constitutional right to buy an elcotion, To suggest that Congress cannot enact this measure is to deny democracy the right of self-survival. Surely, with 535 experts preeminent in the field, Congress has the eonstitu.tional :power _o cc:rect a clear and pres.ent evil it recognizes in the arena of elections. To paraphrase the famous words of Justice 0liver Wendell Holmes, challenging Supreme Court decisions thwarting progressive social legislation at the turn of the century, the ConstitUtion does not enact Mr. Herbert Kalmach's political ethics. And so, I am confident the Supreme Court will uphold the pending legislation if it passes Congresa and a challenge is ever brought. r_ _o,.r or roLrrXcaL P^RTmSVnDrR PUBLIC F_a_CZ_G Fourth, contrary to the premature obituaries being offered, public financing is not a nail in the coffin of the two-party system in America. It will not dimirdsh in any substantial way the role of politlcal parties in the Nation. To the extent that Public funds go to candidates themselves instead of to the parties, the Senate bill simply reflects the existing reality of campaign spending, i_ which the role of the candidate is and must be paramount. Congress settled _tfis issue in 1967 and ratified it again in 1971, and ofthatits is where it rests today. the In two provisions, moreover, Senate bill specifically enhances the parties' role: By conferring independent spending authority on party committees at the national and State level, over and alxwe the candidates' own spending limits, the bill establishes a specific role for the parties in their (nvn right, free of t_:e candidates _control. And, by prohibiting expenditures o,ver $1,000 by a candidate for President unless the expenditure has the approval of the party's national committee, the bi/1 guarantees a substantial supporting role for the parties in the national campaigns. On balance, therefore, far from damaging the parties, the prospects are gimd that public financing will in fact be a useful counterbalance to the forces drivlng the two-party System apart and splinl_ring modern politics. Realistically, public financing by _tself is not a lever strong enough to rejuvenate the palitical parties in Ameri:ca. But if that is the direction in which the larger political and social forces now at work a_ moving, then public financing will contribute significantly to the goal. 209 S 4466 CONGRESSIONAL T_ n_m_AcY or r_T. D_SCLOSU_E Fifth, to those who say go slow, that limits on total campaign spending and limits on private contributions are enough for now, that all we need is full reporting and disclosure. I reply that sunlight is too weak a disinfectant, that we should not be satisfied with timed steps today, when Watergate and the experience of 1972 prove that bolder ones are needed, The Nation had an ample full dlselosute law on the statute books for most of the 1972 campaign. True, as we now know, there was a scramble by some of the largest donors to make their contributtons before April ?, 1972, the date the disclosure law became effective, But, as the recent report of the Oeneral Accounting Office makes clear, vast amounts of private contributions were made and duly reported afte_ April ? as well Wealthy contributors with special interest money barely missed a stride under the ftdl disclosure law. No one is inhibited by full disclosure from making a sizable contribution, if that is the investment he thinks is needed to protect his special And, as Watergate makes clear, interest. ff the pressure is great enough, the mc_aey will be found and the contribution will be made in secret, in flagrant violation not only of the disclosure law but also of other criminal provisions in the election laws, such as the prohibition on corporate contributions, When some of the most distinguished corporations in the Nation--familiar names like Amezlcan Airlines, Goodyear Tire, Gulf Oil, and Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing--confess to blatant crimes involving hundreds of thousands of dollars in illegal corporate contributions, and then compound their crimes by using foreign agents and laundered foreign bank. accounts to cover up the trail, we begta to understand the irresistIMe financial pressures that are corruptlng our natkmal life and destroying cur democracy, The basic defeat of a full disclosure law is that disclosure, by its nature, will not work. Too often, the requirement of disclosure is easily evaded. And even where disclosure is made, it will never be full enough, because a donor will never disclose the things he wants in return for the contribution he is making, A separat_e problem in relying on the disclosure-contribution-spendinglimit approach, without public financing, is that Congress would be aiming in the dark. Therefore, the danger exists that the limits would be set so high that they would be meaningless as real reform, or so low that they will break the back of private financing, without leaving any realistic alternative in its place, The pendingSenatebiUsteers a middle course, avoiding botah extremes. It sets the contribution limit at $3,000 per individual per campaign--low enough to prohibit clearly excessive private contributions, but high enough to allow a candidate to run his campaign entirely on private funds, ff that is the route he chooses, In addition, the bill offers candidates the alternative of public funds for both 210 RECORD _ SENAT:E March, 26, 1.974 tZheir primary campaigns and their gen _eral election campaigns, s t realistic level:; that not only are high enough to avoid any relianee at all on large private eon-. tributiorm, but also are :sigh enough to enable any serious challenger to get his message to the people. No one can fairly say that in S. 3044, the S_nat_ is writing a dream bill for incttmbe:lts. The application of S. _044 to primary e'.[ectioim illustrates the caut/ous approach of the bill to the issue of public financing: Any candidate may choose to finance his campaign entirely t/lrough private contributions, at $3,000 p_:r donor, Or, he :may obtain mat:hing grants of public ftmds for each $1,)0 contribution irt congressional primaries, or each $250 contribution in Presidential primaries, For example, for each :;3,000 a Senate clmdidate needs to finance his campaign, he mtm_t decide whether it is easier to rsdse the full amount from a single donor, or to raise it from 15 dono cs of $100 each, w:hose contribul,ions will be matched by $1,500 in public funds to r.'ach the $3,000 level In effect, the $3,0t 0 contribution ceiling will function as a safety valve in tELe event that the no_el concept of mate ihing grants fails to w_rk in practice. Equally important, to (:ualify for any public funds at all for his priraary earnpaign, the candidate must meet the blU's substantial test ,of raising a hi_ threshold of $100 contributions--20 ]percent of his spending limit in the _._se of a Senate pIimary. As the threshold provisions make clear, the bill offers no easy access to the Treasury for political candidates s_eking a joyride at the _axpayers' ex- system than by reaching for his pocketbook, and that the best way to a voter's heart i_ through his opinions on the iszues not through the dollar_; in his wallet. As it should, the bill accommodates iuoth v:;ews, letting each candidate "do :l_.isowr thing," without forcing any candidate into a rigid formula for financing ::d,; can_paign. .'[:_ti:ds respect, S. 3044 is, a_l improvement o_,er the 1971 dollax checkoff law, _:vh:ich prohibits a person who accepts public funds from accepting private coni:_fibutions. Under S. 3044, there is greater i!le:xibility--a candidate can select the mix of private and public funds he wants for his campaign, such as 50-50 or 80-20, and is not obliged to accept public funds ,::,:aan ail-or-nothing basis. l?or that reason, I am opposed to al!ernatRe proposals that would turn pubi:c financing for general elections into a compulsory mixed system of partial public funds and partial private con_;r'lbuticms, with or without matching grants. Last :November, in the floor debate on I;'ae public financing amenciment to the [Debt Ceiling Act, the Senate voted 52-40 _gainst a proposal to cut the amount of :_ub:Lic :[!ands In half and to require the :remainder to be raised in private contB:ibutions. As Senator JOHN PASZOaE sucerectly put it in the floor debate, in opposinl_ such a mandatory mixture of public and private financing: E_her we are going to have. or not going to h_ve public financing. If we, are going for r,.:J, biLc fi:t_ancing, let us go for public financl:c_:g.If _vGare not going to have it, let _:_ not have it. What we have here [in the pense.funds _mtfiN° onehe_rillsatisfiesbe entitled_hethreshold, to public and thereby m_ts the bill's stiff test of the seriousness of his candidacy, _:L_.l::c°p°sal :,:ora mixed system] Is a hermaphroIf pa::'_icipation in politics through small private contributions is the goal, _E ROLEO:?PRr_ATN_._&N(,'_'_I_ Slxt2_, contrary to som_ reports, the public financing provision_ of t_he bill are in no sense mandatory. T_e bill does not prohibit private financing, arid it certs:inly does not prohibit small private contributions, lin fa_t, it provides strong ialcentlves for small contributions in primaries, since it offers matching public funds only for the fix'st $250 in prl_ate contrlbutlons for Presidential printarie_ and the first $100 in primaries for the _mate and tIcmse, _Private contributions alamohave a role to play 'm general electionh sir[ce major party candidates will have the option of relying entirely on private fund_, entirely on public fmlds, or on _ny combination in between, And in both primaries an/[ general elections, the bfil provides new incentives for small private contribu_ions, by doubl_ag the existing tax credit and tax deduction avafiable for such eontriburio:ns, In those respeel_, the bill ::ecogmizes the vigorous differences of opinion on the proper role of small priv:_te contributions. Some feel that such contributions are an essential method, for bringing citizens into the system a:ld encouraglng popular part:_cipation in politics, Others, _ike myself, feel that _here are l_tter v:ays to bring a pe_'son into the tile:l], the dollar checkoff is already achieving it. More than 4 million taxl:'ayers have used the checkoff so far in 1974, A'L the current rate, 12 million t._xpayers will have used it by the time all r,eturas are filed on April 15. That is a world record for public participation il_ campaign financing, a tribute to the worhzbiiity on the "one voter-one doHa.r" approach to public iiuancing eha:_ted in I971. _Purth_?r, it is by no means clear that it 1_ feasible for a large number of general eSectioncampaigns across the country to be r_m o:a small private cont, rlbutions. _I_e G.oldwater campaign in 1964, the _cGovern campaign in 1912, and the Democratic National Committee's teletigon in L973 are good examples of succ_ssf_ll fandraising through small prirate contributions, but they prove only *A,_.atsuch fundraising may work in the u_:dque c:ircumstances involved in those carnl:,aigJ:,s. ??hey do not prove that the method will work when every Senate, House and Presidential candidate is 'tapping the _,ol of small contributors. "]5_._ne'5 result of such a system applied to all. elections may simply be to put a p_em:ium on the best-known candidate, or tlle candidate who starts the earnest m' who h:res the best direct-mail expert ;_s hi_; fmtdralser. Nor would it be desh'able, in my view, March 2 6, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE to adopt a program of matching grants for small private contributions as the form Of public financing for general elections, In the case of primaries, a system of matching grants is appropriate and is the method adopted by S. 3044. In fact, matching is the only realistic method of public financing in primaries, since it is Thus, in its provisions offering full public funds on an optional basis for general elections, S. 3044 avoids the waste, pitfalls, and obvious dangers to the election process of a mixed system of public-private financing or a system of matching grants, and I urge thc Senate to approve it. TZ_EEFFECT ON BUSINESS ANDLABOR the only realistic way to identify those who axe serious candidates. The candidates who deserve public funds are those tee Seventh, we must lay to rest the specthat public financing win fracture S 446;'7 Through the democracy of the dollar checkoff, we can spread the cost of cam-. paign financing broadly among all tax:payers. Thanks to the good fuith effort,s of the Internal Revenue Service to pub-. ]icize the checkoff on this year's tax returns, the procedure is working reason-. ably well today--15 percent of the re-. turns filed so far in 1974 are using the checkoff now, already a fivefold increase over 19'73. My hope is that the use of the check-. ,afl will increase between now and April 15, as taxpayers become increasingly familia:r with the plan. At the present :rate, the checkoff will be ample to finance the 1976 Presidential election, but mo:re :is needed. To pay for public financing of other e:ections, the rate of use of the del:lax checkoff will have to double once again, which means that one out of every 'three taxpayers must use the checkoff if supp:Lemental appropriations are to be avoided:. Eighty million taxpayers are voting on their tax return this year. The votes they cast with the Internal Revenue Service between now and April 15 wfil be some of the most important votes they ever cas'L because they are votes for honest, fall' and clean elections. who have demonstrated broad appeal by raising a substantial amount of private funds from small contributions. Thus, if we are to have any public financing of primary elections, it must be accomplished through matching grants, In the general election, however, the nomination process has already identifled the major party candidates who deserve public funds. It is appropriate, therefore, as S. 3044 provides, to give them the full amount of public funds necessary to finance their campaigns, with the option for every candidate to forgo all or part of the public funds if he prefers to run on private contrlbutions, Thus, full public funding in the general election gives a candidate maximum some presumed compact betweenin business money election and labor manpower discretion in running his campaign. If an extra layer of private spending is allowed, all candidates would be obliged to raise the extra amount as a guarantee that they would not be outspent by their opponents. As a result, all candidates would be forced into the mandatory straitjacket of spending time and money to raise small private contributions, even though many candidates wouldin more prefer productive to spend that time and money ticipate in political campaigns. THE COSTOF PUBLICErNANCINO Eighth, to those who say we cannot alford the $90 million annual price tag on the public financing provisions of S. 3044, I say we cannot afford not to pay the price. Dollars for public financing are a bargain at any standard, because they are dollars invested now that promise rich dividends in public service for America in the future, A totally new experiment in American democracy is underway, an experiment as significant Lq its way as the school desegregation and reapportionment decisions by the Supreme Court in the 1960's_ ,or the civil rights and 18-yeax-old vote :legislation passed by Congress in recent years. In sum, public financing of elections means no more Watergates. It is the wisest possible investment the America:_ ways in their campaigns. Think what that price tag really means, For about the cost of a single week of the Vietnam war, for less than a tenth of a cent a gallon on the price of gasoline each year, for less than 50 cents a person each year, we can take the step best caiculated to clean the stables of our Gevernment and tx) bring integrity back to politics. taxpayer can make in the future of his country. If it works, our elections will once again belong to all the people of the :Nation. The stage is set for Congress t;o seize this historic opportunity to bring democracy back to tlealth. May future generations say tlmt we were equal to the ,challenge. American public life. That view contains a basic fallacy, because it paints a picture of political life that no candidate would recognize. The impact of public financing wifi be approximately equal on both business and labor, because both business and labor depend primarily on money and large campaign contributions to support the candidates they favor, Under public fLqancing, neither business, nor labor, nor any other interest group will be able to purchase influence or any other special benefit. But neither will they have a monopoly on the manpower or on the energy and ability of those who are willing and eager to pax- A system of matching grants in general elections would be especially dangerpus to the existing two-party system, since it might encourage splinter candidates--for example, a candidate narrowly defeated in a primary would be ehcouraged to take his case to the people in the general election as an independent candidate or as a third party candidate. Under S. 3044, by contrast, a third party candidate with no track record from a past election would still be able to obtain public funds, but only retroactively, on the basis of his showing in the current election, We trust candidates for once elected to the White Congress, to spend over public funds in the annual et. Why should we hesitate dates with $90 million a funds for their election? Federal office, House and to $300 billion in Federal budgto trust candiyear in public Mr. President, sent that a table :results under the ,outline of S. 3044, I_ECORD. There being no was ordered to be as follows: I ask unanimous consD0wing the current dollar checkoff, and an may be printed in the objection, the material prir_ted in the RrcoR:1_, WEEKLY AND CUMULATIVE RESULTS OFTHEDOLLARCHECKOFF 1973returnsusingcheckofffor 1973 November WeeklyResults: ThroughJan. 18............ Weekof: Jan.25................ Feb.l ................. Feb.8................. Feb.15................ Feb.22................ Mar.1................ Mar.8................ Mar.15............... Cumulative results: Jan.25.................... Feb.1..................... Feb.8..................... Feb.15.................... Feb. 22.................... Mar. l .................... Mar.8.................... Mar. 15................... Percent Amount Total returns processed i 43, 198 10.7 $60,066 .............. 120,202 251,312 396,287 553,806 629,823 766,586 770,729 775,262 14.O 14.7 14.3 14.1 15.1 14.6 14.4 13.9 171,984.............. 365,777.............. 585,519.............. 820,986.............. 930,641.............. 1,136,250.............. l, 145,293.............. 1,150,872.............. 163,400 414,712 810,999 l, 364,805 l, 994,628 2,761,214 3, 53},943 4,307,205 13.0 14.O 14.1 14.1 14.4 14.5 14.5 14.4 232,050.............. 597,827.............. 1, 183,346 .............. 2,004,332.............. 2,934,973 13,963,000 4,071,223 19,141,000 5,216,516 24,472,000 6,367,388 30,005,000 1973returnsusingcheckofffor 1973 November Percent Amount Total returns processed 1973returnsusingcheckofffor 1972 Weeklylesults: ThroughJan.18........... Weekof: Jan.25................ Feb.1................. Feb.8................. Feb.]5................ Feb.22............. :_. Mar.1................ Mar.8................ Mar.15............... Cumutative results: Jan.25................... Feb.I ..................... Feb. 8..................... Feb. 15.................... Feb.22................... Mar.l .................... Mar.8.................... Mar.15................... 21,580 5. 3 30,46l ............. 59,360 120,088 186,534 2§8,172 294,289 359,590 361,825 364,692 6.9 7.0 6.7 6.6 7.1 6.9 6.8 6.5 85,998.............. 177,418.............. 280,093.............. 390,459.............. 443,390............... 544,809............... 550,796.............. 555,120............. 80,940 201,028 387,562 645,734 940,023 1,299,713 1,661,538 2,026,230 6.4 6.8 6.8 6.7 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 116.459 .............. 293,877.............. 573,970 .............. 964,429 ............. 1,407,819 ............. 1,952,628 .............. 2,503,424.............. 3,059,544.............. : = : ; 81,000,000 returnsexpectedbyApr. 15,1974:asof Mar.15,43,611,000 returnshadbeenreceived,or about54percentof thereturnsexpected to befiled.Thefiguresin thetablearebased,on thenumberof returnsprocessed. 2l:t S 4468 OUTLINE 1. S. provides CONGRESSIONAL OF S. 3044---PUBLIC I_INANCING FEDERAL ELECTIONS PURPOSE 3044 builds on existing publlc financing for FOR law, which Presidential general elections, by extending its provisionS to include public financing for Presidential primaries and for Senate and House general elections primer]ea. ·:r_-rxNo Law 2. The existing law is Senator Russell Long's "Presidential Election Campaign Fund Act." ¢ known as the dollar checkoff. The and Act, as passed Congress ainprogram 1971 and amended in 1973, byestablished of public financing for Presidential general elections, to go into effect for the 1976 elecMom Under the Act, taXpayers are authorized to designate that $1 of their taxes ($2 on joint returns), shall be available for a "Presidential Election Campaign Fund," establlshed on the books of the Treasury. Under the law, the designated amounts must be transferred into the Fund under a specific appropriation enacted by Congress. Once transferred to the Fund, tt_e amounts will be apportioned among eligible major and minor party' candidates in the Presidential general election. Tho 1973 amendments el]mihated the so-called "Special Accounts" in the Fund; and left only a "General Account," to be allocated by formula among Presidential candidates. The program is administered by the Comptroller General. _;ENERAL PROVISIONS Ob[ pUBLIC FINAN_CING 3. S. 3044 establishes a Federal Election Campaign 17_nd in the Treasury as an expanded version of the existing Presidential Election Campaign Fund, to be funded through the dollar checkoff and general appropriatlons acts of Congress. Payments from the Fund will be made to eligible major and m.lnor party candidates irt primaries and general elections for all Federal offices-President, Senate, and House. 4. The bill increases the amount of the dollar checkoff from the existing level of $1 ($2 on a Joint return) to $2 ($4 on a Joint return), 5. The bill modifies the checkoff to provide an autx)matic de,]gnat]on of tax dollars into the Federal Election Campaign Fund, unless taxpayers indicate on their returns that6. The they bill do not want the Congress designation to authorizes priate funds to make up deficits left fund after the operation of the dollar made. apprOin the check- off. a 7.newThe Federal The program Elco-ilea will be Commission. administered by Commission will certify a candidate's ell_lhility for payments, and be responsible for conducting de_alled post-election and]ts and obtaining repayments when necessary. The Commission will also administer the reportlng and disclosure provisions and the eontribution s_ad expenditure ceilings of the Federal election laws_ 8. There are heavy erimlnal penalties for exceeding the spending limits, and for unlawful use of payments, false statements to the Comm/aslon and kickbacks and Illegal payments, 9. The provisions of the bill will go into effect for the 1976 Presidential and Congressional general elections and primaries, 10. The cost of the public financing provisions of the bill is estimated at $223 million in a Presidential election year, and $134 million in the off-year Congressional elections. Thus, the total cost of the program over the four year election cycle is $358 million, or an average cost of about $90 million Presidential Election Campaign Fund Act, P.I_ 92-178, 35 Stat. 497, 562-575 (December 10, 19'/1), as amended by the Debt Ceiling Act, pt.. 93--53° 87 Stat. 134, 135-139 (July 1, 1973). 212 a year. The cost _A'_ aa follows: ['rimaries ......... fi;eneral elections_._ Ictal ........... PRESIDENTIAL, RECORD -- SENATE estimates for each President Seeale (33seats) e!ectlon H0us_ $_2,000, 000 $I), 900,1300 $31,000, 000 47,000, {)0D 2% 000, 000 69, 000, 00a 39,000,000 3%(]00,000 SENATE ELECTION_AND I-IOnSE March 26, 1974 l:m_)lic {'nnds in proportion to his share tim popular vote in the current election, t_, retroactive reimbursement basis, if he of on re- c:eives more than 5% of the vote in the electio:a. 17. A.n independent candidate is entitled to pub:lie funds on the same basis as if he were th _ candidate of a party. PRIMARY for ELECTIONS 100,000, 00C 18. To qualify must accumulate public funds, the following GENERAL _,,moun'ts'of private funds, rate co best bargains in higher education next Student fees at ti0o and March business (S. 3044), which the clerk wi]'_ .';tale. ' The s_ssistar, t legiSlati _e clerk read a;_; follows: A bill iS. 3044) to amend the iFederal Elec.tlon Campaign Act of 19T1 to provide fo_' public financing of primary and general. election campaigns for Fed,;ral elective office, Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Presilent. this after. ]loon at 3:30 the SenaLe will vote or_ amendment No. 1064, which would strike from the pending bill the public finance feature, which would remove any fur. ther or additional public subsidy of Fed. eral election campaigns, In the event that tha_ amendment i:; ]1ot adopted, I plan to offer alternatively tWO additional amendments, one of which would eliminate the elei:tion campaigns. and the primaries of Meml)ers of the ]_Iouse of Representative,, and the Senate /'rom the subm. dy provis.ons of the bill which would leave both primaries and general electio:ms of House Members and Senate Members in the private sector 1otal but still leave the limitat:ons provided by the ct:her title,s of the bill as to overal:l campaign expenditures and maximum $5,100 contributions b_ a campai gn. 3,290 The other amendmenL in the event 4,920 that amendment No. 1064 fails of adol>. tion_ would be an amendment which, 2, 350 WOUld eliminate from the bill the subsidy 6,280 of camp_dgns Ior the Presidential nomi., U:p at a later date. The PRESIDING OI_ICER. The anlendments will be received and printed, and will .lie on the table. The pending question is on agreeing to the antendment (No. 1064) of the Senator from Alabama. Nir. ALLEN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum, 'The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The second assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call that roll. 3/Ir. HRUSKA. Mr. President, I ask 'Llnaniraous consent that the order for tile quorum call be rescinded, The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. I-1ATHA ¢VAY). Without objection, it is so ordered. ]._Ir.)klRUSKA. Mr. President, today, we ihave (Irt the floor a very significant bill a.llcl one with far-reaching implications. S. 3044, the Federal Election Campaign Act of :L974,is a response designed to meet problems of campaign abuse that have plagued campaigns throughout American _ooHtical history. In the processof reform, howew;r, the members of the Rules Cornmittee have decided to go one step further and significantly, perhaps dramatica]ly, alter the basis by which we elect our political leaders. ]; am firmly committed to the goal of camps:tn reform. For too long, both political parties, have been plagued by calnpaJ.gn pressures and abuses. Whether the abuses in the 1972 campaign were more l!ar-reaching than abuses in other campaigns or whether suclh abuses were magnified in such a manner as to arouse mlparalleled public attentJ, on and anger is not the issue. The point is that campaign abuse has long been a blot on our political history. Breaking the law in order to win elecrio:ns i_ wrong in every sense of the word, both le_;al and moral. As the primary lawmaking body of this Nation, the Congress March 27, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL of the United States must do everything possible to write clear and concise laws so that candidates know exactly what they can and cannot do in a campaign, Last year the Senate passed a campaign reform bill known as S. 372. It is a bill that had my support. This bill provided strict limitations on campaign contributions and expenditures as well as providing for other reforms in campaign practices. The House of Representatives has yet to act on a similar measure. As the year progressed, public clamor increased and new cries were heard that further reform of campaign practices was needed. Because it appeared that many of the alleged wrongdoings associated with Watergate were tied to the raising of campaign funds, the idea occurred to alter the basis by which candidates receive funds to run their campaigns. Public financing became the banner for those who sought to reform the system, The Senate was given an opportunity to debate this issue on the floor late last year when a group of Senators were successful in attaching a public financing amendment to the public debt limit bill. As we all know, my distinguished colleague, the junior Senator from Alabama, led an earnest and successful fight to have that amendment deleted. He was right in that effort, not because it would have been unwise and deceptive to attach such far-reaching legislation to a completely unrelated bill, but because the substance of the amendment was and undesirable, Theill-advised Senate Rules Committee, therefore, agreed to return to the drawing boards and draft a new campaign reform bill. Now we will have an opportunity openly to debate the central question contained in that amendment: Is public financing the answer to our problems of campaign abuse, or is it a substantial part of such an answer? In seeking to answer that question, we must first ask ourselves what kind of political system we want. I think my colleagues would agree that we want a dynamic system that is flexible to the demands of changing times, people, and attitudes. We want our electoral processes to encourage the best possible people to enter public life. We want a system that leaves room for the election of only those candidates who are quaiifled beyond doubt, who embrace the goals and attitudes of their constituents and who in short, consider public service to be the best way to make their contribution to life on this Earth. Then we return again to the question: Is public financing of campaigns the only way, or indeed a wise way, in which to produce our leaders and on which to base a political system? I think not. We can achieve campaign reform and improve our electoral processes without overturning our system of privately financed campaigns. I think S. 372 went a long way in that direction. More importautly, I have serious doubts about the efficacy of the public's being called upon to subsidize campaigns. My remarks at this time will, therefore, be devoted to title I of S. 3044. RECORD-- SENATE First and foremost, I doubt Whether public financing would do anything to solve problems of campaign abuse. There are several ways by which a candidate gains public exposure and indeed runs a campaign. Money is one. A candidate's ability to raise money is one measure of his viability. Public financing may remove money from categories of influence, In fact, it is the logical place to begin talk of reforming campaign practices, But, by removing money from influence, one simply focuses attention on other areas of influence, and of potential abuse and even corruption, These other influences include manpower and publicity. A candidate needs people to help him run a campaign. In local elections, we talk of hundreds of workers. In national elections, we talk of thousands and even tens of thousands S 4543 be made even more simple. The American taxpayer has been footing the bill for just about everything these days. A taxpayers' revolt is no idle jokE;, as ail of us close to the :political scene at home are pain:fully aware. Do we as political leaders and potential candidates have the right to ask the American taxpayer to pay fc,r our carapaigns? If I were a retired man living on a fixed income in rural America, I think I might be just a little upset if I heard my Senator or my Represent-. ative egpousing the virtues of public fi-. nancing. The same can be said as to arty taxpayer living anywhere. Thomas Jefferson, more than 150 years ago, put it well in the_,;e words: To compel a man (a taxpayer) to furnis:h contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, issinful and tyrannical, of workers. That statement is fully applicable teda:y Certainly, publicity is another factor ;as it was in the time of Jefferson. which bears heavily on one's ability to Public financing denies the individual campaign effectively. A candidate needs ]bis freedom of choice. A portion of his exposure and lots of it. There are other tax dol:tars would be financing the camfactors, however, which deserve mention, paigns of candidates he may dislike, not Organizational skill, durability, the right even know, or, worse yet, completely abissues, and that winning personality-:hor and despise. which all candidates either fancy they A ca'adidate should pay for his own have or wish they have--are all subject eampail,m. He will need the help of many to influence of one kind or another, friends and contributors This does not Transferiqng money to the public sec- mean that he needs to be "bought off.:" tor, instead of having it originate from Good laws with proper forms for limitaprivate contributions, will only serve to tion of funds from any one person and bring greater pressure on these other i!or disclosure, timely and completely important factors, including the two made, can remedy this part of the situaprincipal ones I have already mention. Other provisions in the pending bill tioned_namely, publiccontain explicit reme_lies of that kind. ity. The candidatemanpower who has and immediate access to hundreds of workers will have An editerial recently appeared in one a distinct advantage. Is the union boss of the newspapers in my State. It re.who provides manpower really different ferred _a obvious "dirty tricks" that haw; from the president of the corporation occurred in past campaigns, and they are who donates money? Would not a cannot a monopoly by any of the political didate who enjoys the favor of a teleparties, including the two major political vision commentator have a distinct adparties. In referring to public financing vantage? Public financing does not adas a cure, the editor said: dress any of these factors. Would reformers feel any better If those tricks had been paid for by taxpaye.rs' money The goal of public financing is to reinstead ¢,fprivate funds. move the raising of campaign funds from political pressure. Under the bill, the Yes, we should be in the business to re-. money is collected and then doled out by form our campaign laws and procedures;. the Federal Government. I need not go Let us not be so "hell bent on reform" t0 into a long dissertation about the danthe point where we lose sight of the very gers and problems this method could unstrengths of our political system and t<_ leash, the point where we invite much worse i,1 It is common thinking that the best solutions we advance than is found in the way to confuse a situation and snarl a situation we seek to remedy. program is to involve Uncle Sam. I do Public financing of political campaigns not see how public financing is going to has additional disadvantages. They in.be any different in this respect, clude: As I read the bill, if the $2 checkoff First. Unfair advantage to incumbents. system on the income tax return does This comes, about because of the ncces._iot provide sufficient moneys in the Fedsity to impose ceilings on campaign eral Treasury to cover the demands of spending, inasmuch a,s taxpayers will be all eligible candidates, then Congress p.utting 'up the funds. Challengers almost can appropriate additional sums. This is invariably must spend more money than a most interesting proposition. We would those already in office. This is so because have Members of Congress, political canthey have so much tx) do toward name didates themselves, and a President rotidentification, toward making their lng on appropriations or signing approqualifications and views known, and in priation bills into law that can affect general bo counterbalance the many ad-. their campaigns and that of their oppovantages held by a person already in of-. nents. I am sure that I do not have to rice. Yet, by public financing, both incum-. remind my colleagues of the political bent and challenger would have identicaI pressures which could affect this procedlimits on their expenditures. ure. Seconci. Under title I of the bill, the The issue against public financing can level of campaign spending would be in- 22 ]l S 4544 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-- SENA'I'iSZ sentattvesCreased pax%icularlyracer A,35Inoftt°usethem°feveryRepre'2 tacksd'er°u:S'onlibel°USpublic fi_ures.and un scrupulous atyears. That increase would be paid bY Election practlces---fruudultent registaxpayers, tration and voting, stuffi:_g ballot boxes, Third. citimms Public offinancing deprive many the onlywould opportunity they have to participate in the campaign process. M,'my are not in a position to take part in it in any other fashlon or by any other method. This might be by reason of demands of their calling, profession, vocation, or it might be because of physical disability or health reasons. The way public financing would operate would tend to reduce or decrease citizen participation which is a w_luable and vital component of a strong party system and a wholesome election process. That component would be sacririced or heavily imperiled, The Congress would do well to reject an untried, potentially dangerous, and objectionable feature of this bill, and should rather concentrate on those fcatures dealing directly, effectively, and with preponderance of agreement toward correction of abuses which are so obvious and so much in need. of remedy. The list is long. I enumerate some of the issues: Public disclosure of all names and identirication of contributors, Complete and timely accounting for all campaign funds, Limitation of contributions by an in- riggingor miscounting voting machines; lng, balk,ts.for_,qng, alterThere are many more it ems for the lisS. lB'very h_t_ent should be to make advances ia each case as effectiTe as possible_ 'l_ere should be an avoidance of questionable approaches, t?.ose possessing ,;ufiicient minus marks to detract from. _,rogre:'cs-by urdfied, undivided support. Public financirLg is a divisive factor, a major one. It 'would not bear upon the solution t;o the Long lists of ills and abuse_; which have plagued o_r system, and threar_m to de so in th_ ful;ure unless; legislation of this type will be fairly con-. sidered and enacted into law and applied. Without it and with a concentratior_ e,n those other aspects, orr election proc-_ ess can be notably strengthened and tmproved, It is my hope that as w_ prc_eed :in the consideration cfi this measure, there will be such action taken as tc delete from the bill the provisions with nfferenee to pub.. lic financing. This will remove an unde., sirable feature from the bill and at thc same time enable the thm'ough con.. s,ideratian of other features of thc election process, Mr. President, I suggest the absence o!! dividual to any single campaign, Limitati¢m of exl_enditures by any candidate, Ir_ this connection, it is well to note that the bill gives all candidates an option of soliciting alil private contributions up to the prescribed limz[t contained lzt the bill. Therefore, it must be coneluded that such sources are acceptable _nd in order because they can be monitored, policed, and _n a disciplined way held within proper and legitimate bounds, The taxpayer should be spared the added drain on. his fu_ds m_d the new and more evil results which would ensue, lin referring to a comment I made earlier, it is not the source of money which results in a great many abuses and m_desirable factors in campaigns and elections, it is the fact that money is used at all. At any rate, private funds, according to the committee report, are not evil ii:L themselves as long as they are encased, modified, controlled, and. supervised by public disclosure o£ all the names and identifications of the con-. tributors, as long as there will be a com-. plete and timely accounting for all cam-. paign funds, and as long as there will be such Congress in its wisdom limitations will _ek to as impose. Other ,controls over contributions, such as mss of checks not cash; single or central campaign treasury; prohibi-, tion of all loans to committees; prohibi-, a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerl_: will calltheroll, The legislative clerk proceeded to calll the roll. Mr. MANSF:[ELD. Mr. President: I asl_: unanimous co,_sent tha; the order fo!: 1;he quorum call be rescinded, The PI_ESrI)ING OFt'ICER. Without: objection, it is so ordered tion o£ stocks, bonds, or similar assets from contributions, CampaiI_m activities such as d_stribu-, [ion of false instructions to campaign workers, disruptive actions, rigging public opinion polls, _xfisleading announcements or advertisement in the media, misrepresentation of a candidate's voting record; organized slander campaigns; legal recourse and redress against slan.- March 2 7, 19 74 Mr. AT.T,EN. _r. President, I ask u_naninLous consen ! that the order for the quorunL call be res_nded. The PRESIDIN_ OFFICER. Without ,:?bjection, it is so_ed. FEDEt;,AL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT AMENDMENTS Oil 1974 The Senate continued with the con_-_iderat on of the bill eS. 3044) to amend i:he Federal Election Campaign Act of ] 971 tc provide'for public financing of pri:mar_ and general election campaigns :['or Feel.oral elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating :!.o the financing and conduct of such ,:-ampaigns. _/Ir. ALLEN. Mr. President, the pend:Ins amendment, which is to be voted on at 3:31) o'clock this afternoon, strikes from this bill, which contains five titles, thc fir,;t title, title I, in which title are contail'_ed all of the provisions having l:o do ,vith public rinaneing of Federal electio:lls. _vir. ?resident, this title :is not needed. l:t :is n,,t needed for two reasons. In the fir_;t place, we have publlc financing of Federal elections in a strict sense; and, in the second place, regulation of campaign ,xpenditures and contributions in l;he pr:ivate sector has never really been t;ried. Now let us explore the .first statement that I made, that we already have Fedcr_l subsidy of Federal elections. We have el the book the checkoff provision, which provides for a checkoff by taxpayers of $1 in the case of a single person or $2 in the case of a couple, which amount goes into a fund which would pay Zor th(i expenses of Presidential general electio:_l campaigns. ]VIr. ?resident, it has been estimated by :_scal authorities--the statement has I_.ECESS been n_ade here on the floor of the SenMr. Mr. Preside_t, after: ate--that by 1976, the next Presidential discussing the _tter _ith the distinelectio:_, there will be in this fund $50 guished leader, the _,mato._: m_.llior: of public money, because when :_rom (Mr. HrgGH SCOT_) .... _he taxpayer checks off the $1 or $2, it and he in turn ;ussed it with the Re. do_s n._t come out of his pocket, except publican on yesterday--Z in the sense that it comes out of tax brought the of an August-Labo.? .moneys he is paying on his income tax. :Day recess to the of the Demo.: Ii; comes out of the Government portion. cratic policy today. The l_e._ Ii; comes out of the tax liability that the ipublican and the Democratic, _axpayer owes to the Federal Govern]policy committee _greed that th, _, ::_.mt. So this is money from the Public Senate, barring circum. Treashry. _stances like, _or ampi,_, the possibility, _l'he checkoff plan, which is the existof a sine die adj( will, at th,:_ :ff[g la_--not what is provided by this ,eonclusi,:m of on Friday, b:[I); il: is already the law--provides that .August 2.3, recess until noo_:_ each major party would get, for the conWednesday, ber 4. d'Lg:t cfi a Presidential election, 15 cents This is an announcement which per person of voting age throughout the has been agreed card is sent to will see that .._ of the Sen. count_,:y as a subsidy by the taxpayers to carry m a Presidential election. So that ate; but I want to, )h_size that., as fa_' as this recess is concerned, and an:othe?'s upcoming, 1 th_ Ea',ster and th,_ Fom%h o_ July rec the_ will 'be ur:.. dertaken only in the way of al:_ extraordinary occurs, Mr. President. sug_'est the absen(,: of a qaormn. t.here _7ould be $42 million available to thc D_mocratic Party and the Repubiican Party under existing law. _['hc:'e is one catch to that, under the e:_isth g law, for a party to come under t_e px'_visions of the checkoff and to get this $::rl million--and I say that $21 milli_,_'x i_ derived by multiplying the number o:{ people of voth_g age throughout tbs c(:untry by 15 cents. That ends up _;,:,raev here in the neighborhood of $21 _?[i_ic_ or $22 million. That is available The PRESIDIN, will cai1 the roll. The legislative the roll. Mer_ber OF]['ICt_[_. c _rk ])roccedcd The cleric, to cal) March 27, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL to each party. That would be a subsidy of anywhere from $42 million to $44 mfilion for carrying on the 1976 Presidential election, As I say, there is a catch to it in this: That in order to come under the provisions of the checkoff plan and have the Presidential election subsidized for a party, the party has to certify that they want to come under the provisions of the law, and that keeps them from accepting private contributions in any amount, There is no possible mix, as is provided in the Senate bill. With the expense of Presidential elections that we have observed, it seems that ff Presidential elections are going to be conducted on the scale that they have been conducted in the past, $21 million would not be sufficient. So it is ehtirely likely that neither of the parties would come under the provisions of the checkoff, because it is optional whether a man comes under it or not. He can come under the public sector or the ptirate financing. But it seems to me that 100 percent public financing would be bad for the party, and that is one of the weaknesses of public financing. It seems to me that this would be a weakening of a political party, How much better it would be to receive $5,400,000 in contributions than to receive $21 million or $22 million from the public treasury. I do not believe we are going to see money here authorized to the major parties come under the 1970 law on the checkoff. There is $42 minion--S42 million to $44 million_by which Federal elections are already subsidized or for which money is available for subsidy, By the way, I might add that under another title in the bill, that would not be stricken out by amendment No. 1064, is a doubling of the checkoff. So the checkoff then would be $2 for a single person and $4 for a couple. We are already taking in enough to run a political campaign. What is the use of doubling the amount? By specifying a doubling, we will have changed the whole concept of the checkoff from being a voluntary checkoff. This is Senate bill 3044 that is submitted to us to vote on. It provides for a doubling of the subsidy from $2 to $4. It provides that if a person does not check off the $2 or $4, he is then presumed to have checked it off. In other words, if he does not check it off, he is ruled to have checked it off, because he must have the checkoff to apply against him. At my request, the Committee on Rules and Administration prepared or obtained some estimates of what these checkoffs are going to cost the Government. This Is what it will cost the Government, according to estimates obtained by the Rules Committee, I assume, from the Internal Revenue Service, and appears on page 28 of the report: If all returns, individual and Joint, should {;akofull advautage of the orl_ dollar checkoff, the total cost would be $117,370,000. $117,370,000 is what would be brought Into the public treasury for the political campaign or available for the political campaign, RECORD-- SENATE But if the provisions of S. 3044 should get through the Senate and go through the House, and ff all returns should take full advantage of the $2 checkoff, the cost would be $234,740,000. That is how much this little item of the checkoff would bring if everyone availed himself of it. But the proponents are not satisfled to leave the proposal on a voluntary basis. According to the bill--and that is all we have before us--if the taxpayer does not check it off, if he does not specify that it is not to be checked off, then the bill would make that decision for him, and that decision, naturally, would be that the money is considered to be checked off. It does not cost the taxpayer anything at that point, other than as a member of the taxpaying public. That amount is just a contribution to the public Treasury. It does not increase the taxpayer's income tax. It is simply taken from his tax liability. So there we see what is being done on the checkoff, I am not a soothsayer, but I believe that it will not be too long before we will see an effort to raise the amount of 15 cents per person of voting age, that comes out of the checkoff, to 20 cents, or possibly 25 cents, because the candidates are not going to be satisfied with $21 million or $22 million for each party, which is already provided under existing law, without any further extension of the Federal subsidy to politicians. After all, why should the Federal Government take over the expenses--the campaign expenses--of the politicians of the courttry? That is what we would be doing. Take the State of California, under this proposed law. California would be subsidized, according to the table prepared by the Committee on Rules. The candidates running in the primaries of the State would have half of their expenses--each candidate in the primary-up to $1,414,300, paid by the Government. So $700 in the primary is what he would get out of the taxpayers' pocket, and maybe there would be seven, eight, nine, or ten candidates in some races, I asked a Congressman from a Western State the other day how the Senate race looked in that area. I-Ie said, "Well, there is one candidate from I party, and 10 candidates from the other party." Every one of those 10 would be getting a subsidy from the Federal Government, according to this bill. The Government would match the contributions it received up to $100 each. That is not so terrible, out of $700,000, for a politican in a primary, It does not take any matching then. As soon as he gets on the ballot as a major party candidate, the Government opens up its coffers and makes a contribution to the candidate for the Senate out of the taxpayers' pockets of $2,121,450. Each major party candidate would be given that subsidy--$2,121,O00; why? Why subsidize our good friends who might run for the Senate from the State of California? I use that as an example, admittedly, because it is the largest State population-wise. In New York the amount paid to each candidate of a major party would be--this does S 4545, not require any matching, Mr. President, it is an outright gift by the Government for use in the campaign; I assume if he did not spend it all it would have to be refunded to the Government_ ii' it could be located---S1,899,750 to each major party candidate for the Senate. out of the Public Treasury. I am going to get around to the second corollary I laid down a moment ago,. that we have not tried strict regulation. in the private secter---this other field is; so broad it is just going to take a little time to get to it---on tae methods we already have of public financing. I have talked about the checkoff which makes $_i2 million available to candidates for President, and about the cost of the checkoff. The approximate cost now, ill everybody takes advantage of it--sup-. pose jus'_ half take advantage of it, un-. der the committee's pl,'tn of making them. certify they do not want it or it will be checked off. If everyone took advantage of it, it would be $117 million, or, if th'e committee's version _,_oesthrough and ii; is doubled, $234 million. That is a whole lot of public financlng, right there. But that is not all. Look at the campaigns also financed by recent amendments of the income tax laws. Already, under the law--of course,. this bill tries to double it--it is alread:_ the law, if I am not mistaken, accordlng to my recollection, that an individual under the present law is entitled to a tax credit of $12.50 :_or contributions he makes to a political candidate. That can be in a Federal election, a State election, or county or city, I assume. It may be just for Federal elections--$:[2.50 as a credit; and, of course, a credit :is a deduction from the tax. The credit comes off the taxes payable. If the tax bill was $100 before he applied this credit, it would take $12.50 off that. amount. Well, that is fine. Then a couple has a $25 credit off of taxes. And that is ali right. I do not object to that, the reason being that this provision allows an individual to make a contribution to a candidate of his own choice, someone with his views, with whom he agrees, and not, as under the legislation that is before us, requiring a taxpayer to-contribute to someone whose views he disagrees with. Ail right. Say the taxpayer figures he could do better going the deduction route. They provide for everyone's convenience, so if he does not want to go the credit route on his contribution, he can go the deductio:a route, and under the deduction route, if I recall correctly, he can take a deduction from taxable income of $50, or a couple could take a deduction of $100 frora taxable income. The bill would double that, in addition to all of this other public subsidy, so that under the committee's biI1 the credit would be raised up to a $25 credit for an individual or a $50 credit for a couple filing a joint return, or a deduction of $100 for an individual and $200 for a couple filing a joint return. So, Mr. President, they have several subsidies already for Presidential elections. Now, to focus on the generosity of the 223; S 4546 CONGRESSIONAL RE,ZORD -- SENAq[E March 27, 1974 Treasury as required by the bill to some of the politicians in California and New York, that is just the work of a piker as compared to the subsidy for those seeklng the Presidential nominations of the various parties. What do they get there? Well, they are allowed to get the contributtons they receive up to $250 each matched by the Federal Government, after they have collected, in contributions of that size, the sum of $250,000, which is referred to as the threshold amount. So once they get the threshold amount, which is $250,000, then they go :into the Treasury and pick up a check for that amount, $250,000, and then go on the les,ser-well-known candidate. As a part of my arithmetic, _t would help thee better-lmown candidatE, The better-known candidates, M:c. President, are those who are, pushing for this bill, to get right do',vn fA)brass tacks about the matter. They are not looking out for the lesser well-kaown candidates. That is obvious from the provisions Jn the bill. Who would qualify under this? Well, Governor Rockefeller wou':d qualify. He would get cut.and raise $_!3 million in eligible contributions and tl'e Government would th_n raake him a present of $7.5 million, blithely seeking contributions, which the Government will match, up to the astounding sum of $7.5 million--t7.5 mililion for candidates. Then, if a candidate gets the nomination, $21 million or $22 million is available to him. Is this campaign reform, Mr. President? It seems to me it is just cam- I remember when this thing was under discussion last year, the same provisio:t:ts in the same bill, in a different form, of course, but it is there, r.evertheless--and I remember Governor lq.ockefeller's visit;-, ing here on the Senate floor. The rules ,:)f the Senate permit a silting Governor :in office, the Governor o_ any of our 50 paing lunacy--campaign prodigality, I 'would say. Far from cutting down on the amount of campaign expenditures, this, in ali likelihood, would double the amount of campaign expenditures, Suppose one of the candidates in the States, to come in on. the iSenate floor, He has an automatic privilege of the fioor. The Governor of my State, Govm'nor Wallace, was on the Senate floor under that pi_vision as was former Gov_ ernor Brewer He has been en the Senate Senate--and there are several candidate for the Presidency in the Senate--. about or potential--I doubt whether floor under the automalic privilege of the floor that he has. So Governor Rockefeller was hece many candidates could collect milch over $7.5 million to run for the nomination of their various parties, Well, that should be fair for one as it is for the other. If they are all limited by the amount they can receive, what is wrong about that, leaving it in the prirate sector? It would seem to me that this Federal subsidy just compounds the advantage that a well-known candidate or an incumbent in an office would have over his lesser, well-known opposition because, Mr. President, he could get more of the campaign contributions than could hi_ lesser known opponent and then the Government will match that increased amount, Say a little-known candidate for the Presidential nomination can raise his $1 million on which to run for the Presi_ deney, then all the Government wilt while that [,ill was vnder debate. Of course, it was only a coincidence that he was here. He probably did not know what bill was under consideration, bat Let; us see, Mr. President, what the I remarked s_t that tir_e that I noticed Washington Post thinks about this bill Governor Rockefeller was on the Senate we h_ve before us. One would think they floor and I supposed he had come down would laud it to the skies. But, let us see to pick up his $7.5 million check, thinkwhat it says: lng that this bill was about to pass. But The problem with the latest Senate bit1 is it did not pass, and I doubt whether J.t that it tries to do too much, too soon, and goes beyond what is either feasible or workwill pass now. As a matter of fact, l_[r. able. President, as I look about the Senate floor, I do not see anyone on the floor No_,, Mr. President, if this amendment or in the Chair that is very strong for the that will be vo.ted on in about an hour bill, if at all. and s, half is adopted, we still have a bill I just wot.der whether a whole lot of covering a wide territory, but it would the push ariel drive be:lind this bill b_._ be more feasible and :more workable not deteriora'_d, without title I. Right at t:hat point, Mr. President, I Continuing to read from editorial: notice here _Ghat the '_rashington Po_t. _ Fox' one thing, the bill provides for full which I thought was sort of the Bible public financing of congressional generalfor the public finance people. I thoug'_:d; e:Lection campaigns, and that is clearly indigeslible in the House this year, since the they were in the forefront of the drive :_:ouse leadership even chokes on the more for public financing; but not so, 1M:r. mode_ ate matching-grant approach embodied President. I declare, ] was very muck. :m th_, Anderson-Udall bill. The more serious pleased at the conserwztive approach of defecis in the Senate bill involve the inthe Washington Post t) this problem. __t c:msic,n of primaries. makes me want to reconsider my po,,_.iWe can meet the objections, or solve tion. But I am not goi:_g to pursue that the c_bjections, of the Post if we adopt until after we have disposed of the biE[ t:ais amendment, ulthoug:h I am not saybefore I star'; reassessing my position, tug taey are for it, but I am sure they But the editorial, for Tuesday, Marcl: are not. But the editorial for Tuesd_y, Th.s is what they say about the camMarch 26, 1974, the day before yestcr-, paigr_ for the nomination of the two day--that is 'Gheir view righl: up to date ..... :parties: and we are talking about the bill that No aspect of the federal elections process was passed here in th, _ Senate back on is more motley and capricious than the July 30, by a vote of 8'2 to 8, which pro-. presez_t steeplechase of presidential primaries. vided for campaign reform, but reform in Injecting even partial public funding into the private sector. It did not provide this ]:_rocess, without rationalizing it in any for public financing. This is what the othe_ way, makes little sense. editorial said about that bill, S. 372. [[t; I c,,,_rtainly agree with that statement: is over there now in the House and I As :for congressional primaries, they are so sort of believe, in the province of WAYiqE varied in size, cost and significance among H_Y';, that he will gel behind that l:il] t'._e States that no single system of public match him will be $1 million, but the well-known candidate, say he gets out and gets the whole $7.5 million, what is the Government going to do for him? Why, the Government will give him $7.5 million, so that he will end up with $15 million and the lesser well-known candi-, date will end up with only $2 million. So he is worse off than if the Government had not interceded to help him. So if I were a lesser-known candi~. date--and certainly I would be that, ff I became such a candidate--I would say, "Well, do not help me in that fashion by just compounding the advantage that my better-known opponent has, because without this intervention from the public Treasury the difference would be $7V2 million to my $1 minion. But after you get through me on this public subsidy, the difference would be $15 million as against $2 million." 80, Mr, President, it has not helped 224 or so:me approach to the campaign reform. But the editorial commented on that bill, as follows: Thus the Senate last summer sent the ttouse a very solid bill to curb private giving and spending and to strentghen the enforce~ ment of the election laws. Ir. President, that was not a public financing bill we passed and that the Washington Post is talking about here. I think that statement is worthy of l)eing repeated: Thrls the Senate last summer sent the House a very solid bill to curb private giving a_xd spending and to strengthen the enforcement of the election laws. That is just exactly what it did, Mr. President. It did curb spending. It did curb giving. It did strengthen enforcemerit of the election laws. And why, before the House even acts on this bill, are we going to do a 180-deg:cee ]lurn andsector abandon in the private and the get regulations over into the publi,; sector--an President? uncharted W_:_yshould we do that? Co:ntinuing to read from Tod._y-Th:is is last sea, Mr. the editoria'.: Tuesday-- Today, the _enate begins debate on a very ambitious bill to extend public financing t_ a:.l Federal primary and general election camp_ign:_. March 27, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--SENATE seems justifiable without much more careful thought, So, Mr. President, I commend this edttorial to the thoughtful consideration of my colleagues, Mr. HARRY F. BYRD, JR. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. ALLEN. I am delighted to yield. Mr. HARRY F. BYRD, JR. The Senator from Alabama mentioned the legislation which the Senate passed last year. As I recall, that was a very strong piece of legislation. It was, indeed, campaign reform as I visualize it. Mr. ALLEN. Yes. It was so praised by many people who are now pushing this bill. Mr. HARRY F. BYRD, JR. That is a point I cannot understand. When many of the same people felt that that was such a splendid bill, such an important contribution to reforming campaign spending, why is it now that we do not even permit that legislation to go into effect before we try to branch out into another area, in a different way, and begin to take money out of the pockets of the taxpayers to finance political campaigns? Mr. ALLEN. That is a mystery to the Senator from Alabama, also. Mr. HARRY F. BYRD, JR. Would it not be logical to enact the legislation which the Senate has already passed, which puts a tight ceiling on campaign expenditures? It seems.to me that it is important to put a ceiling on the amount of money a candidate can spend and a tight ceiling on the amount that any individual can contribute to a campaign and to see how that works out, before we talk about digging into the pockets of wage earners, taking money out of their pockets and turning it over to poiiticians to spend in a political campaign. Mr. ALLEN. I certainly agree with the Senator from Virginia. Mr. HARRY F. BYRD, JR. Another thought that occurs to me, as the able Senator from Alabama wages his fight against what I agree with him is a piece of legislation that Congress should not enact at this time, is this: The public these days does not seem to be too enamored of politicians. Do the proponents contend that the public is just demanding that money be taken out of the Federal Treasury, from any tax dollars that have been paid in after working by the sweat of their brow, and be turned over to politicians to spend as they wish in a political campaign? I can hardly believe that the working people of this Nation are very much inclined toward that. Mr. ALLEN. Little word of any such demand has reached the ears of the Senator from Alabama. He has not heard of any such demand. Far from it. As a matter of fact, the Senator from Alabama can safely say that, based on communications he has received--and they have been in the modest thousands--the ratio has been at least 9 to I against any element of public financing, Mr. HARRY F. BYRD, JR. This measn,:e is being pushed by a certain group and by certain potential Presidential candidates, I suppose. As to the group that is pushing it, I know many of the support members of that group, and the ones I have had acquaintance with are fne, conscientious people who feel that something needs to be done to get campaign spending under control; and I agree thoroughly with that view. Mr. ALLEN.So do I. Mr. HARRY F. BYRD, JR. I commend them for the interest they are taking in this matter. Where I differ with them is the vehicle they would use. The Senate already has passed legislation which, while not perfect, will meet most of the objections we have had in the past about the abuse of campaign spending--namely, by putting a tight ceiling on the amount a candidate can spend and a tight ceiling on the amount any individual can contribute, I commend and congratulate the able Senator from Alabama for the work he has done in exposing what I believe to be the fallacy of the proposal before the Senate. Mr. ALLEN. I thank the distinguished _e_ator from Virginia for his contribution at this time and for his many contributions througi_out the discussion and the consideration of this issue. I believe he has put his finger right on the point, that the answer to the matter of campaign reform is to have strict overall spending limits, as he suggests, and to limit the amount of.individual contributions that can be made. S. 372, as passed by the Senate, does impose such a limitation of $3,000 per person, per campaign. If we had such a rule during the last Presidential election, during the last general election, we would not have hid some of the abuses we did have. So the answer is strict regulation and full disclosure of contributions and expenditures. That has not yet been tried, I feel that the proponents of this incasute are trying to use the fallout from Watergate as an effort to push this type of legislation to a conclusion. Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. ALLEN. I yield, Mr. GRIFFIN. I commend the Senator from Alabama (Mr. ALLEN) for the argumerit he has presented and for the valiant effort he has made in trying to bring some light to this issue of financlng campaigns out of the public treasury, Aside from the question of public financing, most reasonable people in and out of the Senate would agree, I believe, that a number of genuine reforms in campaign financing are needed: to bring such things as milk funds under control, for example; to require that contributions come from individual citizens rather than from special interest groups; to impose a ceiling on the amount that anyone can contribute to a candidate or a campaign; and to impose realistic ceilings on the overall expenditures in any campaign, A fundamental question is: Are we golng to get any reform out of this Congress if we try to load down the many needed, genuine reforms in this bill with this very controversial public financing proposal that could sink the whole ship? If such a bill stands little or no chance of becoming law, the question is, Who is really for reform? Is it these who press S 4547 for puk.]ic finav, cin[;? Or those who be]ieve public financing should be considered separtely in another bill so that the genuine reforms in this bill can be pressed It seems reasonable to appeal to those who are for public financing to handle it in separate legislation--to separate it out--as the Senator from Ala.bama seeks to do with his amendment, and to let it stand or fall on its own merits or lack of merit. But it should not be loaded on top of the other genuine reform measures now in'this bill that should be passed and should become law. As I was seeking to point out yesterday in colloquy with the distinguished Senator from Alabama, I do not think a lot of people :realize that in the general election--if this bill were to become law as it is now drafted and presented to the Senate--all of the money for campaigns would come out of the public Treasury. ii was pointing out yesterday the situation in the House of Representatives. Let us just take the House races again. I point to the House races because one can corn.pare apples with apples in the House. Everyone represents about the same number of people, and although the ex.. penses of campaigning did vary from dis.trict to district, there is a better cornparison there than in the Senate, where there is a greater variance in the popu.lations. As I understand this bill, and the Senator from Massachusetts had to agree, this would happen: In the primary there is a matching arrangement; the candi-. date i'aises so much money from private contributors, and that is matched by the Treasury up to a limit of $90,000. Then, in the general election, there is no pri.. rate contribution. There does not need to be any, and the whole; $90,000 going into the general election campaign of each candidate nominated for a House seal; would come out of the Treasury. Mr. ALLEN. That is correct. Mr. GRIFFIN. One of the important things, as we try to consider whether or not this is reform, is the level of expendi-. tures that is going to be involved under' this legislation. I put some figures in the RECORn yesterday. They were somewhat; preliminary. I asked my staff to do some more work and they have come up with: better figures and they are even more, startling than the ones I had yesterday. These figures have come from three sources: The Clerk of the House, who has accumulated information about; House races based on the 1972 reports; the Library of Congress, and their fig.ures have come from Common Cause, as I understand it; and also from the GAO. It certainly should be in the RECORr and it should be of some interest, I would think, that in 1972 there were 1,010 can-didates _n the United States who ran in primary and general elections to seek election for the House of Representa-. fives. The tota_ amount spent by all of those candidates in all of those races; was $39,959,276. That is what was spent; in 1972 without public financing. Now, what does the GAO estimate will. be the cost for House races, out of the public treasury for the most part, il this bill is passed? Well, that information is on page 27 of the committee report. The 22'i S 4548 CONGRESSIONAL GAO estimates that the total cost for races in tile House of Representatives, if this bill is passed and goes into effect, will be $100,307,988, or almost three times as raueh as the 1972 cost. If the public understands this legislation I cannot believe they are going to think it is reform---campaign reform with this coming out of their tax dollars, Mr. ALLEN. I think they understand lt a lot better than some Members think they understand it. I think that may be the case. Mr. Gig:IFF'IN. I was pointing out yesterday that every candidate for the House who is nominated is then automatically entitled to receive $90,000 out of the public treasury to run his campaign. A lot of people will say, "Well, he doesn't need to spend it." I guess that is true, but if one's opponent is going to spend $90,000 out of the public Treasury, you do not have much choice other than to spend $90,000. It would greatly escalate the cost of camapigns, To illustrate the point, I wish to put these figures in the RECORD, and they are based on information from the Clerk of the House of Representatives. in 1972, 8 percent of the candidates for the House of Representatives spent nothing--zero; 52 percent of the candidates spent less than $15,000 on their individual campaigns; and 64 percent spent less that]. $30,000. I am reading this slowly because, 3[ just want to make sure that this is understood. Seventy-four perbent of ali candidates who ran. for the House in 1972 spent less than $50,000. Now, we are going to give alll of them $90,000 out of the Treasury. Mr. ALLEN. And that is to reform the election 13roeess. Mr. GIC,IFFIN. That is to reform the election process. That will be great re-.. form, will it not? Mr. ALLEN. That is correct, Mr. GRIFFIN. I just wish there were some of the proponents of the legislation here so we would not have to debate with ourselves these important points as time runs out and we get close to the vote. :But I certainly hope our colleagues will realize what they are doing, Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. President, w:ill the Senator yield for a question? Mr. GRIFFIN. I am glad to yield to the Senator from South Dakota. Mr. Mr:GOVERN. I am curious as to whether or not the figures the Senator is citing :represent the filings of the in.dividual candidates. Does that include what the various committees spent on behalf of the candidates? When the Senator said a high percentage of candidates running last year spent less than $50,000 is he talking about all expenditures or just those the candidates personally filed? Mr. GRIFFIN. tks the Senator knows, even though in my opinion it was not nearly strong enough, in 1972 we did have in effect a new law requiring the filing of reports in detail. For the firs¢ time Common Cause, the Clerk of the House, and others have been able to accumulate and put together the actual cost of what was involved in various campaigns, It is my understanding that everything theft was required to be filed under 226 RECORD -- SE):',LVITE that law is reflected here, and that tl:e GAO estimate is approximately on tee same basis, Mr. McGC,VERN. As the Senate: know'& :it has been the :)ractice Over tt_e years for candidates to file reports ind:bcatir'.g that they spent nothing, becau_ie it was handled through committees or_ their behalf, Mr. GRIFFIN. That was not true :[u the 11¢7',.>, campaign, The Senator from South Dakota w_min the House of Repl'esentatives. Tl_ junior Senator from Michigan was in tt:t_._ House of Rep=esentatives. I do not kno _ wlha%is the cost of runn:ng for the Hou.'_ in South Dakota. Perhaps it is entire:l? different than in Michi[an, but I will tell the Ser]ator ';his: I .raft for the Hou_:,_ five times, and there vms never a tii}:e when I or my opponent spent more th_. $20,000 in those House races. Usually it was ]Less. There may kave been one _Jr two races in Michigan in which the ca:r_-. didates spent as muck as $90,000, bi'd; that would be,. very rar(. Is that not true genexally of the Hou,;e races? The Senatoris familiar with thel:::}, Of his own knowledge, 'vould not $25,000 be a lot in those House races? Mr. McGOVERN. It was double the amount I spent in my first race for t}te t{ouse of Representatives in 1956. Mr. GRIFFIN. Just on that basis, dc,_s not $90,000 for every candidate I_unnixkg for the House of Representatives, comi:[_g out of the Federal Treamry, seem a little absurd? Mr. McGOVERN. Lei me s_y I am _}.,;t an advocate of full pl:blic financing ,;,:[ campaigns. At some point, if it is r_:.t done by another Senat3r, I shall offer' a modification of this bill thai; would ma lrc it impossible for anyone to get full pul;Ifc financing. What 3: would strong!i> prefer lis a system where private citizem:_ are allowed to make :nodest contribm-_ tions to campaigns, and that would _,_ matched by public cor[tributions, up Lo a reasonable amount. I am not going to debate with ti/:e Senator whether $90,300 is the rig)tt amc]iht or not. It may be too high. I _,ir_ not g'oing to advocate the proposal ;{or full :public financing. I do not believe ir, it. J: think in 1972 we demonstrated ir_ the Democratic Presidential campai_;r tha_ it was possible to raise a great den?. of money from a large number of peop)e, and do it itl a very who:esome and hon,!s_ way. 1Vrr. GRIFFIN. That certainly is tr_e and I think many people, of both partl_-'s respect and admire tht,t as:peet, particular!y, of the Senator's campaign for l;::_ presidency, Mr. McGOVERN. _Ihere is a cert;_ir value in preserving at least part of tl_i.._ principle, be2ause the_e is something ;_, be said for providing an incentive for t_ candidate to take his ,'_ase to the peol)l, at the grassroots. If he is offered f_tl'. public financing, I do not 1;hink there _.; the incentive on the pa::t of the eandid;_L_!_ to make his appeal, p,trtic_Jlarly in tak lng it to the people and making his c_.s._ there. On the other aarxd[, I think _,_ haw_ to take steps to reduce the infium::.::_ of special interest money in Americ_o_ politics, Marc,_ 2 7, 10 74 So what I would like to see is a sys_em that combines the best of both these principles--encourage the candidate to go GU; and raise what he can in limited, mode, t contributions, from as many peGple as; possible, up to a certain agreed upon limit, and then match that with publi( contributions, so that we reduce the de0endence of that candidate either on hi;_ own personal fortune or on sperial i:[tberests. Th,! reason I am not fully defending the b31 before us now is that I intend, al; some point, as I say, if some other L,'enator does not do it, to offer a modifioation to this bill which will make it more acceptable to the Senator from I;<[ichigan and others. Mr GRIFFIN. I certainly respect the views of the Senator from South Dakota. Mr CANNON. Mr. President, will the Sena'lor yield? Mx' GRIFFIN. I yield. Mr CANNON. I think there is getting to be a misunderstanding here as to what the bll actually does. The bill as it exists _oul{:[ not permit any candidate for Cong:cess 'bo get $90,000 Federal funds in a prim:_ccy Mr GRIFFIN. Not in a primary. Mr CANNON. He has to go out and demonstrate a public appeal, and there is a 3imit on the amount of those eon1;]:ibu;ions he raises up to 50 percent and getti]:g 50 percent matching funds. Once he wins the primary, it would be possible, under the bill, to get up to the $90,000, if that is the amount that is determined upon. The $90,000 is going to match the figure Mx'. GRIFFIN. Will the Senator'yield? :[.et 't s be clear that while matching is i[:rovi_.ed in the primary, once he is t:.ominated, then all of the $90,000 would be public money out of the Treasury. I j nst want to be sure everybody understands that. Mr. CANNON. Yes; it is not mandatory_ Mi:. GRIFFIN. He does not have to get iL M_. CANNON. He can get it if he desires to. The Senator was complaining abou _ the amount being extraordinarily high Reduce the amount, then. If the Senator likes the principle, but does not like tile amount, simply ]:educe it. I have no b:{ief with the $90,000 :figure. I thought it should more appropriately be left up to the House. M!:. GRIFFIN. I do not think so. We are _pending the taxpayers' money. I thin}t: the Senate should-take a coequal responsibility in the determination of how the taxpayers' money should be sper]b. M_'. CANNON. The Senator was in,qicat.ing a little earlier that a participant coukl get $90,000 when that sum really was ctot needed. L[tst year, in 1972, in the House, 66 of I;he x¢inners spent an average of $107,378. _-3otlney really spent more than $90,000. Tha; was in the general election, In those 66 r_¢ces, the losers spent an average of $101000, so obviously $90,000 was not over:y excessive. It is true that 97 Members who were elec_ied--but I might point out that they got :h,om 70 to 90 percent of the vote, so March £7, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL ,RECORD-- it is obvious that they did not have a tough fight--spent an average of $38,729. In _ case like that, had this bill been in effe_'_, they could not have spent more than $?_8,729. Mr. h_I_I.FFIN. I disagree with the Senator. Mr. CANNON. The Senator may disagree . Mr. GRIFFIN. This bill would permit every candidate to get $90,000. Mr. CANNON. Not if they spent an average of $38,729. Mr. GRIFFIN. But if they spent it they could get it. Mr. CANNON. If they spent it, they could get it, but I am pointing out that the average spent was $38,729. Obviously it was not a tough race in those cases, i-_ they got from 70 to 90 percent of the vote, which is true of them. Mr. GRIFFIN. I certainly respect the views of the Senator from South Dakota, and two of his points have merit. But it seems to me, with all due deference, he has made some very good arguments for voting for the amendment of the Senator from Alabama, who seeks to strike title I from the bill. It seems to me the Senator from South Dakota is saying that public financing should go back to the drawing board for some more work and some more study. I-Ie is not satisfied with it himself, so I hope he will vote for the amendment, Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. GRIFFIN. I yield, Mr. McGOVEI%N. I would like to direct a question to the Senator from Nevada, if he would like to comment on this point, and perhaps the Senator from Michigan would comment on it, too. Would it be feasible to consider moditying the bill, so that the same principle we have operating in the primary would also operate in the general election? In other words, could we eliminate the possibility of 100 percent public financing, and put the whole thing, both the primary and the general election, on a matching basis, so that 50 percent of the funds would be public and 50 percent would be private? It seems to me that that is a solid compromise, one that ineludes the very deserving principle of public financing and also preserves the private sector, Mr. CANNON. To answer the question as to whether it would be feasible, it certainly would be feasible, just as in the bill we provide matching, for the primary. But the rationale of those of us who supported this fvrm was that we would try to get away from private financing, and this was a direct result of the Watergate abuses. We saw what had taken place, so many people thought we ought to get away from private financing and go to public financing, That means that if we do not do it in this bill, then it issomething like being a little bit pregnant. If the private financing is bad, we have a lot of it in the public. We get away from it now in the general election. There is no reason why we could not carry ft on a matching basis in the general election o.s well as having it in the primary, I may say in good humor to my friend from Michigan, frankly, tLa_ he suggests SENATE we eliminate this and go ahead with reform measures. We went rLead with reform measures once before, in S. 372. It is still languishing in the House a year and a half later. If S. 372 had been passed and had become law, I do not think we would be back here arguing the private versus public financing features, I think S. 372 carried a lot of reform fcatures, which made it less likely that we would have such abuses in the private sector, Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, much as I admire the chairman and his views, I do not follow his logic at all If he is saying that if S. 372 had become law, we would not need public financing, I do not understand how the very controversial public financing title, in essentially the same legislation, is going to make it easier to pass. The likelihood is that we will end with no reform at all. But if we will keep our focus on the fuller disclosure, the elimination of the special interest contributions, and those things that really need to be done, I think we could enact legislation that would really be reform in this Congress. I, for one, am not ready or willing to close the door indefinitely on the concept of public financing. Perhaps it has some merit, but I certainly am not for the publie financing in title I, and I must oppose it. If we wanted to venture into public financing or the Government might provide a set amount of broadcgsting time for candidates in a general election, shortening tahe time of campaigns, and provide a fixed amount of time for each candidate to present his case, with the Government paying for it. Television, as we all know, costs are the biggest expense in a campaign. Something like this has been done in Great Britain, and it has worked. If we took a modest step like this, it would be something that the people might accept, But they are riot going to accept this. Mr. CANNON. There are a number of reform features in the bill. Mr. GRIFFIN. There are. Mr. CANNON. The only importance I attach to public financing is that it gets rid of the undue influence of big contributors. A big contributor, under this bill, cannot have any undue influence and still come within the bill. That is where the reform issue comes up in public financing. It means that a candidate is not dependent upon big contributors, Mr. GRIFFIN. The way to eliminate the big contributor is to-put a definite ceiling, such as a thousand dollars, on any amount a person can contribute, I call attention to the remarks made a few minutes ago by the distinguished Senator from South Dakota, whopointed out that in his race for the Presidency most of his support came from small contributors. I do not think we should make it impossible for people to run for the 'House or the Senate, or even the Presideney, by putting a limit on the amount of smallcontributions, Mr. CANNON. The Senator will recall that when this matter was under discussion before, our committee was charged with reporting a bill in this session that contained a reporting feature, S 4519 But at that time we did check with the Senator from South Dakota, and it de-ycleped that while he got most of hL,; money from small contributors, still il; was necessary to have seed money to op-crate thc campaign---a Presidential cam.. paign--and to go out and make these types of contact. Mr. GRIFFIN. Where does the seecl money come from iii this bill? As I un-derstand, in the primaries it is necessary to go out; and raise the money. Mr. CANNON. Thai; is correct; or the candidate would have to raise it on a matching basis in thc primary. But, as. tlhe Senator pointed out or provided fox' t:he RrcogD, despite all the candidate's efforts to get a broad distribution, .'l, broad base, he would still have to rely on some very large contributors to come in and provide the necessary seed money. But I do not know _thether he is going to get ii; under this type of provision, l: do not know whether this provision would be adequate in a Presidential race. At least, we put smaller limits in than we put in on S. 372, which passed the Senate overwhelmingly. The reason is; that if S. 372 had been enacted, we would[ not haw., the very looplholes we are taking care of in this bill. As a result, if that bill[ had been passed last fall, I do not think we would have the pressure now for public financing and other reform incas-. ures. That is my personal view. Mr. GRIFFIN. I thank the chairman for his statement and contributions to the debate. At the time of the earlier debate, in making a commitment to tlxe Senate, it was thought that the Rules Committee would cmxsider reporting a public financing bill, so that the Senate might have an opportunity to have this debate.against :itIinWr°tethereport.the Imin°ritYfelt that itvieWS;was; an issue that should not be decided only wit_hin the Rules Committee; that il; was an issue big enough and of such importance that the Senate itself should[ have an opportunity to debate it. After performing that funcion as a eommitee member, I now am in the position of strongly opposing title I. I do not see ii; as a reform; I see it as a shocking way' of raiding the Public Treasury. I think one thing ought to be men-. tioned in this debate, and that is thai; there is a provision in the tax law for a deduction of up to one-half of small contributions on one's tax return. When you are allowed that deduction, or I think it is even a credit under some cir-. cumstar, tces, that is taking money out of tlhe Treasury. That i:; public financing. There is an important difference, however: you are able, under that system. to make your contributions and provide support to the candidates and the party' of your .choice. It seems to me that is an important concept that is overlooked, here when we talk about financing al] races out of the Public Treasury. That is taxation without representation. It; means that regardless of whether you favor a candidate or a party, your tax funds are going' to go toward his campaign. I do not think most people want that, cr want this Congress to enact it, 227 S 4550 CONGRESSIONAL Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum, The PRESIDING OFFICEI{. The clerk will call the roll The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for RECORD--- SENATE March 27, 1973 amended by the bill, S. 372, which tile lSena_ passed last July 30 by a vote of 82 to 8. The Commg;tee on Rules and Adminlstration labo_'ed long and hard to prepare this bill and it reflects days of pub!Lic hearings on the subject of public fi:nancing and the reasor_s for proposing corruption in the field of political finance:; and to restore confidence in the elective process. I re:ge my colleagues to vote against the amendment. Mr. President, on this subject, today's New 5!ork Times carries an editorial entitled "The Time Is Now" and it em- a system of public finan¢:ing, There is no need to repeat in detail or at great length the many arguments ii1 support of public financ:ng. Those arguments and the rationale are set forth aL !:ength in the committee's report beginning on page 4 and ccpies are on the desks of all Members of the Senate. Excesses in c:ontributions and expenditures evidenced in the 1972 campaigns demonstrated clearly that some candi.dates have no difficulty in :raising vast amounts of money while others cannot raise enough to carry >ut an effectiw_ campaign. The unfortunate ones either drop out phasizes the need for public financing of all Federal elections--primary and genseal. Furi,her, it stresses fairness of the pendi_:tg legislation, S. 3044, in offering public financing as an optional alternarive to private financing. I as_ unanimous consent to have the editor:al printed at this point in my remarks. The:ce being no objection, the editorial was mdered to be printed in the RECORD, as fonows: THE TIME Is NOW Now is the time for a full and fundamental cleansing of the nation's outmoded, corrupt The astute political observer, David S. Broder, mixed a dash of homely wisdom with a reporter's cynicism when he wrote: "The or must wealthy groups. only thing more dangerous to democracy than corrupt politicians may be politicians hell-bent ox:. reform." minds, the idea of "public financing''In many has somehow become synonymous with tions more difficult for the little known candida';e to raise neces.';ary funds for even a minimal campaign, This bill, ar...d especia:ly title I of the system of financing public elections with private money. Now is the time to break the stranglehold of wealthy individuals and of self-setking interest groups over the nation's politic_!. Now is the time to bring into the open s,lnlight of public responsil_lity a systern hslf-publiely regulated and half-secret. If Congress cannot reform the nation's poll- "campaign reform." I am concerned that the reality may be very different, Even though I have serious doubts about the public financing aspects of this bill, I ]>ill, offers tmfity to or election ses the joined in the Senate tunity to b:: t':e Title bill meets the standards set bY title I for !public funding. Public financing cannot be applied only to genera] elections because the pri- the quorum call be rescinded, The PRFSIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered, Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, having made reference, as I did during my remarks, to the views that I included in the committee report, I ask unanimous consent that my statement of additional views as it appears beginning on page 89 of the committee report be printed in the RECORD at this point, There being no objection, the excerpt from the committee report (No. 93-689) was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, · as follows: ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF MR. GRIFFIN voting to report it because I believe as a whole should have an oppordebate and decide the issues raised I. Furthermore, except forfinancing Title I, contains many campaign accept individuals contributions or spec:ial set for When limits are :it becomes even from interest contribu., a fair and reasonable oppor-any citizen to ,;eek nomination to Federal price i:f he possesnecessary qultlifications and reforms which are clearly meritorious, For example, I strongly support such prov_sions as tllose in other titles of the bill to create an independent Federal Election Cpm- rate nlission, to place strict dollar limits on the amount an individual can contribute to a candidate or to campaigns incananycontribute year, to limit the amount a candidate to his own campaign, to restrict the size of cash contributions; to impose ceilings on overall campaign expenditures; and to require each candidate to use a central cam- A candidate could raise money from any source for use in a plimary, if he had ,'recess ti) those sources, and, if he won paign committee and depository. Such provisions truly represent campaign financing reforms, and they should be enacted on their own merit, Unfortunately, public ulxderstanding has not fully penetrated a facade of attractive slogans that has surrounded the promise of public financing for campaigns. As more and more light is focused on the approach of Title I in this bill, the more realization there will be that it does not really represent "reform" at all. That will be particularly true as the people learn that "public financing" means "taxpayer financing"; and when they see that Title I would actually increase, not decrease, the levels of campaign spending, particularly in races for the House of Representatives. It should be noted also that a number of needed, real reforms have not been included in this bill. ]For example, I believe everyone-- Unless primary election ,:andidates can be relieved of their exeessiv. 3 dependence on large amounts cf public money, a system of public financing in ger_epal elections will only move the evils it see:cs to remedy up-. gtream to the primary phrase of the electoral process, The bill S. 304_ doe_ not open the candidates steps to The thoroughness of 5he bill's provi8ions, the requirements which must be met pri.Or to becoming eligible for public and shorten voters alike---would welcome the duration of campaigns. ROBERT P. GRIFFIN. financing of primalm/elections would leave us with a situation in which the potential roi' a repetitior of the scandals 0f 1972 is obvious, lie could finance As page the 6: then demand his general committee public election report funds to campaign. states on vaults of the Treasury to every candidate who enters a race. It :'squires him to demonstrate a genuine appeal to the electorate by raising a meaningful threshold amount in small private con_ tributions. If he cannot Inset the thresh()Id he gets no public moi_ey, The bill also furnishe_, full funding to lnajor party nominees s,nd only a proportionate ammmt to minor party candidates, Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I am opDosed to the pending amendment and ask the Senate to reject it. The amendment is very brief but its effect upon the bill funds, the provision for private and public matching, _nd the option to go for either private or public funding careful auditing and accounting, are all evidence would be to destroy it, for title I provides for the financing of Federal elections from the public funds. Without title I we would be left with the existing law as of the painstaking concern of tile committee for the public and the use of public money. Public financing is the only answer to 228 tics in this sordid year of Watergate, when will there be a more opportune time? The Jampaign reform bill awaiting action in the _3enate is an admirable measure. It has biparti;:mn backing as well as support from ordinary citizens across the country. Senators Mike i%Iansfield, the majority leader; Robert Byrd, the majority whip, and John Pastore, the pa_:ty's chief spokesman on this problem, have given the bill stalwart Democratic support. C;n the Republican side Senator Hugh scott, the minority floor leader, has been out in front urging action on reform. The :aeart of the bill is a sharp reduction in. the size of private contributions and, as an alt,!rnative, an optional form of public financing. Opposition to this reform concept ccmes from diverse quarters. President N:txon is opposed. Senator James Allen, Alubama Democrat, who serves as Gov. George C. Wallace's agent in the Senate, is opposed. So are the right-wing conservative Republlcans led by Senators Barry Goldwater and Strom Fhurmond. The biggest danger to the bill is _he threat of a filibuster by Senator Allen _qith the backing of the GoldwaterThurmond group. But this bluff can be called if Senators Mansfield and Scott remain firm in. supI:ort of the bill. As with any innovation, the advocates of reform are vulnerable to the criticism that they m:e attempting too much. But primarles as well as general elections need drastic improv._ment; ia many one-party states, the primary provides voters with their only effective choice· It would make no sense to reform the financing of political campaigns at the _'residential level and leave House and Senate unreformed. Righ-;ly or wrongly, Congress as well as the Presidency suffers from a los.,; of public confidence in this Watergate season. The members of Congress will be making a serious miscalculation about their own political futures a:3 well as the fate of the institutions in whl(,tl they serve if they revert to bustness-as-usual. The people sense the need for reform, and the people's sense needs heeding. The principles underlying the reform bill are simple: Presidential and Congressional primaries would be financed by matching grants. 'Thus, Presidential aspirants would have to, raise $250,000 in private contribu_;ions o_ $250 or less before tixey qualified to receive the matching sum of $250,000 from March 2 7; 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL the Federal Government. Like climbing steps in a flight of stairs, the candidate would qualify forheanother each time raised quarter-million the same amountdollars pri- RECORD -- SENATE raising funds from other than members of his own party if he were in a heated primary. vately. There would be an over-all limit of My next question is this: I cannot approximately $16 million, half public and possibly see, quite frankly, if in the State half private, for each Presidential candidate Of Maryland, for example, we were to in the primaries, have a heated primary in the Republican The same principle would apply to House Party, which has only 300,000 memberq, and Senate primaries except that the limit how any candidate with a limit of $100 on contributions would be lower--S100 or on a contribution could hope to raise less--and each step in the staircase would be lower, $25,000 in Senate races and $10,000 $54,000 in order to qualify for the Fedin the House. In general elections, the eralparticipation, which would then doumatching principle would not apply. Candi- ble the amount of money he received, dates could finance their campaigns by pubI am saying that the bill as now writlie or private funds er any mix of the two ten puts an intolerable burden--as a as long as they stayed within an over-all matter of fact, a penalty--on a candicei_ung. The bill would not lock parties and candi- ' date of what is a major party in a minor dates into a novel or _ rigid arrangement, party status, so far as registration figRather, it curbs the abuses of private fi- ures are concerned, nancing and offers public financing as an Mr. CANNON. In the first Place, I canalternate route to elected office. Since the not agree with the Senator that out of old private route has become choked with a voting-age population of 2,720,000 scandal, it cannot---unreformed and unthere are only 300,000 l_pnblicans, aided--serve democracy's need much longer. Mr. BEALL. I know that there are. I Now is the time to provide a public alternalive in Maryland, and I happen to be Retive. publican, and I know how many people Mr. BEALL. Mr. President, I wonder are registered as Republicans. I am not whether the distinguished chairman of only sorry but also a litle ashamed of the Committee on Rules and Administrathe paucity of the people who register tion, the Senator from Nevada (Mr. in that party, CANNON) WOuld yield for a qIiestion for Mr. CANNON. If the Senator is cotpurposes of clarification, rect on his figures and if he feels that in Mr. CANNON. I yield, the State of Maryland he could not go Mr. BEALL. As I underst._nd the proout and raise $54,000...... visions of this legislation with regard to Mr. BEALL. In the primary, public financing in the primaries, to be Mr. CANNON. If he or some other canuse_i in my State as an example, we are didate in a primary could not raise that required to raise 20 percent of the priamount, then I would say they had betmary spending limit in order to qualify ter not be in the race. for public financing, which means, as I Mr. BEALL. I hope I will never have to read the chart, and Maryland would be spend $54,000 to be successful in a pripermitted primary spending of $272,000, mary in the State of Maryland. that in the primaries we would be reMr. CANNON. The Senator does not quired to raise 20 percent of that amount have to go to the matching J_ormula basis, of money, which is $54,000 in order to Mr. BEALL. What I am :saying is that qualify for the 50-50 participation; is thg public is financing the candidates in that not correct? the Democratic Party but not the candiMr. CANNON. Yes, as I understand dates in the Republican Party. So the what the Senator stated. In other words, Democratic Party continues to grow the voting age population of Maryland is stronger while the Republican Party con2,720,000. So, using the 10 cents per rottinues not able to take advantage of the lng age population in the primary, the public funds that might be available for amount that could be spent in the the financing of elections. That may primary election would be $272,000. The sound good to the Senator from Nevada, candidate would be required to raise 20 as a Democrat, but it does not sound good percent of that by private contributions _tome, as a Republican. in order to be eligible for the matching Mr. CANNON. The requirement is that formula proposition, a candidate demonstrate that he has Mr. BEALL. To pursue this matter fursome public appeal if he is going to get ther, 'in the State of Maryland we registhe Federal contribution. If he does not ter by party. Assuming there are 1,600,- have that public appeal, he is not going 000 voters registered, unfortunately, only to get the Federal contribution. If he 300,000 are registered as Republicans. says, "Somebody else is going to get it This means that I have to raise $54,000 and I am not," the Senator from Maryfrom 300,000 Republicans, with a limit of land is correct. He could say, !'Tax money $100 per contribution. Is that correct? is going to support some other candidate Mr. CANNON. The Senator could raise but not me," and that is true, if he canit from all over the country, and he need not demonstrate the public support, not raise it just from Republicans. So Mr. BEALL. But for a Democrat runhe would have the opportunity to raise ning in our State, the figure is not the it from any source, but the limit would same. He has 1,300,000 people to whom be $100. to appeal for contributior_, whereas I Mr. BEALL. I would hope that my have 300,000 people to whom to appeal, services would be so much in demand as a Republican. that I could attract attention from all Mr. CANNON. I cannot think of anyover the country and that I could attract one on the Senate floor who could raise attention from Democrats. that question less legitimately than As a practical matter, considering a either of the Senators from Maryland, first-time candidate, I am wondering because they are both Republicans, and how successful a candidate would be in I think it is quite obvious that they are S 4551 able to get private contributions adc-quate to compete in a campaign. Mr. BEALL. But this is a nonincum-. bent's bill, I would hope. This bill is not to perpetuate incumbents in office, much as we would like it to be. I thought the purpose of this was to give anybody an opporturdty to seek public office, in the U.S. Senate or the House of Representsfives, regardless of whether he is in of-rice at the present time. Mr. CANNON. The Senator is not correct. 'This bill is not designed to givE; anybody the opportunity to seek public' office. This is an election reform bill, to try to reform the electoral process by providing limits to reduce the influence of large contributions, and it is not di.. rected toward either political partY. So far as we can tell, it is not weighted toward either political party. If the Senator does not like the forrfiula, I would suggest that he offer an amendment to change it. Mr. BEALL. I think that is a good suggestion. I accept the suggestion. But the reason why t engaged in this colloquy is that I wanted to point out that I think there are inequities. The bill as now written, keeps people from running for public office who might otherwise do so. Mr. CANNON. May I point out, in response, that it does not keep anybody out, because nobody has to qualify anti receive Federal funds. Obviously, when the Senator ran the first time, he received no Federal funds, and he was able to raise private contributions and to cornpete and to win. A candidate can do that at the present time, and he can do it under this bill The bill would not change that one iota. But if one is going to com.pete for Federal funds under this bill, he has to demonstrate that he has some public appeal; otherwise, everybody who wanted to run would come in and say, "ir want in on the pie." Mr. BEALL. Suppose that in 1976, when I am up for reelection, we have a primary---perish the thought--and I, because I am the incumbent, might be able to go out and raise $54,000; and because I raised $54,000, I would then be entitled to another $54,000 from the Federal Treasury. Mr. CANNON. If tile Senator spends ii;.He is not entitled to it unless he spends it. Mr. BEALL. It is not very difficult to spend money in an election campaign if you lqave it or if you know you are going to get it. Then I would be entitled to $108,000, on that basis. Is that correct'..' Mr. CANNON'. Oh, no. The Senator would be entitled to $54,000. If he raised $54,000, ihe wouhl be entitled to a match-lng amount. Mr. BEALL. So I would have $108,000. Mr. CANNON. Yes. but $54,000 the Senator would raise from private contri-. buttons. Mr. BEALL. The $54,000 I raised and the $54,000 that Uncle Sam wonld give me. Iarn the incumbent, and I can hopo to raise $54,000 in the primary. How about the fellow challenging me in the primary? Suppose he can raise only $35,-. 0007 He is not going to get public funds. I would have a campaign financed half 229 S 4552 CONGRESSIONAL by my supporters and half by Uncle Sam, and any challenger would have to depend on funds that are very difficult for him to collect. So I would have a double advantage. Is that eom'eot? Mr. CAlXFNON.Not a double advantage; but the ultimate assumption is correct, that a man who cannot demonstrate the public support, cannot share in the public financing. That :part of the Senator's statement is correct., Mr. BEALL. Sometimes there is a difference between demormtrating public suppm't and collecting money. Sometimes one can get the votes but not the dollars to back up the votes. It seems to me that by using this formula, a terrible burden is placed upon those people who might want to challenge an incumbent in a primary, and I do not think that is in keeping with the purpose of the legislation, Mr. CANNON. If the Senator is opposed to public financing, he should vote against it. Mr. BEALL. I started out by saying that I am not opposed to public financing combined with private financing. But ][ am opposed to public financing that discriminates against people v:ho want to challenge the incumbents, I yield to the Senator from Tennessee. Mr. Bi_OCK. I think the Senator is saying that whether or not it was the intent of tlhe bill, as it is written it is an incumbent protection act, particularly in the sense of the primary. Further, if a candidate is a viable candidate and all his supporters happen to be people of Iow economic standing, he just does not have an opportl:mity to demonstrate his voter appeal, because the dollars are not there. Mr. BEALL. That is correct. Mr. BROCK. So he is penalized, even though he may have enormous appeal for the majority of his constituency, 2_lat is the thing here: The incumbency is perpetuated. The process is damaged, It is made.' almost impossible for chal-. lengers to bring any freshness into the System. That is the terrible thing about this kind of approach, and it see_hs to me tlhat we can do a better job on it. Mr. GRIFFIN. I wonder if the Senator f:rom Maryland would agree with this observation. It seems to me if the Senator is concerned, as he well might be, about the possibility of raising funds under the present circumstances from that number of Republicans in his State, I wonder how the climate and the attitude of potential givers might be because if we pass this bill, entitled "Public Financing,' and the word goes out that the Government is going to finance campaigns from now on, I wonder if the peopie will be interested in making any contributions, and I wonder if they will understand that it would be necessary for us to raise $54,000.--is it 5,400 contributors? Mr. BEALL. 540 contributors, Mr. GRIFFIN. I am just wondering ii! it would not be a great deal more difficult than _mder circumstances today, Mr. BEALL. I think it would be. Mr. GRIFFIN. I think so, too. Mr. BROCK. Mr. President, I wish to point out that there is another flaw in this approach, and that it is we do try to strengthen the two-party sys- 230 RECO_kD --- SENATE March 2 7, 19 74 tom, but the Republioa._ Party has not been around for 200 yesrs. It was croated about 110 years ago ,)r 115 years ago. Had this law been in effect sbt that time, the grave of Abraham IAnec,ln would be just another burial plot in the cemetery, He could not have run under this bill and could not have gotten the support, There was no such thir g then as a Republican Party. He wou.d have been the candidate of a mhior party, and since the bill states that ther_ must be established a basis in a, pr:or election and there is no prior election for a new party, he wouldhave none. I wonder what would happen in the case of the l:;u!l Moos(: Pat'ty in 1912, when the Bull I_¢oose candidate ran ahead of the B;epublican Par:;y candidate on a splintered ticket. V'hat opportunity do we have in that situation? This bill freezes the prs.etice, it freeze,; the incumbent, and it has the posAbility of reducina tl_te vitality of our system. Mr. BEALL. I am really more concorned about the advartages to the ineumbent. I was not concerned about the party. :But as Republicans we should be concerned about our 1%_publican Party. But il; seems to me as presently written the incumbent in the _ase of a party where there is an imbal{nce in registration in the State has a tremendous advantage and Z think it is an advantage no one can hope to overcome because I cannot imagine a challenger in the State of Maryland in a prim_Lry situation beina able to iaise the required $54,000 that would be necessary to pursue a primary campaign against an incumbent, Mr. MOSS. Mr. President, today this Congress has the opportunity and responsibility to impleme _t a lasting and comprehensiw_ means tc prevent corruption in politics. The 'purchasing" of favors through private political eontributions to _ampaign,', has had a demeaning effect on all public officials, Acceptance of S. 3044 can go a long way toward alleviating thi,'; problem, Last summer when the Federal Elcotion Campaign Act of 1973 was being considered by the Senate, I indicated my support ior an equitahle form of public lq.n,anci]lg. Last S_ptember I testifled before the Subcommittee on Privileges and Elections that emphasis in politics should be on people, not on money. I further indicated that the public would not be ill-served to have some of its tax money reserved for the assistance of political candidates to public office. Such use of om: tax money would improve, the representative process by enlarging its scope, _nd invigorating the workings of democracy. Sunday session, oppositio n hardened and supporters of reform could not muster the two-thirds vote necessary to break the filibuster. It must be emphasized that campaign financing is not a new issue. It is not being rushed through Congress. Extensive hearings have been held in the Senate. M[y distinguished colleagues on the _!;ubcommittee on Privileges and Elections, and the Rules and Administrat:ion Committee have devot'ed many long hard hours to dew_lopment of a bill that is comprehensive, but fair. S. 3044, the Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974 is such a bill. I commend my colleagues for their work hi ha:p.d]ing this delicate issue of public finam::ing of campaigns expeditiously but with fairness to the exponents of all viewpoints. Senator Ar.Lr_ is to be respected for his vi_w on public financing of elections. Although I do not agree with his reasonlng orr conclusions regarding public financing, I certainly cannot dispute his sincerity. I be:lieve that Senator ALLEN is wrong in contending that title ir of S. 3044 is a "raid on the Treasury." Rather, publie financing as provided by this bill merely prevents special interests from buyin_ favors and placing undue pressure on public servants. Americans now only end up paying more for campaigns than bhey would by having tax dollars used ior campaigns. Large contributions by representatives of large corporations come from higher prices of commodities that are purchased by the consumer. The milk :;upport price rise in early 1971 is proof of this. The only difference is that such increase in price is a subtle increase. Only last month I joined in a colloquy with several of my distinguished colleagues and pointed out that the traditionalpractice of campaign revenue ratslng is susceptfvle to much abuse and that an alternative to this a3use was the allowance for taxpayers to a checkoff on their Federal income tax for campaign purposes, Last November, I was pleased that the Senate accepted an arr endment to the debt ceiling bill to provide a means to publicly finance electioILs. However, following a compromise by the House, a fillbuster in the Senate, and a historic Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, the Senate has under consideration the most comprehensive campaign finance reform measure ever to come before the Contress. No single piece of legislation before the Senate in this session has the potential of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1974 for cleaning up American politics and restoring confidence in tlhe integrity of our political system and t]he individuals who work within it. The most important feature in this legislation, which incorporates and builds on a number of recent campaign reforrl measures passed by the Sen- Certainly, I do not contend that publie financing is a panacea to all of the ills of campaigns. But it is a step in the right direction. Until individuals realize that llavors will not be purchased by politica] contributions, politics in the eyes of Americans will not be restored to a place of honor and respec, t. I think that public financing, although problems will occur in development of means to implement it, is one way in which this honor and respect can be returned to p_lblie service. I ask that my colleagues join in defeating amendment No. 1064 to S. 3044. Only I;hrough this means (;an we indicate our commitment to prevention of corruption evident in recent campaigns. CAMI?AIGN TIME FINANCE I_EFORM--A FOR CLEANSING March 27, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL ate, is the new provision for the public financing of Federal elections that it authorizes. I totally disagree with those who claim public financing of elections is a diversion of public funds from iraportant public activities. If the tragic drama called Watergate, which has been unfolding for nearly 2 years in our newspapers and on our televisions, has made anything cleat', it is that the public has no greater interest or priority than in assuring the integrity of those they choose as their public officials, While I do not endorse every detail of this bill or feel it can be written on stone tablets for all posterity, I do agree cornpletely with its basic objectives and believe its major provisions are reasonable, Obviously, any legislafion of such signifieance will require very careful menitoring by Congress to be sure it is having 'the intended effects on our electoral process. This monitoring will lead naturally to the adjustments and fine tuning that always prove necessary as major new legislation is hnplemented, Title I of the Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974, the public financing title, affords all. candidates an opportunity to obtain a certain amount of public financing of their campaigns from the Treasury of the United States. However, to receive such assistance, they must be able to demonstrate a reasonable amount of support from the electorate in the geographic area in which they intend to run for Federal office, To qualify for public financing assistsnce in the primaries, a candidate must raise a specific amount of "earnest money" from contributions of $250 or less in the case of Presidential candidates and $100 or less for Senate and House candidates, After the required threshold level of "earnest money" has been reached, publie matching funds would be available on a dollar-for-dollar basis for each contribution of $250 or less for a Presidential primary candidate and $100 or less for a Senate or House primary candidate, In the general elections, candidates may choose to receive all private contributions and no public funding, a blend of private and public funding, or, in the case of major party candidates, exclusively public funding. The nominee of $ major party would be able to receive full public funding of his campaign for election, up to the specified campaign spending limits. Minor party nominees would be eligible for public funding up to an amount equal to the percentage of the vote their party's candidate received compared to the votes cast for the candidates of the major parties, The bill would also increase the value of the dollar check-off to $2 for individual and $4 for joint returns and provide that the designation be automatic, unless the taxpayer elects not to make such a designation. If the amount of designated tax payments to the fund do not result in a sufficient total amount to fulfill the entitlement of all qualified candidates, then the Congress may appropriate the addi_ional sums needed to make up the deficit. RECORD-- SENATE The bill would limit i21dividual contributions to a candidate, or committees operating on his behalf, to $3,000 for each election. It would limit the total contribution of an individual to ail candidates in any calendar year to $25,000. And, it would limit to $3,000 the contrlbution of a political conlmittee to any candidate. A limit of $100 is placed on all cash campaign contributions, While the legislation before us includes a number of other significant reforms regarding campaign finance, I believe that the provisions relating to public financing of campaigns are of the utmost importance. I have been a vocal advocate of expanded public financi:ag of Federal elections for many years. As one who has been involved in almost all types of Federal elections, I can appreciate, perhaps more than some others, the importance of such a ch_mge in the finsncing of the electoral process. It was with thisin mind that I supported the dollar check-off and authored the amendment which put it on the front of the income tax form whe:re people could see it and use it. This was also my reason for speaking in behalf of the KennedyScott public fnancing am endment when it came before the Senate last July. Mr. President, ff the faith of the American people in their Government is to be restored, this vicar[ campaign finance reform legislation must be passed with its major public financing thrust intact, There is no doubt that this reform measure is needed, In politics, I have found that what is true is, regrettably, not always as imporrant as what people perceive to be true. Those of us who run for office can pro: fess that the' campaign contributions we receive do not in any way control our votes, but I venture to say that not many believe it. I have been in a numbe:c of campaigns, and I erdoy the campaigns, I like them. But the most demanding, disgusting, depressing and disenchanting part of polfries is related to campaign financing, Furthermore, in. nations] elections it is literally impossible for tlae Presidential and Vice Presidential candidate to have control finances. over All or too knowledge easily you ofcancampaign become the victim of sloppy reporting or carelessness on the part of your committee or committees. Yet, in the public's mind, it is the candidate that is t_ilty of wrongdoing, In my years of public service I have seen the cost of campaig:as skyrocket to unbelievable levels. It is time we stopped making candidates for Federal office spend so much of their time, energy and ultimately their credibility, on the telephone calling friends or committees, meeting with peopie, and often times begging for money, Scrounging for funds to bring your case to the electorate is a demeaning experience. The bill before us today gives us our best chance ever of cleaning up our politics. Frankly, Mr. President, the election of public officials is too important to our Nation, and an electoral process that is S 455'_ above suspicion is too precious to our people, to permit elec:tions to be decided on the auction bloc of private campaign funding. Big money, large private contributions, and the amount of money a politician can :raise should not be permltted to continue as a key to electio]p day success. Mr. President, it is gratifying for one who has labored long in the vineyard of public campaign fin'mce, and it should be very encouraging to all Americans, 'to see such a creative step toward cleansing our electoral process emerge with nearly unanimous bipartisan support from thc Senate Committee on Rules and Admin.istration. Chairman OA_NON and his col.leagues have done a laudable job and de-serve our congratulations. I hope that the Senate will support, in general, the committee's work, and pro.vide the Nation with the leadership our people seek in. restoring confidence in the integrity of their Government. It is not enough to criticize corruption in politics. That is easy to do, we can a.ll be against evil. But our constituents are demanding more than rhetoric from us, and rightly so. The American people will no longer tolerate _tip-service to campaign finance reform. The time for us to act is now and the vehicle is before us. We must act positively on the Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974 and authorize the extension of public financing to'all Federal elections. Some may say, "All the politicians are doing is taking care of themselves." Others, who should know better, have called it "taxation without representation" and "a diversion of public funds from important purposes." But, Mr. President, as one who has been to the "political wars" at the hational level for 25 years, I say unequivocally that thereis no more important use of public funds--no better insurance of effective representation that directly benefits our people--than to assure the integrity of our public officials and to tear away the veil of suspicion that shrouds every politician who must go to the marketplace to finance his candidacy. _Mr. BUCKLEY. Mr. President, S. 3044 inchides a number of campaign reform proposals tied will together a package we are told satisfyin the public that demand for reform and at the same thne solve many of the problems that face our society. Some of the proposals that have been woven into this bill have merit smd deserw. · consideration, but those that -dominate S. 3044 are so deficient as to render the bill virtually unsalvageable. Title: I of S. 3044 is, I am afraid, chief among these. It is title I, of course, which incorporates public financing of Federal elections with strict expenditure limitations. The concept of publicly financed electio:n campaigns has been the subject of controversy in this body for some years now, but I am still far from convinced that it is an idea whose time has come or indeed, that it is an idea whose time should ever come. The scheme incorporated into this portion of S. 3044 is quite intricate mechanically, but one that must be thoroughly understood both mechani- 231 S 4554 CONGRESSIONAL REC,DRD -- SENA ]?E rally and co,neepttally before we go so far and should be stricken _long with the as to vote it into law. z',_t of title I. Therefore, before I move into a disAs you may recall, the checkoff! was cussion of what I see as the basic objecoriginally established to give individual tions to the entire concept of public taxpayer:; a chance to direct $1 of their financing I 'would like to go over the protax money to the political palty of their visions of the specific plan incorporated clhdice for use in the next Presidential into title I of S. 3044. campa)_gn, 'Under title I tax money amounting to When it was extended I)y the Congress approximately $360 million every 4 years last year, however, the grounclrules were would be m_le available to finance or clbanged so that this yea7 taxpayers are help finance the primary and general not able to select the part:7 to which their election campaigns of legitimate major dollar is to be directed. They are simply - and minor party candidates for all Fedallowed to deMgnate that the dollar eral offices, should go into the Presidential election A candidate seeking the endorsement campaign ftmd to be d_vided up at a of his or her party via the primary route later date. Thus, while th _ taxpayer may must demonstrate his "seriousness" by still refrain from participating he may raising a specified amount through pri_ell be directing his dollar to the oppovate contributions before qualifying for sition party if he elects to participate, Federal money. Once this threshold A theoretical example will illustrate amount has been raised, however, the this. I_._t us assume that two candidates candidate becomes eligible for public imln irt 1976 and that the money to be matching funds up to the limit applicable divided up amounts to $_ 0 re:[Ilion. Half to his race. of this would go to each can,lidate, but Oandidat_.'s running in the general let us further assume thst 60 percent of election for amy l_ederal office are treated this money or $6 million is contributed 'differently depending on whether they by Democrats. Under thi_ set of eircum-_ axe running as major party or minor stances a million Democrats worfid un_ party candidates. Of some interest is the wittingly be contributing I o the campaign fm;t at the Presidential level a major cfi a candidate they do not support and party is defined as one that garnered 25 for whom they probably _ill not vote. percent of the vote in the previous If S. 3044 passes things will1 get even election, worse. During t:he first year oirly 2.8 perMajor paxty candidates may receive cent of t:he ta_:paying public elected to fdil public :funding up to the limit apcontribute to the fund. This disappointplicable to their races, ing participation was generally attributed A minor party candidate, on the other tx) the fa_:t that it was diffictfit to elect hand, may receive public funding only to participate. Therefore this year the up to an amount which is in the same form was simplified and _ great effort is ratio as the average number of popular being raade to get people to participate_ votes cast for all the candidates of the As a result about 15 p,._rcent of those major party' bears to the total number of filing 'appear to be paIticipating and popular votes cast for the candidate of while this increase seem; to warm the the minor party. However, the minor hearts of those who haw pla:ns for this party candidate must receive at least 5 money it will :not raise nearly enough percent of 'the vote to qualify for any money 'to finance the comprehensive plan funding, the sponsors of S. 3044 have in mind. Minor party candidates are allowed to Therefore they have found a way to augment their public funds with private increase participation. U_der the terms contributions up to the limits set in the of S. 3044: the ciheckoff would be doubled act and may receive post election payto allo_t $2 from eac'n individual to go ments if they do better in the current into the fund, but the indi'Adu_rl taxpayer election than they did in preceeding will no longer have to designate. Instead elections, his $2 will be automatic_lly designated The indei_dent candidate or the canfor him unles,; he objects. This is a didate of a new minor party isn't entitled scheme designed to incr,._ase participa-. to ar_ything prior to the election, but tion reminiscent of the _ay 'book clubs can qualify for post election payments ased to sell books by telling their mem-. if he draws 'well at, the polls, hers they would receive the month's seThis plan is expected, as I indicated a lection trnless 'ohey chose not to. As I few momenl_ ago, to cost about $360 milrecall, Ralph Nader and his friends did lion every 4 years. The sponsors of S. not like this practice when book clubs 3044 would have us believe that this were engaged in it and on,.· can only hope money will be raised through an ex- _that they will be equally outraged at the panded tax check off provisions such as proposal that Uncle Sam join in the act. the one now on our tax forms that perBut S. 3044 goes further still. If enough mits us to designate that $1 of our tax people resist in spite of the Government's money shall go to a Presidential Elecefforts to get them to t,articipate, the tion Campaign Fund. Congress will b,_ authorized to make up This strikes me as one of the most the difference ,)ut of general revenues, objectionable features of this entire So, after all is said, it al;pears that the scheme. The check off as modified by checkoff :is little more than s_ fraud on the authors of S. 3044 is a fraud on the the taxpayer, American taxpayer. It is an attempt to Let us move from the ,luestion of the give people the feeling that they can way the money needed _;o finance this participate in decisions that the authors plan will be raL';ed to the _uestion of the of this bill have no intention of letting propriety of the spending limi5s that are them participate in. This provision alone a:n integral par_ of the P.an. would force me to vote against S. 3044 Under section 504 of the title we are 2:32 Marclz o 7, 19 74 debatir_g uniform limits are imposed on in,zurnl:,ent and nonincumbent eandidates alike. These limits vc[ll necessarily i'avor incumbent Presidents, Senators, and Congressmen because any incumbent h:;_s advantages that must be over,._ome by a challenger trying to unseat lmm. To overcome these advantages a challenger must spend money. I have already indicated that I will call up an z,.mendment designed to overcome _:his problem by allowing nonincumbents _:;ospend more than office holders. Some:shing o!_ this sort strikes me as absolutely l:'tecess_ry at a time when Americans are skeptical enough about Government in g'eneral and elected officials in particular. Congressional and Senate incumbents ]:lave g,fmerally been fairly safe re-eleei:;ic,n be(:_ for a variety of reasons. Incumhenry itself has been estimated to be worth 5 percentage point,; on election ,:!lay,an l I just do not think we should do anything that might be fairly interpreted as givir:Lg us an even greater lock on our _i;eats. The $90,000.00 limit on House races imposed by this bill would have a similar _ffect. 75ndeed, my own analysis of a recent Common Cause study of expendiI:ures ir_ 1972 convinces me that this legi slation is weighed heavily in favor of in:::rrm.berets and might therefore weaken I:.he ab:ility of our citizens to influence governmental decisions. I ha'ye been discusing the specifics of I:.itle I ;[tnd they are, of course, both in{;cresting, and important. They represent an attempt on the part :_f the }l.ules Committee to answer some ,>f the ,_;pecific problems that arise when ::)ne gels into the business of publicly _;ubsidizing election campaign§. We could discuss these specifics for ,!ia.rs ar_cl I fear that we might find our:_,elves doing just that if we do not accept i:he Senator from Alabama's amendment ::.o strike the entire title. The problem is '!:hat a discussion of specific attempts to overcon::_e problems that are merely :;ymptematic of a faulty approach to a /Lauch larger problem are a complete ';vaste o!i' time. The :_;cheme before us today like others i:hat have been proposed in recent years _;eems to be based on the assumption that :::)rivate financing is an evil to be avoided _,,t ali cc,sts. I am afraid I have to reject that basic _:;_ssumpl_ion. A candidate for public of:%e is :_urrently forced to compete for ::'_aoney :/rom thousands or---in the case of :i?reside:ntial candidates--millions of po;ential contributors and voters. Viable candidates rarely have trouble :'aising _he funds needed to run a credihie campaign and, in fact, their ability _;.:)raise :money is one very good gage of ';heh- potential popular support. _ks Congressman FRENZrL said during :'.:earings on public financing last year: While the ballot box is an essential means .l! meas_ring popular support for a canditiate, poiitical contributions give individuals _,.:adgroups an opportunity to register strong approval and disapproval of a particular cant'_idate oi: party. Unde:: our present system potential _:andide:tes must essentially compete for l:,rivate :support, and to attract that sup- March 2 7, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE port they have to address themselves to issues of major importance to the peopie who will be contributing to their campaigns and voting for them on election day. Public financing might' allow candidates to ignore these issues, fuzz their stands, and run campaigns in which intelligent debate on important matters is subordinated to a ?Madison Avenue" approach to the voters. Consider a couple of examples. During the course of the 1972 campaign, it is reported that Senator MCGOVERN was forced by the need for campaign money to place greater emphasis on his support of a Vietnam pullout than his political advisers thought wise. They felt that he should have downplayed the issue and concentrated on others that might be better received by the electorate, I do not doubt for a minute that the Senator's emphasis on his Vietnam position hurt him, but I wonder if we really want to move toward a system that would allow a candidate to avoid such issues or gloss over positions of concern to millions of Americans. The need to court the support of other groups creates similar problems.' Those who believe that we should maintain a friendly stance toward Israel, for example, a_vell as those who think a candidate should support union positions on a whole spectrum of issues want to know where a candidate stands before they give him their vocal and financial support. The need to compete for campaign dollars forces candidates to address many issues and I consider this vital to the maintenance of a sound democratic system, Second, to the extent that these plans bar the participation of individual citizens in financing political campaigns they deny those citizens an important means of political expression. Millions of Americans now contribute voluntarily to Federal, State, and local political cam1saigns. These people see their decision to contribute to one campaign or another as a means of political expression. Public financing of Federal general election campaigns would deprive people of an opportunity to participate and to express · their strongly held opinions, They would still be contributing, of course, since the Senate proposal will cost them hundreds of millions of dollars in tax money. But their participation would be compulsory and might well involve the use of their money to support candidates and positions they find morally and politically reprehensible, Third, S. 3044 and similar proposals combine public financing with strict limits on expenditures. As I have already indicated, these limits must, on the whole, work to the benefit of incumbents since they are lower than the amount that a challenger might have to spend presently in a hotly contested race if he wants to overcome the advantages of his opponent's incumbency, Fourth, the various schemes devised to distribute Federal dollars among various candidates and between the parties has to affect power relationships that now exist. Thus, if you give money directly to the candidate you further weaken the part_ system. If you give money to the national party, you strengthen the na- tional party organization relative to the State parties. If you are not extremely careful you will freeze out or lock in minor parties. These are real problems with significant policy con:tequences that those who drew up the various public financing proposals tended to ignore, The authors of S. 3044 merely managed to make the consequences less clear, They did not solve the problems, Fifth, public financing will have two significant effects on third parties, neither desirable. In the first place, it wfil discriminate against genuine new national third party movements---such as that of George Wallace in 1968--because such parties have not had the chance to establish a voting record of the kind required to qualify for preelection financing. On the other hand, once a third party qualifies for future Federal financing, a vested, interest arises in keeping it alive--even if the George Wallace who gave it its sole reason for existence should move on. Thus we run the risk of financing a proliferation of parties that could destroy the stability we have historically enjoyed through our two party system. In addition, S. 3044 and ali similar plans raise first amendment questions since they ail either ban, limit, or direct a citizen's right of free speech, In this light it is interesting to note that a three-judge panel in the District of Columbia has already found portions of the law we passed in [971 unconstitutional. As you will recall the 1971 act prohibited the media from charging for political advertising unless the candidate certifed that the charge would not cause his spending to exceed the limits imposed by the law. This had the effect of restricting the freedom both of individuals wishing to buy ads and of newspapers and other media that might carry them and, in the opinion of the District of Columbia court, violated the first amendment, I would like to state parenthetically, Mr. President, that I intend to vote against all amendments that might ameliorate some of the constitutional objections, so that whatever is enacted will be as vulnerable as possible to judicial attack. I will do so because of my profound convictions that 5he bill's principal features will do our political system substantial harm. I have already indicated in references to the specifics of title I that I fear we are debating a bill that would aid incumbents over the candidates. This is so because of the uniform spending limits that are an inherent part of this and most other public financ_ag plans, In addition to incumbents such plans would aid another class of candi_tates and therefore artificially tilt the politics of this country, Any candidate who is better known when the campaign begins or is in a position to mobilize nonmone,tary resources must benefit from these kinds of plans as compared t(_ less known candidates and those whose supporters are not in a position to give them such help. This is necessarily true because the spending and contributions limits even out only one of the factors that determine the outcome of a given campaign, S 4555 Other factors therefore become increas.. ingly important and ]nay well determine the winner on election day. Consider, for example, the advantage that a candidate whose backers carl donate time to his campaign will haw_ over one whose backers just do not haw_ the time to donate. In this context one can easfiy imagine a situation in which a liberal campus-.oriented candidate might swamp a man whose support comes primarily from blue-collar mid-die-class workers who would contribute money to their man, but do not have time to work in his campaign. Or consider the candidate running on an issue that attracts the vocal and "in.dependent" support of groups that can provide indirect support without falling under the limitations imposed by law. The effectiveness of the antiwar move.ment and the way in which issue-. oriented antiwar activists were able ti) mesh their efforts with those of friendly candidates illustrate the problem. David Broder of the Washington Post noted in a very perceptive analysis o1_ congre_ionaI maneuvering on this issue last year that most members seem to sense that these reforms will, in fact, help a certain kind of candidate. I-Ii,_ comments on this are worth quoting at length: ... the votes by which the public fl.nancing proposal was passed in the Senate had a marked partisan and Ideological colora.. tion. Most Democrats and most liberals i:a both parties supported public financing; most Republicans and most conservatives lxi both parties voted against it. The presumption that liberals and Dem.oerats would benefit from the change i'.' strengthened realization that money is Just one of by thethesources of influence on a political contest. If access to large sums is eliminated as a potential advantage of one candidate or party by the provision of equal[ public subsidies for ali, then the election outcome will likely be determined by the ability to mobilize other forces. The most important of these other factor.'_ are probably manpower and publicity. Legis.. lation eliminates e_Lhaneos tile dollar the influence politics that automatically influenceon of those who can provide manpower or pub-. licity for the campaign. That immediately conjures up, for Repnb.. licans and conservatives, the union boss_ the newspaper editor and the television anchor-. man--three individuals to whom they are rather reluctant to entrust their fate of electing the next President. This legislation affects the way we select our representatives and our Pres-. idents. Z[taffects the relationship of our citizens to their elected representatives and to Government itself. It affects the party system that has developed in this country over nearly 200 years in ways that we cannot predict. In other words, S. 3044 affects the very workings of our dem_ycratic system and could a_ter that system significantly. Those in and out of Congress who ad-. vocate public financing are selling it as aills.cure-all for our the national political For example, Senator andfrom Mas.. sachuse'_ts, Mr. KErrNEDY, recently went so far as to saythat-Most, and probably all, of the serious problerns facing this country today have their roots in the way we finance political cam. paigns . . . 233 S 4556 CONGRESSIONAL This statement reminds one of the hyperbole asse_iated with the selling of New Frontier and Great Society programs in the 1960's. The American people were asked then to accept expensive and untried programs as panaceas for all our ills. Those programs did not work. They were oversold, vastly more expensive than anyone anticipated, and left us with more problems than they solved, Public /_inaneing is a Great Society approach _.o another problem of public concern and, like other solutions based on the theory that Federal dollars will solve everything, sh.ould be rejected, I intend 'to support the Allen amendment to strike title I and I urge its adoption. Mr. HUGH SCOTT. Mr. President, I rise in or)position to the Allen amendment which, if adopted, would strip public financing from the bill. As a member of the Rules Committee-which held long hearings and markup sessions before favorably reporting the bill to the Senate floor, I support the entirely flexible and realistic approach it takes, Supporters of the amendment claim that public financing, as proposed in title I, would place full Federal control over the election process. This is inaccurate. As a New York Times editorial said this morning: The bill would not lock parties and candidates into a novel or rigid arrangen-,ent, Rather, it curbs the abuses of private financlng and offers public financing as an alter._ate route to elected office, I hope that the Allen amendment will be soundlydefeated Mr. FANNIN. MI'. President, public campaign financing as envisoned in title I of S. 3044, the Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974 represents a major effort to restructure our political arid electoral process, all in the name of "campaign reform." Most certainly none of us are opposed to reforms of existing abuses since our political system needs constant monitorlng and readjustment, and the Congress has acted to correct some of those abuses, But what is proposed in title I is not a single adju_tment or correction. Instead we have a whole new approach to financing Federal elections, Mr. President, I am aware, of course, that this issue has been considered for years in Congress. In fact, I would point out that in June 1967, Russell D. Hemenway, national director of the National Committee for an Effective Congress, made these remarks at a hearing before the Senate Finance Committee and they bear repeating here today: The NCEC wishes to be on record as opposed to any proposal which provides direct Treasury financing of elections. We feel this would substitute the Treasury for the voiuntaw political contributor. To appropriate Federal funds to pay for campaigns is antidemocratic since it excludes the individual from a vital portion of the political process, It also tends to establish a political monopely which would ultimately erode the process of free elections. Even with limitations and safeguards--the practical effectiveness of which are open to serious question--the direct subsidy vests in the national party committees an undesirable concentration of power_ control, and 234 RECORD_ SENATE ' Marcl_ 27, 1974 influence which would ultimately have serf ous impact on the entire party system and political process. The long-range results are predictable: A. lessening of pub:tic infuence over party platforms and policies, and central control over the decisions and actions of candidates and over State and local party organizations. By reducing the financial dependence of parties on the ran_¢ and file c3nstitnents, the party hieri_rchy is insulated against the public will. The inhe:eent dangers of st[[Hng conformity, rigii discipline, and athe se!f-.perpetuat:ng witbil_ major parties are power obvious.struc:ture It is m order here, to take a quick look at how direct Treasury fi:lancing of campaigns would operate. Suppose the two nalional parties wece each allccated $10 million 12_omthe Treasuiy. Nominal!y, they could use t:ais money onl_ for certain specified costs of the presidentialcampaign. wouldnot t:ae two national chairmen But discover that i_tS of i::_ose who chose to participate. fNhen ).I1 individual is forced, in effect, tO mal{e a contribution to a political t:_eir slightest whims were respected as orders by party officials, by everyone in the party from supervisors to (:oroner to candidates lor the Ho_lse and Senate? Abox,e all, the basic principle of' volun_ tarism is destroyed, sinc{ thc individual may not determine where _fis money is golng. Nor would he partici:)ate in many of the meaningful campaig:l activities for which fundraisiIlg is mereli7 a s'bimulus. Politically, for the candidat_ and public, it i_,; far more important to r _eeive a hundred al bills than on,_ contribuiion /'or $100. In tile effort to cleanse the present system cf oboe';es, we d) not wan; to sterilize the ]_,olitical process. It willbure do no good to hand_ craft zA_unresponsive, _ucrs,tic Inechan:[:sm whic)_ renders the public will speechless and impotent. The _.merican people 8re nov! reactin_ against t_ e ow_rbureaucratic ageucies of Ciovernment. At a time when every effort is being male to humanize and we do into not v/ant pecsonalize to build the the Ooverrmen'5, same difficulties ,olitics. We se_ in some of the election _.nanc!.ng proposals this salae p_ttern which :,:as ch_racterized much re _ent Federal legislatio_; full of good intentio:as, financed by Federal large,ss, but functionally incap~ :_ble of' proper administr_,tion because of rigid and uniform directiv_adjustment s are imposedand in situations requiring di]emr_u_s. Every person desiring office cannot 'ce subs.dized, so subsidies nlust be awarded i,o =hose who already have demonstrated politica! power sufficient to warrant subsiclization, Parties may gain subsidies for t,heir c_.ndidates according to some formula Linked to their support in the electorate, ivilich _:nust favor the established parties. Congress has considered subsidies geared to equalizing the campaign financing of the two major 1)arties, but funds for minor parties _,t best v/ould only approximate their strength _mong '!;he voters. Mr. :i_resident, this is a very_eal prob:.eln. It is somewhat frightening to envision a government of politicians allocat:ing funds for the campaigns of politicians. Everyone mu,;t share the concer:_ of A. James ReJchley in the December 1973 issue of Fortune tonga;_;ine, w:10 in his article, "Financing_But [_et's I:)o It Right," commented: 'fetal Government financing would also ::'a:Lseth_ danger that at some future time a ,:lorninaut political faction or party might deny the opposition the resources needed to _'each tl:e public. Finally, Mr. President, it has been argued that only through public cam- :_Lexibility Mr. President, we have had hearings c,ver the years and eacL time we have found that the financing of election cam-pai2ns out of tax money creates many more problems than it could _';olve. Mr. President, the pla(:e fo:c campaibql reform to begin is throu_'h the enforcement of the laws which we (lo have. As Arlen J. :Large wrote in _n article, "How Should We Finance Ele2tions?" in the May :[0, 1973, _Nall Street Journah There's not yet an obvious need to go to 'the extreme of taxing people to pay for the antics of barnstorming politicians, or adding their expenses to the natio:_al debt. At least that step shouldn't be ta_ en before trying sternec enforcement of ex.sting law. Mr. President, I believ_ that this goes right to the heart of the {kme:cican politJ(cal process. Ii) would b_ a serious in- :'.:)at,Ti financing can we cure the disease we cali Watergate. Yet nothing in S. :_:044 wfil change the conditions for such acts to occur if it is the desire of some :individuals to subvert the political and elector_d process. Regardless of where the money comes from it can still happen. in this context, then, S. 3044 will aecoml:,lish very little. To avoid the "Wateri;_ates" of the future will require strict _:mforcement of existing laws and the ;:a'osecution and conviction of those found _uilty of such criminal acts as is happening at this very moment. Whai; the supporters of S. 3044 really hope tc:; achieve is not entirely clear, but what the provisions imply is the begin:aing o,f a Federal structure to manage i)olitical campaigns and perhaps even the political process itself. It does not take :much iimagination to conceive of future ;_egislation being proposed to further re- fringement on the rights of the individ_:Lal. For some peopledt could mean tak_:[lg their tax money for political purposes and processes which they oppose; for others it would mean den:.al of' their right to fully participate in the political process in the manner of thei c choosing. Direct subs:idles woLld also raise ,_trict po,litical operations. In essence, this i:s a dangerous bill contrary to oair tradii:.ion o:i! political freedoms. Those who have cs,ndemned Watergate because it ':'epresented an effort to control political power o.ave only to read t:his bill to see I:he pol:ential for achieving the same end only then it would have the cover of law serious problems of free_om of expression. They would be a form of compulsory political activity which limited the freediem ()if those who would refrain as well as giving support freedom. If the Congress which ::avers the movement to which he is :indifferent or which he finds distasteful, it may be fairly _'_aid that a basic freedom is being infringed. When this forced payment is ;::ombined with limits on contributions to favored candidates, political freedom is drastic_:tlly limited, 52_r. ii'resident, we also have a number ':If unanswered questions as to how this bi3J WOLlldbe implemented. In the Ameri.can Bar Association Journal of last ()ctobe_:', Carleton W. Sterling wrote an article, "Control of Campaign Spending: ':_he B'.eformer's Paradox," which observed: . Subsidization schemes raise a number of to restricting political can choose a formula major parties over the March 2 7, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-- minor parties then it has effectively chosen to perpetuate existing political arrangements, If Congress can manipulate funding it can do so in a way to make it impossible for groups to participate in the political process, If the Congress can limit expenditures it can limit them to the point wh_re the opportunity to express a view is severely restrained, If the Congress calx do all this in the name of "campaign reform" then surely we have taken a major step in eroding our political freedoms., It is for these reasons that I oppose title I of S. 3044 and will support the amendment of the dkstirlgnished Senator from Alabama, Senator ALLES. Mr. TALMADGE. Mr. President, I defer to no one in acknowledging the need for election campaign reform in many areas. As a Member who has served on the Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, the so-called Watergate committee, I can vouch for that firsthand, I have supported legislation designed to achieve campaign reform, including limiting amounts of money that may be contributed and spent in political campaigns, reporting and disclosure of campaign contributions and expenditures, and provisions for enforcement of the law to insure that the election process in our free society is not subverted, In fact, even before Watergate and Campaign reform became highly charged household words, I sponsored legislation to allow tax credits or tax deductions for modest contributions to political campaigns in an effort to broaden the base of public political support, However, I draw the line on public financing of Federal election campaigns, This is not campaign reform. It is another blatant attempt to poke the long arm of the Federal Government into an area where it has no business, It is an effort to destroy the freedom of the American people to choose in the election process, It is an effort to deny the American people freedom of expression in the support or nonsupport of candidates for public office, It would constitute a raid on the Fedoral treasury, at a time when our country and hard-working taxioayers are caught in the grip of rampant inflation, when we are unable to even come anywhere near balancing the budget, and when we can not make both ends meet on programs that are needed in our society, What we have before us today is a program that is neither needed, desirable, ok in the best national interest, The right to vote is as sacred a right that the American people have in our free society. Voting is an expression of support of a particular candidate for public office and an endorsement of his views at the ballot box. A citizen's contribution to the election of a particular candidate is likewise an expression of support. To make such a choice and to give such a contribution is in my estimation also a sacred right, How a free citizen casts his vote and how he supports a candidate of his own SENATE choosing is a decision only that citizen can make. No one has a right to make that decisionfor him. A citizen can support this candidate or that candidate. Or, he can choose to support no candidate. That is his right in our system of free elections, I know of no American taxpayer who fully understood the situation who would agree to having his tax money spent on the political candidacy of a person whose views were totally ' repugmmt to him. I certainly do not want my tax money spent that way. Yet, that is precisely what would result from public financing of Federal election campaigns, It is unthinkable that the Federal Government would presume to _ell voters and taxpayers how they ought to contribute to political campaigns. Yet, that would be the effect of this legislation, It would cut both ways. If I were an arch conservative, I would not want my tax dollars going to the candidacy of an arch liberal. If I were an arch liberal, I would not want my taxes supporting the candidacy of an arch conservative. Such an idea as this flies in the face of everything I understand about freedom to choose in the electoral process, Under this proposal, the Federal Government first forces the American taxpayer to fork over his money. Then, the Federal Government takes that money and turns it over to the election campaign of a candidate who perhaps could not get even his wife to vote for him. The only way this could be avoided, would be for the citizen to evade the tax collector. Virtually anyone can file for public office these days. I do net think hardworking people want their taxes spent to finance the campaigns of every crank or crackpot that comes along, I join efforts to improve the election campaign process and to bring about needed reform. But, the last thing we want is for politicians to rut their hands in the public treasury to finance their election campaigns, I hope the Senate will kill this legislation. Mr. KENNEDY. _/[r. Pre,,;ident, with regrot, I find it necessary to oppose the McGovern amendment. I believe would be an unfortunate backws_rd step in our progress toward reform. Contrary to some reports, the public financing provisions of S. 3044 are in no sense manlatory. The_ bill does not prohibit private financing, and it certainly does not prohibit small private contributions, In fact, it provides strong incentives for small contributions in primaries, since it offers matching public funds only for the first $250 in private contributions for Presidential primaries and the first $100 in primaries for the Senate and House. Private contributions atso have a role to play in general elections, since major party candidates will have the option of relying entirely on priw_te funds, ontirely on public funds, or on any combination in between. _,nd in both primaries and general elections, the bin provides new incen- S 4557 fives for small private contributions by doubling the existing tax credit and tax deduction available for such contributions. In these respects, the bfil recognizes the vigorous differences of opinion on the proper role of small private contributtons. Some feel that such contlqbutions are an essential method for bringlng citizens into the system and encouraging popular participation in politics. Other,_, like myself, feel that there are better ways to bring a person into the system than by reaching for hia pocketbook, and that the best way to a voter's heart is through his opinions on the issues, not through the dollars in his wallet. As it _,;hould be, the bill accommodate'; both views, letting each candidate "do his own thing," without forcing any can-didate into a rigid formula for financing his campaign. In this respect, S. 3044, is an improve.merit over the 1971 dollar checkoff law, which prohibits a person who accepts public funds from accepting private contributions Under S. 3044, there i_; greater flexibility--a candidate can se1oct the mix of private and public funds lie wants for his carnnaign, such as 50-50 or 80-29, and is not obliged to accept; public funds on an all-or-nothing basis. For that reason, I am opposed to alter-. native proposals such as the _VIcGovern amendment, that would turn public fl-. nancing for general elections into a com-. puls0ry "mixed" system of partial pub-lic funds and partial private contribu-tions, with or without matching grant:_. Last BTovember, in the floor debate on the public financing amendment to the Debt Ceiling Act, the Senate voted 52 to 40 against a proposal to cut the amount of public funds in half and to require the remainder to be raised ii1 private contributions. As Senator JOHN PASTOR_:succinctly put it in the floor debate, in opposing such a mandatory mix.ture of public and private financing: "Either we are going to have or not going to have public financing.If weare goingfor public financing, let us go for public financing. If we are not going to have it, let us not have it. What we have here [in the proposal for a mixed syst_;m] is a hermaphrodire." If participation in poIitics through :small private contributions is the goal then the dollar checkoff is already achieving it. More than 4 million taxpayers have used the checkoff so far in 1974. At the current rate, 12 million tax:payers wiU have used it by the time all returns are flied on April 15. That's a world record for public participation in campaign financing, a tribute to the workability of the "one voter-one dollar" approach to public financing enacted in 1971. Further, it is by no means clear that it is feasible £or a large number of genegal election campaigns across the country to be run on small private contributions. The Goldwater campaign in 1964, the McGovern campaign in 1972, and the Democratic National Committee's telethon irt 1973 are good examples of successful fund-raising through small pti-. 235 CON '1_oRESSIONAL S 4558 RECORD March z/, _~ 197'_ -- SENATE vate contributions,but they prove only that such fund-raising may work in the unique circumstances involved in those campaigns, They do not prove that the method will work when every Senate, House and Presidential candidate is tapping the p001 of small contributors, The net result of such a system applied to all elections may simply be to put a premium on the best-known candidate, or the candidate who starts the earliest or who hires the best direct-mail expert as his fund-raiser, Nor would it be desirable, in my view, to adopt a program of matching grants for small private contributions as the form of public financing for general elco- ing grants,andlurgetheSen_tte toreject the MeGovern amendment. Mr. President, in closing, Z[et me add cmo further note. Mr. President today's I_ew York 'rimes contains an excellent editorial supporttrig the public financing legi_;lation now before the Senate. The editorial gives particularly strong support to two of the most important aspects of the bill--the provisions extending public financing to ,C{enate and House election, and the provisions mak_ lng public financing available for primary elections as well In addition, the bfil praises the leaders of the Senate who have done so nluch to make [his reform legislation pos- ,:he bat:king of the Ooldwater-Thurmond 12'roup. But this bhtffcan be calledifSenators Mansfield and Scott remain firm in ._mpport the innovation, bill. As-with of any the advocates of reform are vuhterable to the criticism that Lhey ar_ attempting too much. But primaries as well _s general elections need drastic improvement; in many one-party states, the 'primary provides voters with their only etfective choice. It would make no sense to re:form the financing of political campaigns at the Presidential level and leave House and Senate _nreformed. l%ight[y or wrongly, Congress as well as the Presidency suffers from a loss of public confidex:ce in this Watergate season. The members of Congress will be making a serfcms mi,._calculation about their own politicai futl_res as well as the fate of the insti- tions, s:ible. Senator I_(ANSFIELD,Senator to In the case of primaries, a system of ]_;YRD, Senator PASTORE, and ROBERT Senator matching grants is appropriate and is the method adopted by S. 3044. In fact, matching is the only realistic method of public financing in primaries, since it is the only realistic way to identify those HUGH SCOTT, mentioned in the editorial, have played a vital role in bringing this issue to the front burner cf national debate, and I i,m pleased that the edttorial recognizes their impo:_tant con-. who are serious candidates. The candidates who deserve public funds are those who have demonstrated broad appeal by raising a substantial amount of private funds from small contributions, Thus, if we are to have any public financing of primary elections, it must be accomplished through matching grants, In the general election, however, the nomination process has already ldenti- t::ibution. In particular, editorial's cleat tral role played the distinguished Senatm who has genuine bipartisan make this reform Over the years, an outstanding fled the major party candidates who deserve public funds. It is appropriate, therefore, as S. 3044 provides, to give them the full amount of public funds necessary to finance their campaigns, with the option for every candidate to forego all or part of the public funds if he prefers to run on private contributions. Thus, full public funding in the general election gives a candidate maximum discretion in running his campaign. If an extra layer of private spending is allowed, all candidates would be obliged to raise the extra amount as a guarantee that they would not be outspent by their opponents, AS a result, all candidates would be forced into the mandatol-y straightjacket of spending time and money to of election reform, and i,ll of us in the Senate can join in takir g pride in the effective contributions he has made to the cause of integrity in Gow_rnment and to fair, honest, and clean Elections. I ask unanimous conser.t that this editorial be printed in the Prco,m. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the RrconD, as follows: [prom the New York Tlme_, Ma_. 27.19_4_ Tm_ TIME IS N.)W Now is the time for a full _nd fundamental cleansing of the nation's outmoded, corrupt system of financing public elections wit& private money. Now is the time t_3 break the stranglehold of wealthy incividrials and of self-seeking interest groups over lhe n_tion's politics. Now is the time tc bring into the open sunli.ght of public responsl_,ility a systern half-publicly regulated and l_al.f-secret. If Congress oannot reform the nation's polltics in this sordid year of %qatergate, when wiu there be a more opportune't/me? The campaign re.form bill awaiting action in the Senate is an ad.mirabl_ measure. It has btpartisala backing as well as s_pport from ordhlary citizens across the country. Sena*_rs Mfi_e Mansfield, the majority leader, Robert Byrd, the majority 'vhip, and John Psstore,the party'schiefsp_,kesmanon this problem have given the billstaD;_rtDemocraticsupport.On the Repu')licanside Senator Hugh Scott, the minority floor leader, has been out in. front ur,_ing action on reform. 'The heart of the bill is a _harp reduction in the size of private contribu,tions and, as an alternative, an optional form of public financing. Opposition to this reform concept comes from diverse quarters. Presiclent Nixon is opposed, Senaior James Alien, Alabama De,mocrat, who serves as Gov. George C. Wallace's agent in the, Senate, is opposed. So are right-wing conservative Republicans led by 'senator Barry Goldwater and Strom Thurmond. %_ae biggest danger tc_ the bin is the t:hreat of a fill.buster by Senator Allen with raise small private contributions, even though marly candidates would prefer to spend that time and money in more productive ways in their campaigns, A system of matching grants in general elections would be especially dangerous to the existing two-party system, since it might encourage splinter candidates-for example, a candidate narrowly derented fna primary would be encouraged to take his case to the people in the genoral election,as an independent candidate or as a third party candidate. Under S. 3044, by contrast, a third party candidate with :no track record from a past election would still be able to obtain public funds, but only retroactively, on the basis of his showing in the current election, Thus, in its provisions offering full public funds on an optional basis for genoral elections, S. 3044 avoids the waste, pitfalls, and obvious dangers to the election process of a mixed system of publicprivate financing or a system of match- 236 I am :_leased at the recognition cf the conby Senator HUGH SCOTT, minority leader of the done so lnuch to lay the groun lwork that will possibh;. Senator SC0::T has been advocate of all aspects _;utions need in which they busi:ness-as-usua]. for reform, serve The and the if people people's they sense sense revert the needs heeding The ]principles underlying the reform bill are simple: Presidential and Congressional primaries would be financed by matching grants Thus, Presidential aspirar_ts would have to raise $250,000 in private contribuI:lons of $250 or less before they qualified i:o recel_e the matching sum orS250,000 from I:he Federal Govern/nent. Like climbing steps in a flight of stairs, the candidate would qualify for another quarter-_aillion dollars _ach time he raised the same amount pri_:ately. There would be an over-all limit of _pproximately $16 million, half public and half private, for each Presidential candidate m the primaries. The same principle would apply to House and Senate primaries except that the limit :m contributions would be lower---$1O0 or less--and each step in the staircase would be _ower. 825,000 in Senate races and $10,000 m the House. In general elections, the matching principle would not apply. Candi:lutes could finance their campaigns by pub_c long or private funds or any r_fix an of the two ;_.s as they stayed within over-all ::oiling. The bill would not lock parties and candidates ir.to a novel or rigid arrangement. :!?_ather, ii. curbs the abuses of private financ:ng and offers public financing as an alter::Late roul:e to elected office. Since the old private :route has become choked with scanfi;al, it cs_nnot---unreformed and unaided-serve democracy's need much longer. Now '._ the time to provide a public alternative. Mr. _cGOVERN. Mr. President, I l'._ave a perfecting amendment at the desk or_ the section the Senator from 2!alabama proposes to strike. I ask that lit be read. The ;PRESIDING OFi_CER. The amendn:,ent will be stated. The amendment was rea/[, as follows: On ps.ge 10, line 19, following the word '_:o", insert the word "one half". Mr. McC, OVERN. Mr. President, the lJ:'[rust of this amendment was designed _'ythe _'_enatorfrom Illinois(Mr. STEV]!NSON). It embraces a principle which I t:ery strongly endorse, whic:h is to coml:dne the concept of public fhlancing with limited private financing. I think sometiring will be lost in our political process if we go, entirely to the public financing (_:i campaigns. What this amendment (_oes, in. ,effect, is to say that the same concept that operates in the bill before l:,_ in the primaries shored operate in the general election. In other words, under the terms of the perfecting amendment I am offering, once a candidate is estab- March 27, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL lished as a nominee of his party, he is at that point authorized to receive onehalf of the amount of expenditures that the bill permits, rather than the full amount. The remaining half he would have to go out and raise in private contributions under the restrictions that this bill implies. It would have the advantage of giving the candidate the incentive to take his case out to the people, and it would have the advantage of permitring an average citizen to make an investment in the candidate of his choice, It would reward candidates with broad grass root support. It would strike a fayorable balance between those who say, "No public financing at all," and those who want to go the whole distance with public financing. I hope very much the Senate will adopt the amendment. I hope the Senator from Alabama will see it as an improvement over the section of the bill he is proposing to strike and that he might abandon his idea on this portion of the bill. Mr. zaLT,F.N. The Senator understands, I am sure, that under the checkoff provision there is already available 100 percent financing up to the amount set in this bfil in Presidential races: Would the Senator's amendment cut that figure in half? There already is a $21 million subsidy available to each party in 1976. Mr. McGOVERN. It would have no bearing on that. It would relate only to the language of the present bill. Mr. ,aLLEN. If all he could get is onehalf under this provision, how could he then get all under the other since it is all coming out of the public Treasury? IS it not? Mr. McGOVERN. Yes, but this bill prorides for a different method to finance campaigns. It applies not only to the Presidency but all Federal offices, I think the language would not have any impact other than to require the candidate to get one-half from private sources. Mr. ALLEN. No, it does not-say that. It says one-half from the public Treasury of his overall limit, It does not require a single dime to be paid in private contributions. Mr. McGOVER N. That is correct; but if you wanted to spend the total amount under the bill he would have to raise one-half from private sources, Mr. ALLEN. It looks like the candidate would have the option to proceed under the checkoff, which would give him $21 million without matching, or to proceed under this provision, which would give him $10.5 million with public funds, Mr. McGOVERN. May I ask the Senator what would be the impact of his own amendment in terms of the checkoff system? Mr. ALLEN. It would leave the checkoff system exactly where it is now. It would have no effect on it. Mr. McGOVERN. I cannot see where this affects it, because it does not relate to that language, Mr. ALLEN. The reason is that there would be no wording there at all for such provision, RECORD -- SENATE Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from South Dakota have the floor after disposal of the amendment Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, reservlng the right to object, what was the request? The PRESIDING OFFICER. That the Senator from South Dakota have the floor following the vote. Is there objection to the request? Mr. MANSFIELD. On the Allen amendment, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair assumed that the unanimous consent first was on the McGovern amendmerit. Would the Senator from Montana restate his unanimous consent request? Mr. MANSFIELD. I ask: for the yeas and nays on the Allen amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas and nays are requested, The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, a parliamentary inquiry. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan will state it. Mr. GI%IFFIN. What are we going to vote on first? Mr. MANSFIELD. On the Allen amendment No. 1064. Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, will the Chair state what the vote _qll first be on? The PRESIDING OFFICER. On the amendment offered by the Senator from South Dakota. Mr. GRIFFIN. So the vote first will be not on the Allen amendment, but on the amendment of the Senator from South Dakota to the Allen amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan is correct. The vote on the amendment of the Senator from South Dakota takes precedence. The hour of 3:30 having arrived, the Senate will proceed to vote on the McGovern amendment. Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President----Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas and nays are requested. The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, I move to lay the McGovern amendment on the table. Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, in view of the fact that we are speeding things up a little, I would hope, in the interest of expediency, that we could agree on a 10-minute vote limitation, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is so ordered, Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, a parliamentary inquiry. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senatorwillstate it. Mr. GRIFFIN. The vote now is on the motion to table the McGovern amendmerit. Is that correct? S 4559 The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-. ator is correct. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk called the roil. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. FULBRIC_T), the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. MONDALE), the Senator from Mis-souri (Mr. SYMXNGTON),and the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. WILLIAMS) are necessarily absent. Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the Senator from Oregon (Mr. HATFIELD) is absent on official business. I also announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. AXKEN) is absent be.cause of illness in the family. I further announce that the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. THURMOND) iS necessarily absent. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. TF/URMOND) and the Senator from Oregon (Mr. HATF_ELI0 Would each vote "yea." The result was announced--yeas 74, nays 19, as follows: [No. 89 Leg.] YEAS--74 Allen Ervin Montoya Baker Fannin Moss Bartlett Goldwater Muskle -nayh Gravel Nelson Bennett Griffin Nunn Bentsen Gurney Pastore Bible Hansen Pell Brock Hart Proxrnlre Brooke Hartke ' Randolph nuckley Haskell Ribicoff Burdiek Hathaway noth Byrd, Helms Schweiker Harry F., Jr.C. Hruska Holnngs Byrd, Robert Scott, Hugh Cannon Huddleston William L. Chiles Humphrey Sparkman Church Inouye Stafford Clark Jackson Stennis cook Johnston Stevens Cotton Kennedy Talmadge cranston Long Tower Dole McClure Wefcker curtis Magnuson Tunney DominJ:ck McGee Young Eagleton Melntyre Eastland Metzenbaum NAYS--19 Abourezk Hughes Packwood BellmonBeall JavitSMansfield PercyPears°n Biden Mathias Stevenson case McClellan Taft Domenlct McGovern Fong Metcal/ NOT VOTING--7 Atken Mondale Williams HatfieldFUlbrightThurmondSymingt°n So M;['. PASTORE'Smotion to lay on the table l_[r. McGOVERN'S amendment to Mr. ALL_.N'Samendment was agreed to. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ques.tion recurs on agreeing to the amend.lnent of the Senator from Alabama (Mr. ALLEN). NO. 1064. The yeas and nays have been ordered, and the clerk will call the roll. The ROBERT legislative C. clerkBYRD. called Itheannounce roll. Mr. that the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. FULBRrC,HT), the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. MONWLE), and the Senator from Missouri (Mr. SYMINGTON) are necessar.ily absent. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Missouri (Mr. SYMINGTON) would vote "nay." 23 P S 4560 CONGRESSIONAL RECOED ; Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the Senator from Oregon (Mr. HAYFIELD) is absent on official business. I also aimounce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. AIKEN) is absent because of illness in the family, I further announce that the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. THURMO_m) is necessarily absent, On this vote, the Senator from Vermont (Mr. AIKEN) is paired with the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. MONDALE). If present and voting, the Senator from Vermont would vote "aye" and the Senator from Mi_mesota would vote "nay." I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Oregon (Mr. I-_ATFIELD) and the Senator from and the Senate sideration. The Mr. HRUSKA. a bill to grant reli, indorsees of checks drawn on of the United! availability of ance fund. This measure to the Check statue (55 Stat. 64), which is a in the propriated reimburse payees whose, names are which were fora'ed South Carolina (Mr. THURMOND) eaeh vote "yea." The result was announced--yeas nays 61, as follows: 6274 would add alew ,,ection 4 to permit similar to payees and spe cial indorsees on _orgel checks drawn in U.S. dollars or !orei[:n currencies on depositaries by the Secretary ,Df the Treasury the United States or Rbrotu_l. A deficiency exis s in present law which does riot allow for full ::elief for payees would 33, pr,)ceed to its conwill be in order, t,resident, this is to and special negotiated depositaries by extending the check forgery insuruld add new language Insurance Fund 77; 31 U.S.C. §§ 561'fund established )artment out of ap¢hieh serves _o and ,,;pecial indorsees on U.S. check_ md paid on the . Specifically, Bellmen Bennett Brock Buckley Byrd, Harry F., Jla. Cotton Curtis Dole [No. 90 Leg.] YEAS---33 Dominiek McClellan East/and McClure Ervin Nunn Fannin Roth Font Scott. Goldwater William L. Griffin Sparkman Gurney Stennis Hansen Talmadge Helms Tower Hollings Weieker Hruska Alyourezk Bayh Beau Bentsen Bible Biden Brooke Burdick NAYS--61 Haskell Hathaway Huddleston Hughes Humphrey Inouye Jackson Javits Muskie Nelson Paekwood Pastore Pearson Pell Percy Proxmire Byrd,cannonRObertC. Case Chiles Church Clark Cook Cranston KennedyJ°hnst°n Long Magnuson Mansfield Mathias A{cGee McGovern EsndolphBibicoff Schweiker Scott, Hugh Stafford St evens Stevenson Taft currencies. bill is to Tunney \VJlllams Young 13'.S. Treasury deposJ ;ary 'there are now no n cans AMen Baker Bartlett Domenicl Eagleton Gravel Hart Hartke Aiken Flfibright was McIntyre Metcalf Metzenbaum Montoya Moss NOT VOTING--6 Hatfield Mondale So Mr. ALLEN'S rejected, EXTENSION GERY (No. E CHECK I O_sl _i%I_i 'RANCE FUND Mr. HItUSKA. unanimous consen be temporarily la! Senate proceed t( Calendar N'o. 717 The PRESIDI} BARTLETT). The title. The assistant slative 1064) be stated read as follows: A bill (H.r-¢. 6274) and special lndorsees ' > grant relief of fraudulently to payees ncgoti- ated checks drawn on designated depositaries of the United States y extending the ax'ailability of the check I )rgery insurance fund, and for other purpo_ _s. The PRESIDINC OFFICER. Is there objection to the re iuest of the Senator from 238 Nebraska? T] _ Chair hears r none situations in foreigD rely on where amendment and ask consideration. OFFICER. The be stated. dstant legislative clerk the amendment. Mr. President, I ask it that further reading be dispensed with. OFFICER. Without ordered. Fs amendment is as bill, add the following: 203(j) of the Federal .tive Services Act of 1949, 4g4(J)}. is amended-)ut 'or civil defense' in !paragraph (1) and in~ _of 'civil defense, or law enforcement and (2) by striking sentence of lieu thereof '(4), or "(3) by striking the last sentence serting in lieu the_ or (5) '; by insertin new"(4)pa:agraph as justice'; 'or (4)' in the first (1) and inserting in 5)'; it 'or paragraph (4)' in paragraph (2) and in_of a comma and "(4). after : paragraph (4) a "'(5) whether such surplus p_ operty (excel t surplus property allocated !.n with paragraph (2) of Lb is su:)section) is ;able and necessary for purposes of law and criminal justice, including res any State shall be by the AOm Enforcerflentma02.t!...,;sistance AdI .inistration, Law who shall allocat,! such propcrt r on the basis of 'need and utilization for tr _nsfer by the AdminisLrator of General _ _rvices to such State agency for distributi ,n to such State or to any unit of general lc :al gow_rnment or cornblnation, as defined sectio.n 601 (d) or (el of the 5:rime Control Act of i973 (87 Stat. 197), designated purs rant to regulations issued by the Law Enfo: 2ement Assistance Administration. No suh property shall be transfem'ed to any Sta e agency until the Administr _tor, Law Enfo cement; Assistance Adm[nistr trion, has rec, fred, from such State of tile proposed reef urse for claims [atte:: circumstances, law, claimants L mllst gulation,,; send to the desk for it._: The Pl_ amendment will Th( second proceeded to Mr. unanimous of the The PR_ object[on, it is Mr_ follows: At tile end of th "SEc 2. (al Sect Proper;y Administr as amended (40 U.f "(13 by striking tile sertin[!fir;;1; in sentence lieu Since and efficient settlement of finds, delays as 1cng as 2 years are fr ;quently experienced by payees and spec! _l er dorsees seeking settlement, tt.]._. 6_ 14 _ould provide a logical and proven remedy for prompt agency, a certificatic that such property is uaahl_ and needed f( ! law enforcement and .mrimin_,_.[ justice purpl _es in the State, and such Administrator ha determined that such ,_3tate _t_encw has col formed to minimum standards of operatic prescribed by such Administrator for th disposal of surplus property'; "(5) l)y redesignatir paragraphs (5), (6)i and (7) as paragraphs (6), (7), and (8), re- settlement through check forgery fund. Finally, it should _pectiv ,1v; ."(6) byAdministrator striking out Defense l:edesigrlated, and insel lieve a forger, or tr the by tk.efrom Tr4 to thefundforgew, by cover 3aid _re in foreign countri, banking laws _[nd FOR- clerk for a tis-. and cer1o innocent ps.yThe Check: currently prodrRwn in U.S. del- The LIEder _ need _rornpt provide arising Moreover, .Vfr. President, I ask . that the pending bill [ aside and that the the consideration of H.R. 6274. O. OFFICER (Mr. 11 will th lars, but does not where the checks Symington Thurmond amendment H.R. or indorsees of forged checks are , rawn on U.S. Treas.ury depositaries in countries and paid on occasion J foleign currencies. The increased use U.3. checks drawn Oil foreign aad the increased incidence of instluments on such. accounts esl resource tain relief can be ecs and special ]Forgel7 Insurance rides relief for ehee March 2 7, 1974. -- SEN.,-_,TE the the is located. for timely und,, retained ,e noted that in the use of msferee subsequent asuIer does not reany liab:[lity on the [{nd the Federal (6),Civil in paragraph as :ing in lieu thereof a l_Mnistr[A;or, and the A_ ninlstrator, Law comma 'the Fede al_dminkstration'; Civil Defense lorceme_t and Assistance EnAdand check, and all amou its recovered by the Treasurer as a result of s leh liability are credited to the fund as necessary _0 reimburse it. Mr. President, thl; measure makes a simple r,evision of 3resent law which broadens the author: ed use of the check forgery insurance fl nd, and in certain "(7) t)y striking out or paragraph (4)' in i::aragraph (6), as redes _nated, and inserting in lieu thereof a comm , and '(4), or (5)'. ;,.mended "(b) ,_ection (40 U.S.C. 203(k) 484 , 4) r) (4)) of ,is suchamended-Act, as -(1) by striking out 'or' after the semi,:olon in clause (D); "(23 ty striking out tte comma after 'law' n clausb. (El and inser_ .ng in lieu thereof a instances by attthori lng the use of for.,. eign cu:rrencies :;o ma[ e ploper settlemen_ ill a logical ard tin ely fashion. I rec- _,enMcolon and 'or'; "(3) by adding ::¢; the:'ollowingnewcl ommend "'(Fl Assistance the Administ: ,tot, Law in Enforcenent Admini tration, the case {:.::'personal property tra_ sferred pursuant to m._bsecti:_n (j) for law en oreement and crim:hal just.ce purposes,'. "(c3 c',eetion 203(n) of such Act, as .nlendel; (40 U.S.C. 484 ri)), is amended-"(1) ty striking out i: the first sentence its pa,;sage. Mr. MANSFIELD. ,VII'. President, we have order? The PYtESIDING ,FFICER. The ate will be in order. Mr. HRUSKA. M President, I to the Senator from · .rksnsas. Mr. McCLELLAN. Mr. President, may Senyield ][ qtnd the head and lmm of any diately use: Fe feral after agency clause deslg- March, 27, 197_ CONGRESSIONAL the defense and maintenance of our economic strength by bringin_ to us the essential elements to the survival and prosperity of our country and our o_l.daily lives, The American Legion salutes the U.S. Merchant Marine in its [lual role as an essential element of our natty[hal security and a vital arm of transport in,providing the needs for our economic surviv[1. The American Legion is in your corner, ar_l we believe the American people general][' are going to become more and more favorably inclined toward a strong U.S. Merchant Marine as your tmp6rtance in the daily lives of all of us becomes more widely l_lown and better understood. / Thank you verym_eh. Now, ask before I rel aquish this podium, would Mr. Jaspel Baker, President of theI Propeller Club of tk United States to join me here for a'momen Mr. Baker, The At _rican Legion has long shared the concern _ the Propeller Club of the United States in ,romoting and supportlng an American me ;hant marine adequate to meet the requir nents of the national security and the e, ingrate welfare of the United States. ! We appreciate th_ forthright manner in which you have purm ed your total objectives and we are proud c[ the cooperative relationship we have enjoyed with the Propeller Club as we have sought mutual objectives :[or the good of thesq great United States of America. _ In recognition of I;his shared effort it is my personal prtvile_ and pleasure to present to you on beha of The American Legion this plaque _ich is inscribed as :[ollows: The American Leg n commends the Propeller Club of the Ui [ted States for its outstanding and conti_ uing contribution toward a strong, mode 'n American Merchant Marine capable of m_ eting our nation's ecGnomic and defense ne :ds. Presented this 19t day of M,arch, 1974, Mayflower Hotel, Wa _ington, D.C., and attested by ou.r Nation [ Adjutant Bill Yfauck and signed by me as ational Commander. Mr. Baker, please :ept this with our best wishes :[or the success of the Propeller Club of United States as you strive to fill a vital need. ORDER FOR A.M. ON MINIMUM Mr. unanimous consent lng in at 10 o'clock Senate adjourns journment until morning, The PRESIDIN( objection, it is Mr. will allow us the three special business, Mr. President, I sent that the morning business, equally divided from New Jersey the Senator from FIN) or whomever Mr. GRIFFIN. should be. Mr. MANSFIELD Or whomever he that the vote on on the minimum wa Mr. JAVITS. Mr. ator will yield, ther_ AND FOR BILL Mr. :30 TO 9:30 VOTE President, I ask instead of cornwhen the it stand in ada.m. tomorrow OFFICER. Without ered. Mr. President, that 1 hour for and morning sk unanimous conthe conclusion of 11:30 a.m., be the Senator WrLLrAMS) and (Mr. CalF._ may designate, ,_minority leader, it designate; and conference report occur at 11:30 a.m. if the Senno objection, RECORD -- SENATE but I wondered vhether, at that I am for the re] )rt as I am the time, as retaking S 4565 eral election laws. This independent Commission is urgently needed to insure member, it wouZ minority leader nated could assr position out of t] Mr. MANSFI_ Mr. GRIFFIB speak for the [be understood that the or I, or anyone design time to anyone in opat 1 holE:? LD. Oh, yes. I am sure that I can distinguished minority full, fair, and expert supervision of tile provisions of this legislation. The amendment on public financing which received, majority approval by the Senate in December was later filibustered to death on this floor. I opposed that fillbuster because of the urgent need for the leader in givi assurance, Mr. JAVITS. much. The PRESID objection? lg reforms embodied in this bill. I am aware, howewer, of the sincerity of some of nly colleagues who wanted more time to study and perfect tlhis public financing legislation. I am hopeful that these COlleagues will now come forth with con- Without obj_ the hank Senator the that Senator G OFFICER. very Is there i_ w ' it is so ordered, FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN A_'MENDMENTS OF 1974 ACT structive suggestion_ on how to improve the bill before us. Pro_msals to finance at least some of the costs of Federal elections campaig:ns from public funds are not a recent devel- The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill (S. 3044) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing of opment. Almost 70 years ago, President Theodore Roosevelt suggested such measures ill his state of the Union address to the Congress. President Roosevelt stated : It is well to provide that corporations shall primary and general election campaigns ][or Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating to the financing and conduct of such campaigns provide for not contributeand furthermore to presidential to or national the publication of both contributions a:nd expenditures. There is. however, always dan- campaigns, IV[IL JAVITS. Mr. P::esident, I ask unanimous consent that on the canspaign financing bill, Charles Warren of nly office may have the privilege of the floor, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered, CAMPAIGN REFOR]ViNOW Mr. MATHIAS. Mr. President, the Senate has an historic opportunity before it to restore confidence in our publib institutions and public leaders, to reform our political process, and to reinvigorate political life in America on the eve of our Nation's bicentennial commemorations. I earnestly hope that we seize this opportunity courageously and imaginatively by passing the type of comprehensive, broad-based, balanced reform of Federal elections campaigns that is embodied in the pending legislation, S. 3044, the Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974. In some ways, it is a sad commentary that we must even confront the necessity of this legislation today. By this I refer not only to the sordid realities of the Watergate experience which has so shaken the confidence of Americans in their political institutions and leaders. I also refer to the fact that most of the provisions in this bill before us have already been passed by the Senate, only to languish and wither from callous neglect. Campaign legislation has been bottled up, corked and cast out to sea to drift until it sinks foiever to an unmarked grave, Yet these are the circumstances we face, and we must make the most of them. The bill before us attempts to do just that. It combines the basic features of S. 372, which passed the Senate last summer, and a public financing amendment which passed thc Senate in Decamber. S. 372 includes restrictions on both contributions to campaigns and expenditures by c?mpaigns. S. 372 also establishes an independent Elections Cornmission to oversee and enforce these Fed_ ger in laws of this kind, which from their very nature are difficult to enforce of eibforcement: The danger being lest they be obeyed only by the honest, and disobeyed byepenaltythe unscrupuloUS,upon honest sCreen.aS Theret° aCtisonlYaw;ry as radical measure which would, I believe, work a substantial improvement in our system of conducting a campaig'n .... This proposed "radical measure" which President Roosevelt endorsed, was public financing of major campaigns. More recently, former Ambassador s:ad Senator Hem_y Cabot Lodge, who was President Nixon's running mate in 1960, sponsored specific legislation to begin partial public financing. In his recent book, "The Storm Has Many Eyes," Ambassador Lodge explains his support ]!or this legislation: The talk of an 'office market' and of putting high executive and diplomatic missions on the auction block--all this breeding of suspic_ion and cynlc.ism--wonld disappear overnight if the primary cause of the evil were obliterated at its roots. If there are no bidders, there can be no auction. Many other distinguished Americans and recent Presicients have echoed the sentiments expressed by President Roosevelt and _lbassador Lodge. Of course, to(lay, we already have partial public financing. Americans who make political contributions are entitled to a tax credit of up to $25 for their contributions, or a tax deduction of up to $1i)0. This reimbursement is a form of public financing which passed the Congress overwhelnfingly and which has been helpful in encouraging and rewardlng small contributions. In addition, there is in operation the "$1 tax checkoff." Under this provision of the 1971 Revenue Act, each taxpayer can earmark $1 of his tax money to go to a special fund within the Treasury which can be used to finance the general c!._ction campaigns of candidates for the Presidency. I am pleased that the response to this measure by the American t_xpaycr this year has been such thai; it apieears that there will be a sufficient 239 S 4566 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATI,] amount in this special fund to cover the costs of the general election campaign of Presidential candidates in our bicentennial year. I believe that this response indicates that the American people are dedicated to ending the dominance of big.. money and secret contributions in political campaigns, I do not maintain, of course, that the bill before us is perfect in every way. It provides, for example, for virtually 100p_rcent, public financing in general election campaigns for Congress. I believe that this degree of public support is unnecessary. The goals we seek could be reached by supplying a moderate amount of public funds, and permitting candidate to supplement this public contribution by small private contributions. I believe our goal should be to insure that all serious candidates have an adequate amount of flmds, but this does not mean that all such candidates must receive all their funds from public sources. Despite this weakness, and others more minor in nature, I believe that this bill year which included ma:ly of the prov!_ the state _rties. If you aren't ,: _:tremel,/ careful you will freeze out or lock ;,t_ mine: _ parties. These are real problems ',,.'iti_ si!; cif_cant policy c_nsequenees that '!]::_o_e who drew uD the various public fi::_ancing proposals tended to i_,nore. Public financing will have two significant ,! !![ects o]r_third Dartie_, neither desirable. In _:]:::e first; place, it wgI discriminate against I _!,nuine national -third-party movements I:;uch aa that of _eor_e Wallace in 1968i ] ,ecause _uch parties ha-'em't h_d the chance ':o establish a voting record of' the kind rec aired to qualify for fi'_anc*ng. On th,_ other h_nd. once a third party _ ualifies :for future federal financing, a vested i :c_erest arises in kee_i_r it alive--even if _;]_.e 6_eor'_e Wallace who rave it its sole reas:)n for e_:istence should move on. Thus we rltn the clsk of finan_In_ a _roliferat_on of l:_,rties ti_at could destroy the stability we (The Senate is scheduled to take up campaign reform legislation this week. S[_he bill. under oonslderaton---S 3044---includes, among many 'changes, a proposal for public financing of campaigns. Sen. Buekley (C.1{.-N.Y.) has made an i_-depth study of the entire measure and in the following exclusive contributing to their campaigns and voting for them on elec_inn day. I'ublic financing might allow eanditates to ignore these issues, fuzz their stands and run campaigns in which intelligent debate on important mattells is subordinated to a "Madison Avenue" approach to the voters. interview discusses the numerous practical and constitutional objections to the bill.) Q. President recently made lengthy statement Nixonon campaign reform.a rather What Let me give you a couple el exanaples. DurJng the course el the 1972 campaign, it is :ceported McGovern rr.oney was forced I;he need thatfor Sen. campaign to placeby [weater emphasis on his support of a Vier_'mm pullout than his pclitlcal advisers t: ',_.ve his::;oric_aHy end-yea *l_rTtloh our twot: _,rty sys'!;em. Q. Zen say public financing rai_e_ grave c:mstitu-I;:onal questions. Are y'ou saying that t::_ese plans might be _truck down in the c,:mrts? A It i_!. obviously rather difficult to say in s!tw_rlee iast how the courts inight decide 'v hen we don't know how the case ,will be bt. ought before them, but I do thine there :b a real possibility that subsidie_, expendi- FEDERA]L ELECTION ACT AMENDM_S CAMPAIGN OF 1974 The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill (S, 3044) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing of primary and general election cainpaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating to the financing campaigns. [Mr. CANNON. information that the amendment and Mr. conduct President, of the Senate, Senator that of such for the I understand from Alabama he is ready to has an offer and on which he is willing to agree a very short time limit. If that is so, as soon as he returns to the Chamber, we will try to have the amendment laid before the Senate and try to get a 20-minute time limitation and have another vote this afternoon, Mr, HAR}_tY F. BYRD, JR. Mr. President, the able Senator from New York (Mr. BUCKLEY) gave an exclusive interview to the magazine Human Events in connection with the pending measure, $. 3044. Senator BUCKLEY has made an in-depth stl_dy of this measure, and the questions and answers in this article are very illuminating. ][ ask unanimous consent that the text of the interview be'printed There being no objection, was ordered to be printed as follows: SENATOR JAMES BUGKLE¥ REFORM was; your reaction A. There were in the REcent. in the material the i_ECORD, ON CAMPAIGN to his proposals? too many proposals included 1_1 this package to allow me to give you anything even approaching a definitive alzswer here, but I will say that I find myself in teneral agreement with the tt_rust of his proposals--especlally as compared with those included in S 3044, the bill recently reported out of the Senate Comn_ittee on l_ules and Administration. thought wise. They felt that he should have down_layed the i_s,,e a_d conce:_trated on others that might be better received by thc electorate, ][ don't; doubt for a minut_ thai; the sena'tor's emphasis on his Vietnam position hurt hl._, but I wonde_ if we really wa:at to move toward a system :;hat would allow a candi- The President's proposals seem designed to deal with the problems h_ our present system, while the Senate bill we will have before us shortly would scrap that system. I would be among the first to admit that our present system of selecting candidates and financing campaigns needs reform,_ut I am not at all convinced that we should abandon it for a scheme that would diminish citizen partieipatton in polities and, in all probability, would create more problems than it would solve, date to avoid such issues or gloss over posttic,ns of concern to millions )f Araericans. The need to ccnrt the s_pport of other [_roups creates similar probltms. Those who be'iieve that we should maintain a friendly stance toward Israel, for example, as well as those who think a candidate should support re]ion positions on a whole spnctrum of issues want to know where a eandiiate stands before they' give him their vocal and financial su]pport The need to compete for campaign dollars forces candidates to address many 242 't_re lin: rations and contrib_tion ceiling_ c :_uld be found unconstitutional. Ail ofali t!nese proDo._al_ raise 1st Amendment crnestions since they all either ban, limit or direct a ._:itizen's right of free speech. lin this Hght it is interesting to note that ,'_ three-J_._dge panel in the District of Co!urnk._a has already found portions of the 1971 s :'b unco:m;titutional. The IC'Vl Act prohibits the media from eh. urging for political advertising unless the candidate certifies that the eh.argo win not cause his spending to exceed the limits in]: ;_sed by _he law. This had the effect of rest_lcting the freedom both o:[ individuals %_isbing I:] buy ads and of newspapers and o;her media that might carry them and, in ti.) opin[::m of the D.C. court, violated the l_;t; Amendment. Q. But 13enator, according to the report p:'epared by the Senate Rules Committee on S 3044, Jif is claimed that these questions Ma,'ch 27, 1973 CONGRESSIONAL were examined and that the committee was satisfied that objections involving the effect of the legislation on existing political, arrangements were without real functions, A. I can only say that I must respectfully disagree with my' colleagues on the Rules Committee. The committee report discusses a number of compromises worked out in the process of drawing up S. 3044, but I don't think these compromises do very much to answer the objections I have raised. The ethical, constitutional and practical questions remain, The fact is that the ultimate impact of a proposal of this kind on our present party structure cannot be accurately predicted, S. 3044 may either strengthen parties because of the crucial control the party receives over what the committee calls the "marginal increment" of campaign contributions, or it may further weaken the parties because the government subsidy is almost assured to the candidate, thereby relieving him of substantial reliance on the "insurance" the party treasury provides. One can't be sure and that alone should lead one to doubt the wisdom of supporting the bill as drawn, As for third parties, the effect of the bill is equally unclear. It does avoid basing support for third parties simply on performance in the last election and thus "perpetuating" parties that are no longer viable. But the proposal does not deal, for instance, with the possibility of a split in one of the two RECORD -- SENATE major parties--where two or more groups claim the mantle of the old party, Q. Senator Buckley, advocates of public financing of federal election campaigns claim that political campaigning in America is such an expensive proposition that only the very wealthy and those beholden to special interests can really afford to run for office, Do you agree with this claim? A. No, I do not. First, it is erroneous to charge that we spend an exorbitant amount on political campaigns in this country. In relative terms we spend far less on our campaigns than is spent by other democracies and, [rankly, I think we get more for our money, Thus, while we spent approximately $1.12 per vote in all our 1968 campaigns, the last year for which we have comparative figures, Israel was spending more than $21 per vote. I say this because I am convinced that given adequate time a viable candidate will be able to attract the fnancial support he needs to get his campaign off the ground and thereby overcome the initial advantage of a personally wealthy opponent. And I am also convinced that a candidate who doesn't appeal to the average voter won't get very far regardless of how much money he throws ii,to his own campaign, My own campaign for the Senate back in 1970 illustrates this point rather clearly. I was running that year as lhe candidate of a minor party against a man who was willing and able to invest more th_n $2 million of his family's money in a campaign in which he began as the favorite, I couldn't possibly match him personally, but I was able to attract the support of more than 40.000 citizens who agreed with my posttions on the issues. We still weren't able to match my opponent dollar for dolIar he spent I wice as much as we did---but we raised enough to run a creditable campaign, and we did manage to beat him s,t the polls. At the national level it is. just as difficult to say that money is the determining factor and the evidence certainly suggests that personal wealth won't get a man to the White House. If it were the case that the richest man always comes out on top, Rockefeller would have triumphedow.'r Goldwater in 19_4, Taft over Eisenhowcr in 1952 and neither Nixon nor Stevenson would ever have received their parties' nominations, What I'm saying, of course, is that while money is important it isn't ._verything. Q. Wouldn't public financing assist ehallengers trying to unseat entrenched congressmen and senators who have lost touch with their constituents? _J. I don't like to think of myself as overly cynical, but neither am I naive enough to believe tllat majorities in the House and Senate are 'about to support legislation that won't at least give them a fair shake, The fact is that most of the "reforms" we have been discussing work _;o the advantage of the incumbent--not the challenger. The incumbent has built-in advantages that are difficult to overcome under the best of circumstauces and might well be impossible to offset if the challenger is forced, for example, to observe ail unrealistically low spending limit. An index of comparative cost of 1968 reveals that political expenditures in democratic countries vary widely from 27 cents in Australia to the far greater amount spent in Israel. This index shows the U.S. near the bottom in per vote expenditures along with such countries as India and Japan. Second, I think we should make it clear that the evidence suggests that most contributors---large as well as small--give money to candidates because they support the candidate's beliefs, not because they are out to buy themselves a congressman, a governor or a President. Many of those advocating federal financing forget this in their desire to condemn private campaign funding as an evil that must be abolished, Anyone who has run for public office realizes that most of those who give to a campaign are honest public-spirited people who simply want to see a candidate they support elected because they believe the country will benefit from his point of view. To suggest otherwise impresses me as insulting to those who seek elective office and to the millions of Americans who contribute to their campaigns, I don't mean to imply that there aren't exceptions to this rule. There are dishonest people in politics as there are in other professions, but they certainly don't dominate the profession, Q. But doesn't the wealthy candidate have a real advantage under our current system? A. Oh. he has an advantage all right, but I'm not sure it's as great as some people would have us believe, Incumbents are constantly in the public eye. They legitimately comm_nd TV and radio news coverage that is exemp,: from the "equal time" provisions of current law. They can regularly communicate with. constituents on legislative issues, using franking privileges, Over the years they will havre helped tens of thousands of constituents with specific problems involving the federal government. These all add up to a massive advantage for the incumbent which may weLL require greater spending by a challenger to overcome, Q. V/hat kind of candidates will benefit frompublic financing? A. Any candidate who is better known when the campaign begins or is in a position to mobilize non-monetary resources must benefit as compared to less-known candidates and those whose supporters aren't in a position to give them such help. This is necessarily true bE,cause the spendlng and contributions llr_.lts that are an inegral part of all the public funding proposals I have seen even ou_; only one of the factors that will determine the outcome of a given campaign. Other factors therefore become increasingly important and may well determine the winner on ,_lection day. Thus, incumbents who are unusually better known that their challengers benefit because experience has shown that _, challenger often has to spend significantly more than his incumbent opponent simply to achieve a minimum degree of recognition, In addition, consider the advantage that a candidate whose backers can donate time to his campaign will have over one whose back- S 4569 ers just; don't have the time to donate. In this context one can easily imagine a situa-. tion iii which a liberal campus-oriented can-. didate might swamp a man whose support comes primarily from blue collar, middleclass workers who wouhi contribute money to their man, but don't have tinie to work ill i_:iS campaign. Or consider the candidate running on an issue that attracts th.e vocal and "indepenct-. ent" support of groups; that can provide tel-. direct :support without failing under the limitations imposed by law. The _qeetivenes.'; of the anti-war movenient and the way in which i_sue-oriented anti-war activists were able to mesh their efforts with those of friendly candidates illustrates the problem. David Broder of the Washington Post noted in a very perceptive analysis of congressional maneuvering on this issue that most mem._ bers seem to sense (:hat these reforms will, in fact, help a certain kind of candidate. His comments on this are worth quoting at length. . . . IT]he votes by which the public financing proposal was passed in the Senate had a marked partisan and ideological coloration. Most Democrats and most liberals in both parties supported public financing; most Republicans and most conservatives in both parties voted against it. 'The presumption that liberals and Demoerats would benefit from the change is strengthened by the realization that money is Just one of the sources of influence on a political contest. If access to large sums is eliminated as a potential advantage of one candidate or party by the provision of equal public subsidies for all, then the election outcome widl likely be determined by the ability to mobilize other forces. "The most important of these other factots are probably manpower and publicity. Legislation thai; eliminates the dollar lllfiuence on politics automatically enhances the influence of those who can provide mallpower or publicity for the campaign. "Thai; immediately conjures up, for Republicans and conservatives, the union boss, the newspaper editor and the television anchorman--three individuals to whom they are rather reluctant to entrust their fate of electing the next President." Q. You indicated a few minutes ago public financing will cost the American payer hundreds of millions of dollars that many Americans might be forced to to candidates and campaigns they find pugnant. A. That's right; it is estimated that plan envisioned by the sponsors of S. would cost nearly $3(;0 million every that taxand give rethe 3044 four years and other plans that have been discussed might cost ewm more. Necessarily, this will involve spending tax dollars, extracted from individuals for the support of candidates and causes with which many of them will profoundly disagree. The fundamental objection to this sort of thing was perhaps best summed up nearly 200 years ago by Thomas Jefferson who wrote: "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions whielx he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." Q. But won't this money be voluntarily designated by taxpayers participating in the check-off plan that has; been in effect now for more than two years? A. Not exactly. As you may recall, tile check-off was originally established to give individual taxpayers a chance to direct one dollar of their tax morley to the political party of their choice for use in the next presidentiai campaign. When it was extended by the Congress last year, however, the ground rules were changed so that this year taxpayers are not able to select the party to which their dollar is to be dirt_ted. They are slmpiy allowed to designate that the dollar shon;ld 243 S 4570 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE go into the Presidential Election Campaign Fund to be divided up at a later date. Thus, while the taxpayer may still refrain from participating he may well be directing his dollar tO the opposition party if he elects to participate. A theoretical example will illustrate this. Let us assume that two candidates run in 1976 and that the money to be divided up amounts to $10 million dollars. Half of this would go to each candidate, but let us further assume that 60 percent of this money or $6 million is contributed by Democrats. Under this set of circumstances a m!llion Democrats would unwittingly be contributing to the campaign of a candidate they don't support and for whom they probably won't vote. If S. 3044 passes things will get even worse. During the first year only 2.8 per cent of the tax-paying public elected to contribute to the fund. This disappointing participation was generally attributed to the fact that it WaS difficult to elect to participate. Therefore his year the form was simplified and a great effort is being made to get people to participate, As a res_tlt about 15 percent of those filing appear to be participating and while this increasc seems to warm the hearts of those who :have plans for this money it will not raise nearly enough money to fnance the comprehensive plan the sponsors of S. 3044 have in mind. Therefore they have found a way to increase participation. Under the terms of S 3044 the check-off would be doubled to allow $2 from each individual to go into the fund, but tihe individual taxpayer will no longer have 'go designate. Instead, his $2 will be automatically designated for him unless he objects. This is a scheme designed to increase participation reminiscent of the way book clubs used to sell books by telling their members they would receive the month's selection unless they chose not to. As I recall, Ralph Nader and his ¢riends didn't like this practice when book clubs were engaged in it and one can only hope that they will be equally outraged now that Uncle Sam is in the act. But S 304_ goes further still. If enough people resist in spite of the government's efforts to get them to participate, the Congress will be authorized to make up the difterence out of general revenues. So, after ail is said, It appears that the check-off is little I happen to believe ratl_er strongly that tlhis is the case with publ.c fiixancing and with prx)posals that would impose arbitrary limits on campaign spending a:nd, thereby, on political activity. The same problem must be faced if we decide to limit tlqe size of individual political contributions. In this area, however, I would inet oppose rea_;onable tirlits that would neither unduly dlscrimina :e against those who wish to support candidates they admire or give too great an advantage to othe_ groups able to nlake substantial non-mone.., tary contributions. The least dangerous form 3f regulation and tlhe one I suspec; might prove most effective in the long run :.s the one whick_ simply tmposes disclosure requiremer ts on candidates and political committees. The 1971 Act-which has never really k sen tested--was passed on the theory that m_jor abuses could bes_ be handled by full anc open disclosure, The theory was that if candidates want to accept sizable contribution.,, frets people assoeiateci with one interest or cause as op.posed to another, they sholtld be allowed to do so as long as they are willing to disclose receipt of the money. The ;oter might then decide :if he wants to support the candidate i:aspiteolU--or because of--lbs fi:aancial sup.13crt he hits received, The far-reach:.ng disclosure requirements written into the 1971 Act _,ent in effect in April _972 after much of tLe money used to _.nance the 1972 campaigns had already been raised. This nxortey--raised prior to April 7, 1972--did not have to be reported in detail and it wits this unreported money that fir;anced many of the a_tiviti _s that have been l:acluded :in what has come to be known as the Watergate affair. I feel that th(.' 1971 Act, as amended last year, deserves a real test b,.,fore we scrap it. It didn't get that test in 19,2, but it will this fall. I 'would hope, theref(,re, that we will wait until 1975 '0afore eonsideri!ag the truly radical changes under cons:deration. On _he other hand, there are a few loopholes _hat we can close right away. It seems to me, :for example, that wa mlg:at move ira.P,aediately to bar: cash cont:-ibut:[ons and ex_,enditures of more than, saT, $100. Q. So you believe that "Iull disclosure" is the answer? A. Essentially. But I don"; want you to get the idea that disclosure laws will solve all more a fraud the most taxpayer, This than to me is one on of the objectionable features of the whole scheme. It is an attempt to make people think they are participating and exercising free choice when in _act their choices are being made for them by the government, Q. If there are problems and you can't support public financing, just what sort of reform do you favor? A. I said earlier that I prefer the general thrust of the President's message on campaign reform as compared to the direction represented by S 3044. The President, unlike the sponsors of the Senate legislation we will soon' be debating, seems to grasp the prob- our problems or that Ithey create new problems. simplythemselves feel that don't they create fewer problems and are more likely to eliminate gross abuses than the other raeasures we hav..= discussed Q. You say that "full dis_'.losure" laws also create new pro'01ems. What kind of new problems? A. Well, you may recall t:mt Sen. Muskie's 1972 primary campaign ret,ortedly ran into trouble after April 1972 because a number of his larger contributors were Republicans who didn't want it publicly known that they were supporting a Democrat. The disclosure requirements included in the 1971 Act clearly inhibited their willingness to give and, therefore, al; least aIguably had what constitutional lawyers call a "chillirg effect" on their right of self-expression, These were large contrib'xtors with promLnent theil decision toin give should names. not be Perhaps viewed as lamentable the lems inherent individual aof :free society. in any overly rigid and group political regulation activity in have toactivity recognize any regulation of We political raisesthat serious consritutional questions and involves limitations on the freedom of our citizens. This has to be kept in mind as we analyze and Judge the various "reform" proposals now before us. Our Job involves a balancing of competing and often contradictory interests that Just isn't as easy as it might appear to the casual observer, Thus, while we are called upon to do what we can to eliminate abuses, we must do so with an eye toward side effects that could render the cure worse than the disease, 244 context oil the p_rposc of th_ act. But consider the smaller contributor who might want to give to a .mndidate viewed with hostility by his employer, his friends and ct:hers in a position _ retaliate. How s bout the bank teller who '_ants to give $10 to a candidate who wanis to nationalize banks? Or the City Hall erfploye who might want to give $5 to the man run:alng against the incumbent mayor? Wha_ effe,_t might the knowledge that one's em]_loyex could uncover zhe fact of the contrib atlon have on the :r,.'larcn' 2 7, 19 74 ,:!.esirevent this measure going into effect before the November election, The Senator from Alabama would receive$350,000, and the SenatorfromAlabama does not even have opposition in the November election. The Senator from Pennsylvania would get a subsidy of $1,236,000. The Serlator from Missouri, who was here a few_mo-. ments ago Mr. MANSFIELD. He is still here. Mr. ALLEN. The Senator from Mis-. souri (Mr. E_,GLETON) would pick Up a check for $487,650 at the start of his reelection campaign. Mr. President, we are going to give the Senator from Missouri an opportunity tomorrow to vote against that subsidy for his race out there in Missouri. The Senator from Missoul'i does not beliew_ he needs it. He thinks he will win without it overwhelmingly. I do not believe he needs that kind of a subsidy. Mr. President, that is what the amend-ment would eliminate. It would leave the Members of the Horace of Representative'; and the Senate subject to the wishes of their constituents, subject to letting the constituents have some little influence and input into their thinking, their cam-paigns, and their philosophy. They would be approachable by' lheir constituents, and not just look to the public Treasury for paynaent of their campaign expenses. Mr. President, put any limit you wish e.n overall expenditures and the Senator from Alabama can live with it. Wipe out contributions, for all the Senator from Alabama would care. Put any limit what-. soever on it. Limit contributions to $10 or $5, but leave it in the private sector. Do not turn it over to Uncle Sam. Do not have Members of Congress dipping into the public till to pay the costs of elections of Members of Congress. Tomorrow the Members of the Senate. _ and the, House of Representatives will have the opportunity to take themselves out from under the provisions of this campai2n subsidy bill. Mr. MANSPrELD. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? I_r. A)r,LEN. I yield. 1JNANI _,v_,,trr_'_-.CONSENT AGt EEMENT Mr. MANSFI LD. Mr. President, would the Senate: consider the possibil.. iW of a time lim] ;ation on the pending amendment, aftra th/.' vote on the con-ference report on he minimum wage bill tomorrow? Mr. _LLEN. B_fore or after, it does not matter to tle Senator from Ale-. bama. I shall be glad to agree to any time the distingt shed majority leader would say. I am eady to vote. Say 30 minutes? Mr. MANSFIEL Mr. President, I ask unanimous censer that at the conclu-sion of the vote , the conference re-. port on the minir urn wage bill tomorrow, there be a time limitation of 1 hour on the pend ag Allen amendment, with the time to i e equally divided be-tween the distin_ iished Senator from Alabama, the spot or of the amendment (Mr. ALLEN), and bhe chairman of the committee, the d stinguished Senator f_'_m Nevada (Mr., hxr;_-oN). The PRESIDIN( · OFFICEI_. Is there objection? The Ct air hears none, and it is so ordered. Mr. MANSFIELI ,. Mr. President, with the approval of the Senator, I ask unani-. 24 '7 S 4574 CONGRESSIONAL RE CORD -- SEN ATE March £ 7, 19 74 moas corme_t tha$ following the disposition of the_ller_amendment, the distinguished 8._at_r from Maine (Mr. HATHAWAY) be_]_e4ognized for the purpose of offering l_amendment. Mr. HA'rHAWA_. No. 1082. The OFFICER. Is there objection? The hears none, and it is so ordered., Mr. with the approval of the Senator from Alabama, I ask consent that on the Hathaway amendment, the : amendment be brought u] The PRESIDIN( objection, it is so oJ tered, Mr. MANSFIEI_X. Would the rotor consider a limitatk _ on that Mr. ALLEN. Yes. The same be fine. Mr. MANSFIELI ,. Mr. _: the second. Allen an_ :ndment, imous consent tha , as in the case of the first Allen amm dment now pending, there be a time llmi ation of I hour, with the time to be e( aally divided under the same circumsta roes. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, reserving the right to object as I understood on the first ()ne it wo id be 30 minutes to be equally divided. Mr. MANSFIELE Oh, I thought the Senator had sugge_, _d 30 minutes to a side. I will. change t]e request to 30 mtn- cepted, I hope. It_ amendment No. 1066'. candidate. The 1 State committee could I ask that my ar_endment be read. do lit_cwise. [ The PRESIDI_NG OFFICER (Mr. My amendm(_nt would prevent that BARTLETT). The (]hair would advise the from happenin_ It wotfid be a more Senator from Mai_e ths t that would take equit_fble for a distribution of unanimous consent, funds to be by both the national Mr. I ask: unanimous committee and State committee. consent that my amendment No. 1066 I lnderstand that thE: distinguished may be at this time. Senator (Mr. CANNON), the The Ot'FICER. Is there chair:nan of committee, has no obobjection to the uest of the Senator jectien to this _endment. I also underfrom Maine? stand that it been cleared with the Mr. ALLEN. President, reserving minority side that there is no objec= the right to provided it does not tion (:n that side replace the consent agreeMr Mr. President, do I ment given on act[on on the other understand now that, under bill, I have no the t_rms of amendment, the ha- The OPFICE_R. The Chair tional commi could spend 2 cents would advise the from Alabama per v)ting age pulation in that State that it will not do but not to $20,000 or not to exWithout i; is so ordered, cecal $20,000 is greater, but and the clerk state the amendment, the population would depend on The legislative read as follows: the S_ate or the which it is to be On page 73, wi$h line 3, strike spent? through line 22 and i:lsert in lieu thereMr. That is correct. g: Mr. CANNON. the case of the House (1)law Notwith., other provithe ceiling figure with _ect toany limitations on. Of contributions, would be $10,000 the 2 cents per vot_he corem cf a political party ing ar;e _, whichever is higher and a o:_ a political party, in thst' includin committees of a Mr. The :fixed amount is State expenditures in $10,0(0. connection , general .election camMr. CANNON. is a fixed amount, paign of for ]_eder_l office, subthen, without the 2 cents formula? jeer to the co atalned in subsections (2) and (,' Mr. :Chat is the ceilutes to be equally di ided. "(2) The committee of a political ing, o:_ course. Mr. AI.I._EN. And 30 minutes on the party may not expenditure in con.Mr. CANNON. ery well. Yes, I do unother one also. nection with tZae election campaign derstsnd that correctly, and so far Mr. MANSFIELD And 30 minutes on of any candidate who is affili- as thi_ Senator is :oncerned, I am ready the second one as w_ [1. ated with that p_ whlct_, exceeds an to accept the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without amoun_ equal to 2 by the Mr. ! thank the dtstinobjection, it is so or( _red. voting United States. guish,d Senator Mr. ALLEN. Let n e state that the sec"(3) The of a political Th( OFFICER. The ond amendment tha ;the majority leader party, or a State of a politicai questi3n is on to the amendrefers to would take from under the bill party, ineludinl >committees ment of the .tor from Maine, No. the presidential nol dnation contests, of a State any ex- 1066. penditure ix% :tion with general Mr. MANSFIELD. Fhat is in the record election campa!q a candidate Federal Th( am was agreed to. now. I would like to _k the distinguished office in a Stat_ is _.ffiliated that Senator from Main, :f he would consider party which a time limitation )n his amendment "(A) in the a (andidate ORDER BUSINESS tomorrow, and if s( of how long. tion to the office c Sen;_tor, or of reMr. Mr. President, what Mr. HATHAWAY Mr. President, let sentative from a St where a is the pendin me say to the dis' [nguished majority rive is required sta_ewide, the Thc OFFICER. The leader that the Sen ,tor from Michigan of-amend:ment of ,_ Senator from Ala= (Mr. GRIFFIN) and debated this mat"(i) 2 cents by t]he voting (/Mr. ALLEN) is the pending quester yesterday, and ] think we said just population of , or about all that we w rated to say. There "(ii) $20,000; and are some other Senat }rs, aslunderstand, "(B) in the ease a (andldate for elecWho would like to sl; :ak in favor of my tion to the office Rep:'esentative in any amendment. There nay' also be some other State, Mr. President, the who want to speak n opposition to it. "(4) For purposes of th_ subsection--", shortly to come in I hesitate to preclud( them from talking On page 73, line 3, strike out "(1)' and at 9:30 There are three if they wish to do so insert in lieu thereo: "(A) '. special will take up to about On page 74, line I, str!ke out "(2)" and 10:15 'Lm. mo:ming business Mr. MANSFIELD That is a good inser_ in lieu thereo "(B)". ,, hesltatmn · · fOX' net to minutes, with statewaltz." I ,gree with the Senator completely that' re shouldhave Sen= Mx'. HATHAWA g. Mm. President, this merits to 3 minutes. At ator ORIFFXN and oil ers here tomorrow amendment woulc strike subsection (b) tlhe heur of ap] lately 10:30 a.m., the so that we can, m .ybe, arrive at an on page 73 and re }lace it with separate Senat,: will the time limitation agreement then. limitations with r _spec; to what a hacovering the report on the tional committee: nd a State committee minir_um wage the vote on which T thank the distir mished Senator. Mr. HATHAWAY. thank the distinguished majority lea( _r. AMENDMENT NO. 1066 Mr. HATHAWAY. Mr. President, I have an amendment 1 ere which I understand is acceptable both to the floor manager and the ran_ ing minority member of the committe( I do not think it will take :much time and it can be ac- 248 may contribute to, Federal office. Un stands, there is a may be used by b( committees for car it does not specify to individual cane as presented, th_ could funnel all ti to under its limit andidates running for er the bill as it now :ertain amount which ;h nstional and State fiidates in general, but amounts with respect date;. Under the bill nat.ona] committee e money :it is entitled into the race of one will o(cur at 11:30 ' Aft(r that vote amencment will t] business, with a ti_ half-l_our, to be eq_ After the conclus Senator from Mai: will offer his amen time imitation can row. I hope to disc_ ,_. _ke pending Allen ,n_e the order of e lil_itation of one dly d!_ided. m of tl_t vote, the _ (Mr. _[ATHaW^Y) mont. Hopefully, a ,e agreed oi_tomorss thls matter with SENATE FLOOR DEBATES ON 5.3044 MARCH 28,1974 March 28, 1974 The objection, it Mr. JAVITS. pared to yield CONGRESSIONAL Without remainderamofpremy time. Mr. WrLI,IAM,' back our time. The The agreement vote to occur at 11:30 a.m. agreement could by unanimens consent. Mr. JAVITS. yield _ur time. Mr. GRIFFIN. is the in the agreement? Mr. JAVITS. change. We want to yield our time. We no further speakers; unless we'have rum call Mr. GRIFFIN. Senator carl gest the absence a quorum. Mr. JAVITS. have only 3 Mr. GRIFFIN. call it off. Mr. JAVITS. r. President, X do not yield back my I suggest the absence of a quorum, The rOFFICER.The clerk will call the roll. The legislative proceeded to call the roll. Mr. JAVITS. President, I ask unanimous that the order for the The OFFICER.Without objection, it is so Under the order, the hour of 11:30 having the vote on t_he conference report now in order. The been ordered, and the clerk will can the The legislative called the roll. Mr. ROBERT BYRD. I announce that the Arkansas (Mr. Ftmsr_GH_), the from Alaska (Mr. OaAyE,.), Senator from Wyoming (Mr. the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. M , and the Senator from Rhode (Mr. PASTORE) are necessarily that, ff present and voting, the from Rhode Island (Mr. PASTORr) from Minnesota (Mr. MOND&_ ), .the Senator from Alaska (Mr. GRAW _), the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. Fur might), and the Senator from Wyominl (Mr. MCG_.E), would each vote "yea." announce that the Mr. GRIFFIN. Senator from Mar_ _nd (Mr. BEALL), the Senator from Mar 'land (Mr. MATHIAS), and the Senator rom SoUth Carolina (Mr. THin, meNU) _e necessarfiy absent. I also announce i mt the Senator from Oregon (Mr. _-IATIWl :LD) is absent on official business, I further annotr ce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr AmE_) is absent due to illness in the f_ rally. I further anno_ _ce that, if present and voting, the Si aator from Vermont (Mr. AIKEN), the: enator from Oregon (Mr. HATFtELV), th, Senator from Maryland (Mr. M_T}rxa_,_, and the Senator from Maryland (M: BE_LL) WOuld each vote "yea." I further annou ce that, if present and voting, the Sen ,for from South Carolina (Mr. Tmm_o_ D) would vote "nay." The result was ,nnounced--yeas 71, nays 19, as follows: ._bourezk Allen Baker Bayh Bellmen Bentsen Bible Biden RECORD -- SENATE _No. 91 Leg.l JYEAS--71 _rVeY Nelson Nunn H]brtke H_skell H[tthaway H_llings H Brooke H Burdick Byrd, Cannon Robert C. J_ J_ case J( Chiles Church Clark Cook cranston _[_ole Domenici Dominick Eagletoa Fong Griffin _xes _its Packwood Pearson vote on the fir: b Allen amendment there be a lirnitatio_ of 1 hour on the Hathaway amendmel to be equally divided between the di t, tinguished Senator from Maine (Mr. _.. _THAWAY) Pell nority leader o: whomever Percy Proxmire Randolph hate. Ribicoff Roth Schweiker Scott, Hugh Sparkmau Stafford Stevens Stevenson Symington Taft Talmadge Tunney Weicker Williams Young tis Aiken Beau Fulbright Gravel S 4701 tIruska McClellan McClure scott, dwater William L. Stennis Tower VOTING--10 Mondale Pastore _ee Thurmond Mr. President, I move that the reconsider the vote by which the report was agreed to' Mr. I move to lay that motion on The motion on the table was agreed Mr. to. _. President, I congratulate the approval of the conference S. 2747, the minimum wage of $1.60 an not since 1968. Since time has pushed the cost living up percent, Today's vote the third than 2 years th_ t the Senate proved an inere.* se in the economic dignit for those Americans at the _ottom of ladder. On one _ _casin the other refused to go to :onference and on other, our effort were vetoed by President. _ strongly urg_ the President to sign this bill into la_ S. 2747 fully r( ]ects the will of Congress and the put lc. Its provisions have been thoroughly _ _amined in committee in both Houses. It has been debated many hours. Eve y controversial point has been tested b._a vote in the Senate. The differences b_ tween the two bodies have been fairly _ompromised. It is a fine bill and shou] 1 become law. I also want to thank our chairman, Senator WrLLXA_' for his outstanding leadership and pe ;evera_ce in bringing this difficult piec_ of legislation safely through once aga: _. It is my strongest hope that this tin e we will see our efforts rewarded by becoming law. vsast_ous-co: 'SENTAGREEMt_NTS Mr. MANSFIEL] Mr. President, I ask unanimous censer that_:'following the The PRESIX INC_ and the mi- he may desig- OFFICER. Without objection, it is: ) ordered. Mr. MANSi_ _.I,F). I ask unanimous consent that il be in order at this time to ask for thc yeas and nays on that amendment. The PRESII ING OFFICER. Without objection, it is: _ ordered. Mr. :MA_NSF ELD. I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas an, nays were ordered. Mr. MANSF_ ELD. Mr. President, I. ask unanimous co_ sent that it be in order at this time i) ask for the yeas and nays on the se end Allen amendment. The PRESII lNG OFFICER. Without objection, it is ) ordered. Mr. _UIANSF _.Iff). I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. I_kNSPI ,_LD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous co_ sent that following the disposition of i ae second Allen amendmerit, the amc ldlnent to be offered by the distinguisl' _d Senator from Texas (Mr BENTSEN] may follow and that there be a tim limitation of'30 minutes on th*,_.t amel lment, the time to be equally divided Mr. C_IFFI: L Mr. President, reservlng the right tc object, I am not familiar with Bents ,n amendment. Mr. theCOOK. VIr.-President, I am familiar with the Allen amendments, 'but I afn not famj [ar with the Bents_m amendment, ell _er. I wonder if the majority leader wc lld consider holding that one in abeyanc_ Mr. MANSFIi',LD.Yes; I withdraw the request. Mr. ALLEN. for from Texas, said that his a no foreigner co campaigns It is lieve, that the _r. President, tile Senain conversation with me, aendment provided that dd contribute to electicm a recommendation, I beresident made. Mr. COOK. from Alabama ment of that unanimously wouJd not be to have t MAi_SF] [ay' I say to the Senator ; would think an amendature could adopted a voice vote,be and that necessary to have a _ollme for_iebate. V_LD.I will discuss theft I th_ that following the amendment, amendment for today Mr. suits me. Mr. If I may have the attention minority leader and the ranking of the Committee, the Senat has indicared that he be willing to consider a 30-minu_limitation on the third amendment on] _e same basis as the other two. I unc_ers_md that the amendmerit has to do ]witt_kthe positions of the Members of th_ 93al\Congress who will be running for c_ice th_ year. Mr. ALLEN. _unnin_ for the Presidency? [ 2:51 S 4702 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENA.TE Mr. COOK. I ha re no objection The PRESIDIN 3 OFFICER. objection, it is so d rdered, LEGISLAT to that. Without VE PROGRAM Mr. MAN'SFIEL _. Mr. President, mind the Senate on the extraditiol at 12 o'clock tome I rethat we have a vote treaty with Denmark 'row. There is a rmnor going arotmd th_ ; that would be the only business to_ )trow. However, it is the intention of tte joint leadership to consider amendm ;uts to the pending business, arid it is mticipated that there will be yea and n,' _, votes in addition to the vote on the tr aty of extradition. MESSAGES FRO _[ THE PRESIDENT 1Vfessages in wr tifig from the Presldent of the Unit_d States were eommunicated to the; _nate by Mr. Marks, one of his secreta_ Les. EXECUT .I_E ME_ SAGES REFERRED As in executive ession, the Presiding Officer (Mr_ HUDm STON) laid before the Senate, messages J .'om the President of the United State submitting sundry nominations, whicl were referred to the appropriate commi ;tees. (The norninatior; received today are printed at the eh( of Senate proceedings.) _ _ FEDERAL ELECTION AlVEENDMENTS CAMPAIGN OF 1974 ACT The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. ABOUREZK). Under the previous order, the Chair l,ays before the Senate the unfinished business, S. 3044, which the clerk will state. The assistant legislative clerk read as follows: A bfil (S.. 3044) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for p_bllc financing of primary and general election ca_tpaigns for Federal elective ofrice, and to amend certain other provisions of l_w relating to the financing and conduct of such campaigns, The Senate resumed the consideration of the bill. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The pending question is on agreeing to the amendment (No. 1109) of the Senator from Alabama (Mr. ALLEN), which the clerk will state. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to :read the amendment, Mr. ALLEN'S amendment (No. 1109) is as follows: On page 3, line 6, strike out "FEDERAL ' and insert in lieu thereof "PRESIDENTIAL". On page 4, line 6, strike out the comma and insert In lieu thereof a semicolon, On page 4, beginning with line 7, strike out through line 12. On page 4, line 13, strike out "(5)" and insert in lieu thereof "(4)". On page 4, line 17, strike out "(6)" and insert in lieu thereof "(5)". On page 5, line 6, strike out "any". On page 5, line 21, immediately before "Federal", strike out "a". On page 7, line 3, strike out "(1)'. On page 7, beginning with "that--" on line 5, strike out through 7 no page 8 and 252 insert In lieu thereof "that he Is seeking rLomtnation for election to the office of Presi-_ dent and he and his authorized committees have received contributions for his campaign throughout the United States in a total amount in excegs of $250,000.". On page 9, line 6, after the semicolon, in-. sert "and". On page 9, strike out lines 7 and 8 and i:nsert in lieu thereof the following: "(2) r_o contribution from", On page 9, beginning with "and" on lin,:, 13, strike out through line 19. On page 10, '_eginning with "(1)---" on li!ne 3, strike ou_; through line 16 and insert i:a lieu thereof lhe followilkg: "(1), no con.-, tribution from any person sh_ll be taken i:ato account to the exten: that it exceeds $250 when. added to the an.cunt of ali other contributions made by tha'; per.,;on to or for the benefit of that eandida_e for his primary election.". on page 13, beginning with line 16, strike, out through line, 18 on pag,; 14 and insert in lieu thereof the lollowing: "SEe. 504. (a) (1) Except _) th(; extent that, such amounts are changed under subsection (f) (2), no candl.date may make expenditures in any State in which he i_ a candidate in a primary election in excess cf the greater of---, "(A) 20 cents multiplied by the voting age population (as certified under subsection (g)) of the Sta';e in whict, suclh election Ls held, or "(B) $250,000.". On page 14, line 19, strtt:e out "(B)" and insert !tn lieu thereof "(1)" and strike out "subparagraph" and inser,; In lieu thereGf "paragraph". On page 14, line 20, strike out "(A)" and insert ia lieu thereof "(1 )". On page 15, line 8, beg:nning with ,'the greater of---", strike out th:'ough line 17 and insert in ).leu thereof "15 cents multiplied by 'the voting age population (as certified under subsection (g)) of Ohe United States.". On page 18, beginning with line 10, strike out through line 20. On page 26, lines 2 and 3, strike out "under section 504 of the Federal Electkm Campaign _ct of 1971, or". On page 71, beginning w.th line 20, strike; out through line 2 on page 73 _.nd insert in 1Leu thereof the following: "(a) (1) Except to the ,;xtent that such amounts are changed und,;r subsection (f) (2), no candidate (other th_m a candidate for zLomination for election to the office of PresLdent) may make, expenditures in connection with his primary election campaign in excess of the greater of--"(A) 10 cents multiplied by the voting age population (as certified _mder subsection. (g)) of the geographical area in which the election for such. nomlnatic.n ts iheld, or "(B) (i) $125,000, if tLe Federal office sought is that of Senator, _r l_,presentative from a State which is entttled to only one :_epresentative, or "(ii) $90,000, if the Federal office sought is that of Represer..tative from a State which Ss entitled to more than one Representative. "(2) (A) No c_mdidate fcr nomination for election to the Grace of President may make expenditures in any State in which he is a candiclate in a primary ele_'tion in excess ell two times the a_nount which a candidate for nomination for election to ';he office of Senalot fro:aa that State (or fcr nomination for election to the office of Dele _,ate in the case of the District of Columbia, _ae Virgin Islands:, or Guam, or to the office of Resident Cornmissioner in the case of t_erto Rico) may expend In that '_tate in co:_nection with his !orimary election campaign, "(B) NotwithStanding the ];,revisions of _ubparagraph (A), no such candidate may make expendittxes throughout the Unite([[ States in conne._tlon with his campaign for that nomlnatio:a In exce_,s of an amount March 28, 1974 equal to 10 cents multiplied by the voting age pot ulation of the United States. For pittposes o' this subparagraph, tlhe term 'United ,States' aaeans the several States of the United States, 'the District of Columbia, and the Commcnwealth of Puerto 1Z:Lco,Guam, and the Virgin Islands and any area from which a delegate to the national nominating conventioz_ of a political party is selected. "(b) Except to the extent that such arnoun _s are changed under subsection (f) (2), no candidate may make expenditures in conneci.ion with his general election campaign i_ excess of the greater of__ "(1) 15 cents multiplied by the voting age populalion (as certified under subsectiozz (g)) o_ the geographical area in which the electloi, is held, or "(2) {A) $175,000, if the Federal office sought is that of Senator, or l_eprasentative from a State which is entitled to only one :P_._presEntative, or "(B) $90,000, if the Federal office sought is that of Representative from a State which is entitlec to more than one Representative. "(c) No candidate who is unopposed in a primary' or general election may make expenditrres in connection with his primary or general election campaign in excess of 10 percent of the limitation in subsection (a) or (b). "(d) The Federal Election Commission shall prescribe regulations under which any expenditure by a candidate for nomination :forelection to the officeof P.resident for use in two ar more States shall be attributed to such c:mdidate's expenditure limitation in each mmh State, based on the voting age populalion in such State which can reasonably be expected to be influenced by such expenditure. "(e)(1) Expenditures made on behalf of any ca_tdidate are, for the purpose of this section, considered to be made by such candidate. "(2) _,xpenditures made by or on behalf of any cardldate for the office Of Vice President of the United States are, for the purposes of this _ection, considered to be made by the eandld_te for the office of President of the United States with whom he is running. "(3) For purposes of this subsection, an expenditure is made on behalf of a candidate, in eluding a Vice Presidential candidate, if it is aaade by-"(A) an authorized committee or any other agent ¢.f the candidate for the purposes of making any expenditure, or "(B) any person authorized or requested by the candidate, an authorized committee of the candidate or an agent of the candidate to make the expenditure,. "(4) For purposes of this section an expenditLre made by the national committee of a political party, or by the State committee of a political party, in connection with the general electl0n campaign of a candidate affillatel with that party which is not in excessc_the limitations contained in subseclien (i), is not considered to be an expendl'lure m_de on behalf of that candidate. "(f)(1) For purposes of paragraph (2)_ "(A) 'price index' means tlhe average over a calendar year of the Consumer Price Index (alt items--United States city average) published monthly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and "(B) 'base period' means the calendar year 1973. "(2) At the beginning of each calendar year (c_mmencing in 1975), as necessary data become available frorA the Bureau of Labor Statisti'.s of the Department of Labor, the Secreta:y of Labor shall certify to the Federal Election Commission and publish in the Fe(leral Register the percentage difference b_tween the price index for the twelve months preceding the beginning of such calendar year and the price index for the base peeled. Each amount determined under March 28, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD $ 47{)3 -- SENATE subsections (a) and (b) shall be changed by such percentage difference. Each amount so changed shall be the amount in effect for such calendar year. ,,(g) During the first week of January 1975, and every subsequent year, the Secretary of Commerce shall certify to the Federal gleetion Commission and publish in the Federal Register an estimate of the voting age population of the United States, of each State, and of each congressional district as of the first day of July next preceding the date of certification. The term 'voting age population' means resident population, eighteen years of age or older. "(h) Upon receiving the certification of the Secretary of Commerce and of the Secretary of Labor, the Federal Election Commlssion shall publish in the Federal Register the applicable expenditure limitations in elfeet for the calendar year for the United States, and for each State and congressional district under this section." On page 73, line 3, strike out "(b)" and insert in lieu thereof "(i)". on page 73, line 24, strike out "section 50_" and insert in lieu thereof "subsection (g); and". On page 74, strike out lines 1 and 2. on page 74, line 6, strike out "that Act" and insert in lieu thereof "the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971". On page 74, line 8, strike out "(c)" and insert in lieu thereof "(J)". On page 74, Une lO, strike out "(a) (4)" and insert in lieu thereof "(e) (3) ". On page '/5, line 6, strike out "(a) (5)" and insert in lieu thereof "(d) ,'. on page 75, line 11, strike out "(a) (4)" California, $1,900,000 in the State of New York, and lesser sums on down? All this amendment would do would be strike the House and the Senate from ollection of how hard it is to run from obscurity, and how hard it is to be a challenger. I think, Mr. President, that partic- the provisions of the bill. I do not believe that the House would accept the provision anyway, and I believe that the Senate should take the leadership and strike the primary and general elections of House and Senate Members from the bill. For another thing, matching funds are provided in the primary for the ularly in the cases of candidates for tZhe House of Representatives or the Sena_e, public financing creates a distinct advantage on behalf of the incumbents, and diminishes the chance for new and aggressive, intelligent and worthwhile challengers. It tends to cement the status quo of congressional affairs and is fsJr more sns- House of Representatives and the Senate, and this would actually aid the incumbents, in that we would match the private collections of sums up to $100 of House and Senate Members. Naturally the House and Senate Members, being incumbents, and being better known, ceptibZLe to unfavorable results than even the financing of a Presidential campaign from the public treasury, which I also oppose. On the scale of things, I must _,;ay that I oppose this more than I oppose that. So I very much hope that the Sens_te would be able to collect more funds from individual contributors, and then the Federal Government would match that amount, compounding the advantage that the incumbent would have. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired, Mr. ALLEN. I yield myself 1 more mtn- will support the amendment of the distinguished Senator from Alabama to exempt ourselves from public financing. If the matter of the setting of our own salaries is a patent conflict of interest, the matter of providing for our own war chests to campaign with is an even greater conflict of interest. ute. i_[r. President, it is not in the public interest to require the taxpayers to pay for the plqmaries, or half of the primaries and all of the general election expense, of Senators and Representatives, and I hope that the Senate will approve the amend- I thank the distinguished Senator from Alabama for yielding me this time. Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, will the Senator from Tennessee yield for a question? Mr. BAKER. I yield, if I have any more time. and insert in lieu thereof "(e)(3)". The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time for debate on this an_endment is limited to 30 minutes, to be equally divided between and controlled by the Senator ment. Mr. President, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished Senator from Tennessee (Mr. B_,KEg). Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I thank from Alabama (Mr. ALLEN) and the Senator from Nevada (Mr. CANNON). Who yields time? Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I yield myself 3 minutes. the Senator from Alabama for yielding SO that I could speak in support of the amendment, It is no secret here in the Senate that I do not look favorably upon public fl- Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield the Senator from Massachusetts 5 minutes. Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I oppose t/he amendment offered by Senator ALLEN tO strike the provisions of S. 3044 dealing with public financing of congressional general elections and congressional primaries, and I urge the Senate to reject the amendment. This amendment would merely take from under the bill the races for the House of- Representatives and the Senate, both for the primary and the gertera1 elections, Mr. President, I do not believe it is right for Members of Congress to provide that the taxpayers, through the public Treasury, should pay for their election campaigns. I do not believe it is right to present to a candidate for the Senate 15 cents per person of voting age in his State, to allow him to, run for the Senate. This would involve astronomical amounts of money. In the State of Callfornia, the public subsidy to a candidate for the Senate in the general election would be $2,121,000. In the State of New York, it would be $1,900,000. I do not believe that the taxpayers of the country should be caned on to finance elections of Senators and Representatives. I might_say also, Mr. President, that a strong public opinion in this country caused the Senate to vote against a recommendation of the President that the salaries of the Members of the House of Representatives and the Senate be increased by about $2,500. That was overwhelmingly vetoed here in the Senate. What would public opinion be about presenting a check for more than $2 million to a candidate for thc Senate in nancing of any campaigns, including Presidential campaigns. I think it would result in the distortive effect of contributions of large sums of private money givlng way to the distortive effect of large contributions of public money, with the inevitable effect of a proliferation of Treasury rules and regulations and bureaucratic redtape that ultimately will pervade a system of public financing, no matter how we try to avoid it. The election of officials to office at the Presidential and congressional levels, in my judgment, is the most intimate of all democratic processes. It was intentionally not structured into the Constitution, so that we would be entirely on our own, free of the dictates of the Government in deciding how we select our officials, But there is a very real distinction between a Presidential campaign, with two major party nominees who command the attention of the national press corps and the national media including television coverage, and the campaign of a typical candidate for the House of Representatires or the Senate, who does not have similar coverage, especially those who are challengers of established incumbents. I am an incumbent. Now, by the grace of God and the good will of the people of Tennessee, I have been here a little more than 7 years. But 7 years is not long enough to eradicate from my mind a rec- whelming vote. ceraents the existing law providing public financing roi' Preside:arial general elections. Obviously, Congress is not about to roll back the clock on the current dollar checkoff by repealing or deleting existing law. By what logic, then, can Congress fail to see the need for public financing of Jits own elections? The issue is the same under both amendments that _;enator ALLEN pluns to offer today--to strike public financing for all[ congressional elections, and to strike it for Presidential primaries. The logic is compelling, and we escape it at our peril If public financing is t:he answer? to the problems of private money and political corruption is Presidential elections, then it is also the answer to the problems of private money and politica1 corruption in other Federal elections, too. If public financing is good enough for the President, ii; is good enough for the House and Senate, too. If public :5nancirLg is good enough for general elections, it is good enough for primaries, too. For centuries, money and public service have been a corrosive combination in political life. And t/he more things change the more they remain the same. In "The Prince," Machiaw_l]i put the problcra clearly almost 500 years ago: At a very minimum, yesterday's over- 9__,53 S 4704 CONGRESSIONAL As a general rule those who wish to win favor with a prince offer him the things they most value and in which they see that he RECORD -- SENA YE Marc/_ 28, 19 74 The only real change today, when the favors avafiable from the modern Congress and the modem Federal Government would boggle the mind of any medieval prince, is that the most valued presents are not horses and arms, but contributions to political campaigns, Just as _Natergate and private campaign contributions have mired the executive branch in its present quicksand of COITupti0n, SO, I am convinced, the present low estate of Congress is the result of the ingrained corruption and appearance of corruption that our systern of private financing of congressional election ha_ produced, Today, in Congress, the problem has reached the epidemic level. For too long, we have tolerated a system of private finearing that anows the wealthiest citizens and biggest special interest groups to infect otzr democracy by buying a preferred position in the deliberations of Congress. It is no accident that Congress so often Mr. :tAKER. I thank the Senator from Cmtribu. :ionstn Alabama for giving me, again, enough C,mgress, Cash0n hand, time m} that we can have this colloquy Specialinterest groups 197;! 1974 wi,th tl.e Sen_or from Massachusetts. My response is, I do not think we Dairy......................... : $1, }89,001) $2.018,00,) from anyOil........................... 37,000 NA _should have any contributions one except qualified voters. I do not think _he Treasury of the United States, or One of the most.distressins: aspects of {:he trc_sury oI the State of Tennessee, these figures is the proof that Watergate ,:)r that any corporation, or association or has not even made a deft in the special co-op, or whatever, should make contriinterest war chests now being accumu-, butiom or give financial support to any fated for the 1974 electio_.s. Already, with campa!gn. Rather, I think that the supthe 1974 primary campai _qs hardly even port should come only from individual underway, the special :Jaterest groups [human beings who can vote. Corporahave collected more cash on hand for tions cannot vote. Common Cause canpolitical contributions in 1974 than. they not vote. Chambers of Commerce cannot contributed in all of 1972. vote. _hy should they contribute? I proAn equally distressing as!_sct is that :t_osed, and there is at 'the desk, an these figures vastly understate the real amendnent to the bill which I will call amount of special interest giving, since up later, that says that no. one except a t]hey are compiled only fr)m reports filed[ qualified voter can contribute. by registered political c)mmittees. Be-. That is my reply. cause of limits on current capability for Mr. ]_ENNEDY. Mr. President, so long analyzing the published reports, the fig.',_s we have private contributions, the ures are force([ to ignore co:ntributions special :interests will find a way to give by individuals. Yet, we _now that inditheir r_mney and make their influence viduals with a special interest in legislafe]t. tion before Congress omtributed iraAs '_ indicated earlier, the Commense amount_; to 1972 campaigns, and :moa Cause figures are only the tip of the tlhey are obviously tooling u]p to do the iiceberg because they reflect only the same m 1974. contributions reported or collected by fails to act; promptly or effectively on issues of absolutely vital importance to ali the people of the Nation--issues like inflation, the energy crisis, tax reform, and nation_ health insurance, to name but four subjects where the ineffective action of Congress, sometimes over'many years, appears to bear a direct and obvi- It is a hollow joke, a wry hollow joke whose butt is the people of ,_anerica, t(i read that oil committ _es gave only $37,000 for congressional elections in 1972, when we know from other estimates that oil executives contributed millions to both the Presidential a._d the congressional elections in 1972. ous correlation to the massive campaign contributions by special interest groups, It is no secret to any citizen that such interest groups have a stake at least in something 'worse, in flagrant the status quo, and often a disregard stake in of where the public interest really lies. In sum, Congress owes America a bettar legislation record on the issues, and the way to start is by ch;aning the etables of our own campaigns, by reforming the way we finance our own elections. Only when we have public ffraancing of our electionsthe public. will we in Con_ress truly represent will pleasure; often arms, seen that take rulers most ];eceive presentsso it of ia horses, piece of cloth of gold, precious stones, and similar ornaments worthy of their station. Not until we root out all the corrosive aspects of the present system will we be able to cu_., this worsening infection of our Ooverrrment, and bring our democracy back to health, Mr. President, I wonder Whether the Senator from ,4alabama and t:ae Senator from Tennessee are fanfiliar with the figures released, by Comraon Cause this To make the case for public financing morning, which show the sizable contri., of congreasional elections, need look butions made by the special interest no farther than the figures wereleased togroups to Members of Congress in the day by Common Cause. Beyond any rea1972 elections, and the s2:able warchests sortable doubt, these'figures demonstrate they haw., acemmulated for 1974. I won-. that special interest groups have a der what kind of reactio.1 the Senators stranglehold[ on only Congress, and by thatpublic the have to these disclosures, stranglehold can be broken financing. We already have publi', financing for Presidential elections. Why do we think The figures tell a dismal story of how in the House and the Sen _te that we are Congress is 'bought in each election year. "holier than thou" and that it is not necessary to have public financing for Contribal_.[embers of Congress? M)st specifically, tionsto Congress,Cashonhand, what is the reaction of th_ Senator from. Specialinterest groups 1972 1974 Tennessee to tile analys: s by Common Cause, which shows that ever 814 million To_ ................... $_4,000,000 $]4,20_,000 in special interest money has already Business professional ........ : 3,400,000 5,900,000 _.-en collected for the Set.ate and House Alllabm'..................... 3,SOO, 000 5,00o,ooo elections 'this fail? HOW does he respond. AFL-CIOBiPAC (NAM) ..................... ................ 410,847'000000309,000231, 000 on thai; issue tx) the amendment before AMA......................... 844,000 335.000 the Se:nate? 254 organi2ed political committees. They do not re_!ect contributions by individuals. 'get we know, as in the case, of oil money, that v_st amounts of special interest money come rolling in, ,each election !;,ear, iix the form of individual contribution_. We know why these special interest groups are bullding up their warchests roi: 197t. To take but one example, it is clear that this Congress is now welI into a major debate on national health insurance. t'ossibly, a comprehensive bill to _stablish a program of national health insurarce may pass the Senate and the ]f-Iouse before the end of the present sea_don. O:_: the debate may well carry over into th,., 94th Congress that convenes in Januar71975, after the congressional 'Aeetiors this fall. Obviotmly, health reIiorm and national health insurance are issues t:mt are now coming into the foreIront of the agenda of Congress. And _hat do we see when we look at _he Cor_mon Cause figures, published today, sh _wing the warchests that special interest groups have already aceumuiated f(r the purpose of making contri:rations to the 1974 elections? We find :hat ore of the special interest groups ';Tith th _ fattest warchests is none other :ban tl_e American Medical Association _m, nd its .._ffiliated political action commit':ees in the various States. Mr. t_resident, I ask at this point that :;_,nexce_,'pt from the Common Cause ma':erials _';howing the breakdown by State c,f the _i,._A warchest, may' be printed in _;ihe P_ECC,RD. .Ther( being no objection, the material ,,;res ordered to be printed in the RECOSO, :_s follows: March 23, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE S 4705 1974CAMPAIGN WARCHEST OFAMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION ANDITSAFFILIATED POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEES Closing date Organization (branches of American Medical Association) Committee name Ctosing Amount date Mar. 7,1974National ............ American Medical PAC .................. Dec.31,1973District ofColumbia Physcns CornForGood Govt--D.C ........... Executive. Feb.28,1974Alabama ............ Alabama Medical PAC ..................... Jan.31,1974Alaska .............. Alaska Medical PAC ....................... Mar.10,1974Arizona ............. Arizona Medical PAC ..................... Feb.28,1974Arkansas ........... Arkansas PAC .......................... Dec.31,1973California ............ California Medical PAC .................... Mar.10,1974..... do__? ........... Committee forGovtImprovement ........... Dec.10,1973..... do.............. L.A.CntyPhysicians Corem .............. Mar. 7,1974..... do.............. Professional Comm forGood Govt........... Feb.;'8,1974Colorado ............ Colorado Medical PAO ..................... Mar.10,1974Connecticut .......... Connecticut Medical PAC ................... Feb.28,1974District ofColumbia__ DistrictofColumbia PAC ................ Feb.31,1973Florida .............. Florida Medical PAC ..................... Feb.28,1974Georgia ............. Georgia Medical PAC ....................... Feb.28,1974Hawaii .............. Hawaii Medical PAC ...................... Dec.31,1973Idaho ............... Idaho Medical PAC ....................... Mar. 7,1974Illinois .............. IllinoisMedical PAC ...................... Feb.28,1974Indiana ............. Indiana Medical PAC ..................... Do....... Iowa ................ IowaMedical PAC ........................ Do...... Kansas .............. Kansas Medical PAC ...................... Feb.31,1973Louisiana ........ ,--- Louisiana Medical PAC ..................... Feb.28,1974Maryland ............ Maryland Medical PAC ................... Dec.31,1973Massachusetts ....... BayStatePhysicians PAC ................ Feb.28,1974 Michigan ............ Michigan DoctorsPAC ................... Mr. KENNEDY. We see from these figures that the AMA and its affiliates have already collected the massive sum of $889,000 in available contributions for the fall congressional elections. We also know the position of the AMA on health reform, which is a position of total opposition to the sort of national health insurance program that many of us believe is essential if the Nation is to have decent health care. Clearly, the AMA position will be well represented in the next Congress. Money speaks, and $889,000 in campaign eontributions speaks with a very loud voice indeed, But who speaks for the average citizen? Who speaks for the mother trying to get a doctor because her child is sick. Who speaks for the family driven, into financial ruin because of the high cost of serious illness? Who speaks for all the people fed up with a health care system that suits the doctors and the insurance companies very well, but that fails to meet the people's basic need for decent health care at a price they can afford to pay? That is the nature of the problem we face. There are probably only a handful of Members of this body who have not reeeived at least some contribution from one or another of these various interest groups. I think that public financing is the only realistic answer to eliminate the corrupting influence of the special inretest contributions on our Senate and House elections. We see the picture. The special interest groups are waiting with their checkbooks to make their influence felt. If this amendment passes, the effect will be to say that we in Congress are glad to get that money, that we welcome their campaign contributions in 1974 and on into the future. I oppose the amendment, and I hope that the Senate will reject it. Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I do not know what the parliamentary situation is at the moment. The Senator from Massachusetts asked me to yield, but on whose time, I do not know. We have been having this colloquy. If I still have the Orga nization (br_,nches of American Medicat Association) Committee name $60,520 Do....... Minnesota .... Minnesota MadPAC ................. 8,482 Do ........ Mississippi PAC ...................... Do....... ....... Mississippi Missouri ............. Missouri Meal PAC ................... 15,029Oct. 2,1973Montana .......... Montana PAC ....................... 1,375 Feb.28,1974Nebraska ............ Nebraska MedPAC .................... 13,392 Do...... NewJersey .......... N.J.ModPolitical Action ................ 4,411 Dec.31,1973NewMexico ........ N.M.ModPAC ..................... 178,517 Mar.10,1974NorthCarolina ....... NorthCarolina ModPoiEduc & Action Comm. 168 Feb.28,1974NorthDakota ..... N.D.Corem onModPoiAct.................. 14,002 Do.... Ohio .............. OhioIVied PAC ..................... ]56 Dec.31,1973Oklahoma ....... Oklahoma ModPAl;..................... 1,670 Feb.28,1974NewYork........... Empire Medical PAC ................. 4,156 Do....... Oregon ........... Oregon ModPAC ..................... 1,367 Do....... Pennsylvania .... Pennsylvania ModPAC .................. 22,943 De Island....... Island Med PAC .................... Do....... ...... Rhode SouthC arolina ....... Rhode SouthC arolina PAC ................... 34,232 2,629 Dec.31,1973SouthDakota ...... SouthDakota PAC .................. 991 Feb.28,1974Tennessee ......... Independent Medicine's PA(; .......... lA,594 Do...... Texas ............. TexasModPAC ................ 47,909 Dec.31,1973Utah............... UtahMedPAC ....................... 22,652 Do...... Virginia ............. Virginia MedPAC ................. 6,383 Feb.28,1974Washington .......... AMPAC--State ofWashington .......... 16,986 Do..... Wisconsin ........... WiscPhysician's PAC............... 27,294 Oo....... Wyoming ........... Wyoming PAC ....................... 1,022 25,320 Total.................................................. Amount $17,584 15, 26,884 380 2.37;! 7,999 8,8911 3,22].' 20,699 1,243 53,123 9,299 1,803 16,12i 50,874 l,6,405 160 I, 435 19,673 59,160 1,66_.L 6,840 10,084 16,085 1,894 889,088 floor, I should like to have 1 minute more to speak, Mr. ALLEN. I yield the Senator from Tennessee I more minute, Mr. KENNEDY. Whatever time remains to me I will gladly yield to the Senator from Tennessee. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee is recognized for I minute, Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I am really most distressed by the concept embodled in the remarks just made by the Senator from Massachusetts, which I read to mean that we can trust ourselves so little to cure the i119spotlighted by the Watergate case that we have got to throw the baby out with the bath water. I really am concerned that we do not consider ourselves to be good enough legal draftsmen or legislative scholars to be able to draft a way to prevent the special interests from having an effect on the elective process, I know half a dozen ways to do that without tearing down the destiny and the political system of this country, We could hand out $2 million in California or $365,000 in Nevada, or whatever, and pretty soon we will have a little booklet coming out that says "Federal Rules and Guidelines for Qualifying for the Expenditure of Funds"--and pretty soon the Federal Government will be supervising how campaigns are going to be run. Thus, we will have created political incest, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator from Massachusetts has expired, The Senator from Tennessee under.stands who is paying for what now. And one of the most obvious the people sore forced to pay is through ta._: loopholes. The Internal Revenue Code is; riddled with tax loopholes. The Amer-. ican public is paying l!or those loopholes. Vast amounts of tax welfare are being paid th:rough the tax laws to big con-. tributors and special interest groups. And we know who makes up the differ-. ence. The working man and woman, the middle income and the lower income groups are the ones who pay higher taxes to make up for the various tax loopholes. We kalow how those various tax loop-. holes have been obtained. As the Sen-. ator from Tennessee and every other Member of the Senate knows, it is through the work of the highly paid[ lobbyists and the special interest groups down here in the conference rooms and[ in the committee rooms and in the halls of Congress. They make sure that the loopholes are written in and stay in and[ they are always around when campaign, contributions are to be made. Se, make zlo mistake about it, Mr. and[ Mrs. Public, you are paying for the sys-. tern, and you are paying for it in hidden billions of dollars every year. All it takes to change the system and[ put it on an honest footing is to make sure that the public pays the bill for elections to public office. We are talking about a cost of $360 million over a 4-year period, to make Melnbers of Congress and the Senate, and the President o1_ the United States accountable to thE; people and not to the special interest,,;. Mr. KENNEDY. If I have any time remaining, I should like to have 2 miautes Mr. CANNON. I yield 2 minutes to the Senator from Massachusetts. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts is recognized for 2 minutes, Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, the thing the American public should understand is that they are paying for the system now. We hear the statements about the raid on the Federal Treasury. priceThat weisacannotbargainaffordbY anYnotstandard,to pay. a Several Senators addressed the Chair. Mr. _J_LEN.Mr. President, I yield 2 minutes to the Senator from Colorado (Mr. DOM_NZCK). The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-. ator from Colorado is recognized for 2 minutes. Mr. DOMINrICK. Mr. President, ]: thank the Senator from Alabama. Mr. President, I have not participated[ very much in this debate so far and I dc, not serve on the Committee on Rules and 25:5 S 4706 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SEN,,ATE Administration, but I think I have just heard the most illogical argument from the Senator from Massachusetts that I have heard in my whole life in the 12 years I have served in this body, and my 2 years of service in the House. Every single tax thing, including what he calls the tax loopholes, were originally put in for a social reason of one kind or another, like the tax loophole which gives an extra deduction, for example, to one wi]o is blind or over the age of 65. There is a whole group of things like that, which he lumps into so-called tax loopholes. It does not have a single thing to do w_th the bfil which is designed to put Members of the Senate and Merebers of the House in the public trough_ Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, will the Senator from Colorado yield for a question ? Mr. DO:MIN'iCK. I yield, Mr. KENNEDY. Would the Senator $_apport a bill to eliminate all the tax loopholes, say, by the end of this year, over a 2- or 3-year period, then rebuild them back into the Revenue Code, If they really serve a social purpose? I believe that many of those loopholes are dt]-ectly related to campaign contributions by the people who enjoy the benefits of the loopholes. Would the Senator be willing to test the social purpose of the loopholes by re-enacting them or is he simply prepared to continue Mr. DOMINICK. Is the Senator asklng me a question? I wonder whether the Senator from Alabama would yield me another minute to answer the Senator from Massaehusetts, Mr. AIff, EN. Yes. Mr. DOMINICK. I thank the Senator. The answer to the Senator from Massachuset_ is, "no," I would not support such a bill. A great many social projects are of extraordixmry impact in this country, One of the things I hope to do is to get a tax credit for higher educ,ation. We have passed it in the Senate twice, and I have no intention _f saying that the Senator from Colorado would simply eliminate these social practices which we try to accomplish in a tax bill. Besides, that comes out of the Ways and Means Committee, not out of the Rules Cornmittee, and has nothing to do with the public trough bill that is before the Senate now. I have been adamantly _gainst public financing from the very beginning. I am against it for any kind of race--Presidential, Republican, senatorial, or anything else--because all I can see is a continuing effort to get more and more money as expenses go on, increasing the amount of money we are going to be spending on public campaigns for elect;ion one way or another. As one who Is running this year, it would be helpful to me, of course, if we had public financing, But I cammt think of anything worse for the taxpayers of my State, for the taxpayers of the country, and for the country's government as a whole--its welfare, its honor, and its integrity. To have campaigns run on public financing is the worst thing I can think of. 256 The PRF_IDING OFFICER. Who yields time? Mr. ATJT,EN. Mr. President, I yield 2 minutes to the distirgulshed Senator from Mississippi (Mr. STEmWS). Mr. STEI_NIS. ! thank the Senator from Alabama. Mr. President, last year the Senate pass¢_l a good bill. I could not be here to participate ir_ that bill but I have been so concerned about elections, about wi}at has been happening, that I have gone into this matter rather thoroughly; and I cannot sup:port the l,rinciple of using taxpayers' dollars to _,ay for the campaigns, especially om* own elections, especially for the election of Members of the House of Rep]esentatives, who have oxzly 2-:gear terms. As a practical math._r, I know of :no scandal eonn,_ted with senatorial races or with races of Members of the House, either----the actual races for election or reelection. I have been here a good while, We have had some raatters come ?ap about funds collected _nd appreciation dinners, wha'_ever one wants to call it. But that was after the _lectlon was over. Some of that money, w,.· decided--in one case especially--was rrJsused. But I do not think Ccmgress h_Ls any record of scandal or any kind of ]'raud or anything fixed up. There is a se]fish angle, too_ The PRESIDING OPPICER. The time of the Senator has exrired, Mr. ,_%.T,_.N.I yield t_e Senatqr 1 additi onal minute, Mr. STEI_/IS. I fee] that to get into our races and to let the Laxpayers pay for them takes the people out of it, so to speak. The taxpayer P_Ws his taxes because he has to, and he should, of coume, But the idea of taking hl_ money and putting it to this use is contrary to what many people believe in. Worse than that, it takes the people out of the race, so to speak, because they fe_l th,'_t what they can do will not count. We have to get these elections back closer to the people, close]:' to their volunta_7 actions, to their enthusiasm, t_ their willingness to be actire citizens, to becorae involved. We need more people actively involved in these elections, patti mlarly congressional elections. The PRF_½IDING OFi_£CER. Who yields time? Mr. COOK. Mr. Pr,_stdent, will the Senator yield? Mr. CANNON. I yield 2 minutes to the Senator. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, it is my intention to vote against the proposal of the Senator from Alab:Lma, but I would be re:miss if I did not ssy th.._t one of the reasons why :l intend to do so is that I think the p_ple of tile United States have an opportunity to try what we have proposed for some time. I mu'st say, in all fa: mess, that I am surprised at '_he extrerae length of the indictment of DemocraCical:ly controlled Con_cesses that I have just listened to as to the Internal Revenue Code as it now exists, with what ale called complete and al_solute loopholes I think trust the avera_ge taxpayer who files his form 104_1 seems to thir_k of everybody who has _ loophole as not March 2.8, 19 74 being: an average taxpayer. I am thinklng _tbout the fellow who owns a gas start, m, the fellow who deducts for the utilization of his truck, which he also drives home at night because it is his vehicle, and that is a loophole. I an thinking of literally hundreds and :hundreds of things that give a little individml who is a small, independent businessman, not the l_ant businessman_ an opportunity and an incentive to b_,_ a businessman, an incentive to mak( a living. I _ ope that during the course of this deba';e we will not take into consideration such broad, sweeping statements that we are going to have an amendment that takes away aU loopholes. Wha'_ does "aH loopholes" really mean? What; are we really saying to the Interhal lqevenue Service? Wh.at are we really saying to every little individual who pays his taxes on a quarterly basis, not once :l.year? I tLope we will look at this situation from the standpoint that we now have an o])portunity to try a process that is not totally untried in the world of polith_s, and I think we aU know that. I kn)w how individuals on this floor feel, but if the Senator :feels that he is goin_ to try, he should try it at all levels of elective government. I _ now that the next amendment is goin_ to swing around and say that we will ,!lo it for this group and not that grouI,. I a;,_ree with the Senator from Massa_ chus_:tts that we have trod many misUses, and I think we have a tendency to overkill in the United States. Many times legislative bodies certainly do. But I believe this issue has been debated enoug.a so that it is no longer the issue of overkill, that it is now the issue that this _s a process that m:_y indeed work and can work; and if it does not work, obvio _sly the system can be changed. To '_he extent that we in the Rules Comr:fittee, under the l_dership of our distirguished chairman, have tried to work this matter out to the best of our abilit:7, this amendment would do a great injus_,ice to the work we did in the hearings _:a the bill. We feel that if we are going _ make this experimental to eh_mge the methods of campaignattempt oper_tiorr; in the United States, it has to be clone at the legislative level and must be done _,t the Presidential level. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, what is the ti :ne situation? The PRESIDING OY_'I:CER. The Sens_tor lrom Nevada has 2 minutes remainint. _.:'he Senator from Alabama has 1 minu_;e remaining. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield mysell_ 2 minutes. Th_, PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator f :om Nevada is recognized. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, Congress alreacy acted once on this matter and determined last year that the matter should be referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration and that we should, come back with a proposition for the fi:mncing of campaigns out of Federal f, mds. That is exactl.v what we have done. March 2:8, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL We do not provide in this law that every candidate must go to the Federal funding source. We leave it up to his option. If he sees a great danger in it and wants to go the private sector he may do that within the limits of the bill. Of course, we provide a limit on the amount, We will not see another situation, if this bill is passed, where Clement Stone and people like that can make tremendous contributions, or a committee, like the milk fund or a like organization makes tremendous contributions, 'because we have a limit. It means that a person who is unknown and wants to try, if he can demonstrate initially that he has acertain amount of appeal, can find the funds without going to private interest groups to finance a portion of his campaign, provided the funds are there, The law now provides for the checkoff provision. In this bill we increase that and double the amount of the checkoff and increase the amount of the tax credit or the tax deduction that may be taken, They can use those to provide funds to the candidate, I simply say the Committee on Rules and Administration is trying to comply with the instructions given it last year by the Senate in reporting a bill on this subject and we think we have done the best job we could do after holding hearings and listening to the testimony of witnesses who appeared before us_ Mr. President, I hope the amendment of the Senator from Alabama is rejected, Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, yes, the Committee on Rules and Administration did discharge its commitment in reportlng the bill, but there is no obligation on us to take the bill. It is just a vehicle for the Senate to express its will with regard to public financing, I do not believe that the people of this country, having rejected the thought of Congress raising its salary by some $2,500, will look with favor on Congress vetlng itself funds in the primary; up to some $2 million in California and lesser amounts down through other States for Members of the Senate to run their campaigns. I do not believe they want to see Members of Congress have their campaigns subsidized, This amendment will take House and Senate races, both primary and general elections, out from under subsidy provisions of the bill. I hope it is approved by the Senate. Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I rise in support of the amendment No. 1109 proposed by my friend from Alabama (Mr. ALLr_). The bill as it is currently written would establish public financing for all Federal political campaigns. I am opposed to this because I oppose public financing except in the case of Presidential and Vice-Presidential races. The huge amounts of money spent in the 1972 Presidential campaign--S60 million for President Nixon and $35 million for Senator MCOOVERN combined with the Watergate revelations indicate the need to change the method of funding Presidental campaigns, I support, and voted for, legislation sponsored by Senator RUSSELL LONG, of Louisiana, some years ago, to try the RECORD-- SENATE checkoff system on our income tax returns. By this system taxpayers can indicate on their tax forms whether or not they want $1 of their tax money to go to the financing of Presidential level campaigns. I believe that this measure, plus a proposed $15,000 ceiling on contributions, would stimulate a healthier atmosphere for Presidential campaigns, The huge sums required to mount a Presidential campaign force the candidate to seek out the big contributor--to whom he then feels some obligation. We should provide this candidate with an alternative--and public financing is such an alternative, However, I am opposed to establishing public financing for the congressional and senatorial races. This onslaught on the public treasury to pick up the tabs for campaigning and "politicking" all across America would create chaos. It would entice every Tom, Dick, and Harry to jump into the political arena and take his money, and hence take advantage of the public financing. It is nothing more than a subsidy program for all would be politicians, I do favor control on Senate and House races in order to keep down spendlng and disclose all facts concerning contributions and expenditures. One way to do this is to limit campaign expenditures to 10 and 15 cents per voter. Since this would put a ceiling on the total expenditures of a candidate, it would ehcourage him to go after smaller individual contributions instead of having to seek out big contributors to pay for an unlimited, and hence, expensive campaign. I feel that by limiting campaign spending, the candidates will be drawn to public financing in the true sense of the word--the solicitation of, funds from individual citizens. And I also favor a prohibition on receiving contributions from any source other than an individual contributor. No more milk fund shenanigans for example. The last Senator elected in South Carolina spent $660,000. With a voting age population in South Carolina of 1,775,000 and with a limit of 10 cents per voter on campaign financing, future candidates would be limited to spending $177,500 in their campaign. This would be a big improvemerit, I also support limiting the amount that an Individual can contribute to a campaign, and while I personally favor a $1,000 ceiling, I would agree on a cornpromise that would set $15,000 as the maximum contribution in Presidential races and $3,000 in Senate and House races, We must do away with the corrupting influence of big money--far more money than is necessary to present a candidate's views to the people. I think the steps I have outlined here can do the deed. At the same time, they will avoid the pandemonium that public financing and more government meddling are bound to create, Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I have said on numerous occasions that the most important task now before us is to restore the confidence of the people in their Government. Public feeling toward elected officials is at an extremely S 4707 low point. In fact, this Congress--despite its fine record--could muster a favorable rating from only 21 percent of the people interviewed in a recent Leu Harris sur-. vey. It appears to me, 'then, that this is the worst possible time for Congress to enact legislation that would provide for the use of tax dollars to finance centres-. sional campaigns. I have grave doubts th,at public financing of House and Sen:ate race,,; would ever be advisable, but :[ have nc, doubts as to this being the wrong time, of all times, to provide for Federal financing of House and Senat_' races. The bill now before us would allow every candidate in every primary for every House seat in the country to col.lect $45,000 from the U.S. Treasury. Those who survive the primaries could be rewarded with a $90,000 campaign chest from the Treasm_. Not o_fiy is the principle of using tax dollars to finance Senate and House campalgns highly questionable, but the amounts involved here seem way out el line with what would be considered real.istic limits. In the 1972 House races, for instance, 74 percent of ail the candidates recorded expenditures of less than $50,000. In.. stead of setting the limit at that level, the bill would set a $90,000 maximum. In other words, rather than moving to. decrease the high amounts spent in a minority of the congressional races, thc, bill wou.td actually encourage increased spending in the majority of such races. The amounts available for Senate, l_ces, although varying according to the particular States, are also high. In West Virginia, for example, the voting age population is listed at 1,228,000. That. means that $122,800 would be available for primary campaigns, based on 10 cents per voting age citizen; and $184,200 would be available for the general elec-tion, ba_%_clon a 15-Cent ceiling. If one of the objects of campaign re.. form is to limit expenditures--and that certainly should be a main objective---. then public financing of congressional campaigns is not going to accomplish it. Actually, public financing of Senate and House races threatens to increase ex.penditures, not only' by setting higherthan-needed limits, but also by opening a crack :in the Treasury for this kind of spending. No one can say that the 10cent and 15-cent limits contained in this bill will not be increased to 25-cent or 50-cent limits in the _uture. The public became enraged recently when there was talk of dollar-a-gallon gasoline. Imagine how enraged the same taxpayers will be-. come when there is talk of dollar-a-vote Federal expenditures for congressional campaigns. The way to bring about reform is not through the use of taxpayers' dollars for Senate and House candidates; but rather by setting limits--reasonable but strict limits--on what congressional candi.. dates can spend; limiting the amounts that single contributors can give to cam-. paigns; strict disclosure of contributors; and stricter enforcement of the law8 against violations. With all the problems facing the tax-. 257 S 4708 CONGRESSIONAL payers of this country today, we should be trying to find more ways to save their tax dollars--not new ways to spend them. Therefore, I support the amendment to delete public financing of congressional campaigns from this bill. The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time is yielded back. The question is on agreelng to the amendment of the Senator from Alabama. The yeas and nays have been ordered, and the clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. ROBERT C.' BYRD. I announce that the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. FULBr_0HT), the Senator from Alaska (Mr. GRAVEL), the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. MCGEE), the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. MONDAT.E), and the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. PasTORE) are necessarily absent. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. PASTORE) and the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. [V[CGEE) would vote "nay." Mr. the Senator from Maryland (Mr. BEALL), the Senator from Maryland (Mr. MAT_IAS), and the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. SCHWEIKEE) are necessarily absent. I also announce that the Senator fro m Oregon (Mr. _-_ATFI_LD)is absent on offirial business. I further announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. AXKEN) is absent due to illness in the family, I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Oregon (Mr. HATFIELD) would vote "yea." On this vote, the Senator from Vermoat (I_r. AIKEN) iS paired with the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. MONDALE). If present and voting, the Senator from Vermont would vote "yea" and the Sendtor from Minnesota would vote "nay." The result was announced--yeas 39, nays 51, as follows: [No. 9'2 Leg.] YEAS--39 Allen GRIFFIN. I announce Domlnick Baker Eastland Bartlett Ervin Bellmen Fannin Bennett Fong Brock Goldwater Buckley Griffin Byrd, Gamey HarryF., Jr. Hanson Byrd, Robert C. Helms Church Hollings cotton Hruska Curtis Johnston Dole Long NAYS---51 Abourezk Haskell Bayh Hathaway Bentsen Huddleston Bible Hughes Biden Humphrey Brooke Inouye Burdtck Jackson Cannon Javlts Case Kennedy Chiles Mansfield Clark McGovern Cook Mclntyre Cranston Metcalf Domenlci Metzenbaum Eagleton Montoya Hart Moss Hartke Muskie 258 that . Magnuson McClellan McClure Nunn Roth Scott, WilliamL. Sparkman Stennis Talmadge Thurmond Tower Weicker Nelson Packwood Pearson Pell Percy Proxmlre Randolph Ribicoff Scott, Hugh Sta_ord Stevens Stevenson Symington Taft Tunney Williams Young Aiken Beall Fulbrigh_ Grave]. RECORD -- SENATE NOT VOTINS--10 Hatfield l_ondale Mathias lF'astore :McGee flchwelker So Mr. AnLt:N'S amendment (No. 110!)) was rejected. Mr. CANNOlq. Mr. ]_resident, I move that the Senate recomider the vote by which the amendment was rejected, Mr. ROBEF_T C. BYP_D. I move to lay that motion on the table, The motion to lay cn the table was agreed to. AM_:NDMEN_ NO.xe;_2 The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will now proceed to the consi, ieration of the amendment by the Senator from Maine (Mr. I-IATHAW_Y), NO. 1)82. The amendment will be stated, The legislative clerk read as follows: On page 78, l:ine 19, redEsign_te subsection "(al" as subsection "(al (1)". On page 75, line 19, strike the word "per_on:' and substitute the word "individual". on page 75, line 22, strike tlle word "person" and substitute the 'vord "individual'. On page 75, followlng li:le 23, add the fol- March 28, 1974 becarse the area simply does not have the f_rads to provide, or because the candldat-_ is not very well known, these groul:.S provide a means of channeling outside into fund_ influence. the area while preventing any Mos_ liberal organizations, trade associalions, or business groups already have State, local, or regional affiliates as existing networks to support can_dates, and each of them may contribute large sums to each candidate. But citizen groul_s are usually national. They raise funds by mailings to the general public and would not have the means to multioly their committees and set them up in separate States. So the $3,000 limitailor which is at present in the bill for contr! buttons is not enough for broadbased citizen groups or nationwide organizations. An organization representing 80,000 or more people, such as the National Comnfittee for an Effective Congress, or 70,00(, such as the American Conservative lJnion, should be allowed to contribtlte m much as a man and wife contribute, under the bill, that amounts to $6,00(, lowing new subsection: '79) NO perscn (other than an individual) mayof,make a contribution lo, or for the fit a candidate for no:nination for beneelco- It _ _s been said that ii; would be preferab]e to have no group contributions at all that only individual citizens could lion, ofor all election, which, when made added by to that the sum other contributions _person for tha_ campaigr., exceeds $6,000." On page 7s, line 25, strike the word "person" and substitute the word "individuaF', On page 76, itine 2, strike the word "person" and substitute the word "individual". On page 76, :tine 2, strike the period and add the following: ", or from any person (other than a:a individual) which, when added, to the sum of all o_her contributions received from that perffon :!or that campaign, exceeds $6,000.". Mr. HATHAWAY. l_[r. President, I spoke the other day at some length in support of the amendraent. I am not going to burden Senators by repeating everyth_ng I said the other day, but I :;hould like to make a few points in sup]_ort of the amendment. The purpose of the smendment is to differentiate between individuals and organizations with respect to the contribulions limitation. The amenctment allows organizations to contribute $6,000 per candidate ratl_er than $3,000, which _s _he limitation now in the bill. The $3,000 ]imitation will still apply with respect to _[ndividuals. It seems to me that it is inequitable to equate one wealthy individual with an organization whose membership runs to hundreds or thousands. Large citizen group,;, 'whether they b_ liberal or con,';ervative, or single-issue groups, such as conservation groups, pe_ form a valuable function by serving a;; funneling organizations to give mod est contributors S, voice and an impact i:x the election. By giving to the polg;tcal committees that reflect their philosophy or views, more people get interested s_d stay interested in the electoral process, In areas where it is lifficult to raise funds for a statewide campaign, either make I agreeindividuals that it would be ni(econtributions. to have so many interest _d in our electoral process that we could rely solely on individual contributioI_s. Ultimately, that should be our goal. But at present, organizations that pool contributions from groups of citizens who ,,hare a view or an ideology perform _t valuable function in our system, aTld I feel that they axe being treated unfairly as individuals iii the committee bill. The PRESIDING Ot,_'_ICER. Who yields time? 1Vfr. GRIn's'IN. Mr, President, I sugvest tl_e absence of a quorum. I ask unani:nons consent that the time for the quoru:n call be charged to this side. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The Clerk will call t_ e roll. The assistant legislati've clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. HARRY F. BYRD, JR. Mr. President, r ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withou_ object ion, it is so ordered. Mr. HARRY P. BYRD, JR. I ask unani:nous consent that during the considerai;ion of the pending legislation, Mr. Philip P_eberg of my staff be granted the privilege of the floor. The PRESIDING OFI_q[CER. Without obj ecl [on, it is so ordered. Mr. I:IARRY F. BYRD, JR. Mr. President, '_ suggest the absence of a quorum. The _PRESIDING OFFICER. On whose time? Mr. HARRY F. BYRD', JR., On the same Jime that ran before I called off the quorum call. Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, will the Senator withhold that? March 28, 1974 Mr. HARRY CONGRESSIONAL F. BYRD, JR. I withdraw it. Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, I yield myself such time as I may require, The pending amendment would make a change that in my view is wrong in principle. As the biU is now written, special inretest groups--organizations that collect and distribute campaign money for business, labor, farm and other special interest groups---including the infamous milk funds---would be limited to $3;000 in the contributions made to the campaign of any candidate. The amendment proposed would increase that limit to $6,000. In my humble opinion it would be well if we could wipe out contributions of any size from special interest groups to a candidate's campaign. I considered offeting just such a counter-amendment which would eliminate even the $3,000 contribution. I recognize, however, that there would be little chance that such an amendment could prevail I shall not argue the constitutional issue--even though I recognize that it does exist. But whether the limit is $3,000 or $6,000 does not really change the constitutional arguments, The question, so far as I am concerned, essentia.lly is one of direction and principle. It is my view that to increase the limit from $3,000 to $6,000, as the Senator from Maine would do by his amendment, would be to go in the wrong direction; it would be going away from campaign finance reform--which is supposed to be the purpose of the bill. As the distinguished Senator from Tennessee (Mr. BAKES) said earlier today' in a colloquy, special interest groups do not vote; people vote. And it seems to me that we should be endeavoring, in this reform legislation, .to focus on more djrect participation by individual citizens rather than to encourage the channel of campaign support through special interest groups. When an dndividual contributes to a special interest group--whatever its ideology, philosophy or legislative purpose--and then allows the directors of that organization to determine which candidates should be supported opposed with his money, that individual is thereby delegating an important element of his own citizenship responsibility. I just do not think it is in the national interest to encourage that practice, This amendment, in my view, would erode and weaken the strength that is in the bill now. It should be voted down. I realize that in many campaigns--in some Senate campaigns and certainly in Presidential campaigns--the enlargement from a $3,000 limit to a $6,000 limit co61d be considered relatively insignificant. But the amendment would not be so insignificant, Isuggest, in many races for seats in the House of Representatives. At the present time, many candidates who run for House seats conduct their entire campaigns on total amounts of $12,000, $15,000, or $20,000. Certainly, in those situations, a $6,000 contribution coming from a special interest group would be a large portion of the total amount spent in the campaign, RECORD--SENATE It would be much better, it seems to me, if all contributions made to a campaign were to come directly from lndlvidual citizens and if there were cornplete and full disclosure concerning all such contributions, The amendment leaves open the possibility, at least, that campaign funds can be "laundered" through the conduit of a special interest group, Whatever may have been possible in the past in that regard, it seems that this practice should be eliminated. The people want clean elections', they want full disclosure, To allow contributions to be channeled through special interest groups could be a method of concealing and covering up financial support, rather than disclosing it. So, for those reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote down the amendment, Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. HATHAWAY. Mr. President, I yield to the Senator from Rhode Island. Mr. PELL. Mr. President, I rise to speak for the amendment. I have listened but have not had the opportunity to be exposed to ali the arguments on beth sides, I realize the point the Senator from Michigan is making, that this permits the enlargement of the laundering fund, but with all this legislation we have to weigh the good and the bad. My own view is that the organizations that would be most affected by the $3,000 limitation would be organizations whose contributions were basically small and that they should be permitted to contribute, because they are organizations that would be representing large groups of people, The $3,000 figure is an arbitrary figure, The $6,000 figure proposed in the amendment of the Senator from Maine is also an arbitrary figure. Perhaps the $6,000 figure more nearly meets the needs of the situation, It is for these reasons that I would respectfully disagree with the Senator from Michigan and support the Senator from Maine. Mr. HATHAWAY. M.r. President, I yield myself such time as I may require, I want to answer a few points raised by the Senator from Michigan. He pointed out that we would be allowing organizations such as milk co-ops to double the contribution which they can now make under the bill. To be sure, those co-ops have come under some surveillance in the recent past, and some suspicions have been cast on those particular organizations, but the same thing is true of some individuals. A husband and wife can give $6,000, and I suppose there are husbands and wives that might come under some suspicion as to what motivated them to make such a contribution. Certainly, in this bill, we cannot pretend to examine every potential contributor and say that only those who do not come under suspicion may make eontributions and those who are under suspicion may not do so. That is a matter for the individual candidate to judge for himself when he chooses to accept such a contribution. Also, I should like to mention that the S 4709 amount involved is not the point at issue there. Tine reason for tt_e amendment is to do equity and justice to organizations. Under the terms of the bill itself, an individual can give $3,000 and a husband and wife can give $6,000, even though ali. the money is coming from the husband.. This simply puts large organizations; which have marly members--and I have, already cited two such organizations--. the Committee for an Effective Congress and the Americans for Conservative Ac-. tion, which have 80,000 and 70,000 mem-. bers respectively--on the same basis for making contributions as a husband and wife. Many people throughout this Nation have a propensity to participate in poll.tics. They make contributions to various candidates. Many people throughout the country, from Maine to Hawaii, are in.. terested in knowing the composition of the House of Representatives and the composition of the Senate. They are not necessarily interested only itl the candi.dates wilo are running in their respectiw_ States. Organizations serve as the vehicle for these people to make contributions to those candidates throughout the country who represent their ideology or philosophy. Individuals who may be able to contribute only $5 to $100 each, and who do not have access to information about all the candidates running for ofrice are justified, I think, in relying on the organizations which give them leadership and direction about where to make their contributions. The point was made by the Senator from l_ichigan that the people do not necessarily know where their contributions are going. Certainly they know the purpose of the organizations to which they are making contributions. I do not know o:C any organization that deceiw_s its supporters into believing the con'tribution will be, used otherwise than in a way that will be consistent with what the organization holds itself out to be. In conclusion, let me say that the amendment merely puts an organization on a more equitable basis than the basis on which it will be if the bill passes in its present state. Mr. President, I urge Senators to support this amendment. I reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, how much time remains on this side? The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. HutDLESTON). Fifteen minutes remain. Mr. GRIFFIN. I thank the Chair. Mr. President, of course, I respect the views of the distinguished Senator from Maine. I realize there is some points to what he says, but I do not find his argument weighty enough to convince me tha.t I should support his amendment. I take issue, particularly, with the thrust cfi that part of his argument whic:a appeared to condone the delegation by individuals to special interest groups of their c:itizenship responsibilities. Of course, there is an infinite number of special interest groups--many of them are interested in only one particular issue. For example, I think of the Right to Work Organization, which is interested in nothing except the one issue of so- 25;9 S 4710 CQNGRSSSION'AL RECOtlD -- SENATE called right-to-work legislation. The organizatlon collects funds and provides support for candidates needless to say, it hopes--or expects--that those candidates will vote right on their particular issue, I do not wish to criticize the right-to-, work organization. It is no different than hundreds of other one-issue special interest groups. I do not believe it serves the national interest when candidates are elected to Congress because of funds supplied by special-interest, pressure groups. Such groups are not interested in the com_ plete record of the candidate. The oneissue special-interest cares only about the position of group the candidate on its issue, Such an organization will support or work to defeat a candidate solely on the basis of the candidate's views on that one issue. If the limit on such support were increased as proposed by this amendment, the influence of such groups would be doubled as compared with the pending bill. I urge thedefeat of this amendment, Mr. HATHAWAY. Mr. President, I yield such time as he may need to the Senator :Mom South Dakota (Mr. A.BOUREZK). Mr. ABOUREZK. Mr. President, we must work to create an electoral system where Americans by the tens of millions can and will actively participate. This ultimately is thegreatest safeguard of our constitutional freedoms. In recent years, organizations ranging from the conservative Americans for Constitutional Action to the liberal Nattonal Committee for an Effective Congress and the League of Conservation Voters have been working vigorously to achieve more active participation in politics. Many of these organizations have been in the forefront of the fight for meaningful reform of the electoral process. At the same time they have actively solicited tens of thousands of donations from citizens to be pooled together and contributed to congressional candidates, As the Federal Elections Campaign Act is now written, these groups will be scverely limited. Their pooled contributions will 'be treated the same as indtvidual contributions. The Council for a Liveable World, for example, might get contributions from 500 citizens average $20 for a 'total of $10,000. The Council might want to give that money to one PrOgressive candidate but it would be allowed to, give only $3,000. However, Mr. and Mrs. Clement Stone, if they wanted to, and I imagine they would want to, could give $6,000 to a specialinterest opponent. And all the little Stones could each give $3,000 as well. The New York Times looked at this situation earlier this month and editorialized that: Surely such organizations, whatever their political complexion, can be allowed to contribute three or four times the amount of a single person without distorting the will of the electorate, Senator I-IATHAWAYin his amendment asks that ,,;uch organizations be allowed to contribute only twice that of an individuaL 260 I support Senator HA_HSWA_'S amendmeat. It ts a reasonable compromise. It is a compromise that v_ll be unpalatable to the large corporate interests, each of whom wou_td like to give their $3,000 contlqbutions In splendid isolation. But it is a compromise that will work to ex.pand and broaden the political process, not to narrow it. I thank the _enator fol' yielding, Mr. COOK. Mr. President, I yield myself 5 minutes on the bill The PRESEDING OF. FICF,I_. There is no time on the bill. Mr. GRIFFIN. I yield the Senator 5 minutes. Mr. COOK. First of ail, Mr. President, we are talking about a matter of semantics, and I hope it does not get down to an argument between whether C. Clement Stone and his wife 8ire $6,000 or the Connnittee for an Effective Congress can give only $3,000. We are debating the whole issue that we really picked a figure 'with no study as to how we got to that :_gure. Therefore, any place we go from that particula:_ figure to another particular figure is just a matter of making a determination as to whether we agree or do notagree, Another point I should like to make is 'that we discussed ttis business of whether it is or is not a means by which 'we can launder funds. ObviotLsly, one can _[aunder funds at $3,000 contributions as well as at $6,000 contributions. But this bill depends on the peo[ le of the United States to haw; a basic concept of what the law is and'. whether they are willing _o live by the law or whether they are 'willing to break the law. I suggest to the Senator from Michigan that under this act, if we pass it relatively in the form it is in, we provide 'that one cannot do what the Senator has ,,mggested. I read to hin from page 76, paragraph (c): (c) (1) For purposes o_' th(; ltmltatiorm contained in tt_ls section all contributions :made by any person dlrect[y or Indirectly to or for the benefit of a particular candidate, lmclud_ng contributions which are In any way earmarked, encumbe:ed, or otherwise directed through an intermediary or conduit '_o that candid_te, shall be treated as con'_rlbutions from that person tc that candidate. So the only point w_ have to raise here, if we believe that .n the operation of the political process it is our intention to abide by the; law, is that il! one wishes to give $3,000 and say, "Will you please give it to the Senator f:om Maine, and that is whom :[ want it to go for," under '_he law, the organization that receives the $3,000, and is a conduit to get it to the Senator from Main% has to report 'where it came from, and that it was instructed to ];,ass it on. The point I really think we are getting down to is no'", a point _)etween C. Clemeat Stone and the Committee for an Effective Congress, but an honest-togoodness poin't. I think the only point that has ruer:it is whether a husband and wife who have subst:mtial assets can give to one candidate $15,000 and someone who has substantial assets and gives a facility or a lobbying g:oup such as the Committee for an Effective Congress, the Committee for a Federal World, or the Marc,h 28, 19 74 ComnLittee for a Cleaner I!mvtronment, can gve only $3,000 because they cannot marry another committee. I think that is the issue before us, and that ls the issue on which we have to make 'a determination when we vote. The PRESIDING OI_FICER (Mr. ABOU_:_:ZK).Who yields time? Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, how much time remains on this side? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator _as 6 minutes. Mr. e3RI_'_'lN. Mr. President, I do not take issue with the Senator from Kentucky_ Mr. COOK. I thank the Senator for theMr. ti:me. GRIFFIN. I am pleased that the language to which he refers is in the bill, and step ports:at it will in the be right helpful.direction. It is an ImHowever, I still believe that the basic questi_m is the one I raised at the outset of my presentation--that is whether the citizenship responsibility should be delegated by individual citizens to special interest groups. I find it interesting and somewhat ironic that some of the organizations that are the loudest in 'their calls for reform, including ceiling,,; on contributions _md expenditures, are in the forefront of support for weakening amendments such as the one pending now. The New York Times, which frequently calls for ekction reform, is unrealistic when it contends that special interest groups could give 3 or 4 times as much as the bill provides without influencing or alfooting elections. That is absolutely absurd as it would apply to House races. If the limit were to be three or four times what :it is in the bill, then a special interest group could, in effect, provide the major portion of the funds on which a candidate would run for the House of l_epresentatives. Mr. President, the arguments have been presented; and so far as I am eoncerned, I am willing to yield back the renlalnder of my time. Mr. HATHAWAY. Mr. President, I yield _i minutes to the junior Senator from ]_entucky. Mr GRIFFIN. I reserve the remainder Of my time. Mr. HUDDLESTON. I thank the distingul_;hed Senator for yielding. Mr. President, I have a couple of points to make in support of this amendment. It has been a long accepted concept 'in this country--and indeed a tradition-that citizens are able to join other citizens of like philosophy, of like purposes or objectives, so that their combined force may have a combined impact greater than the individual would howe himse::f. I wf,uld think that a person who has only _. few dollars to contribute to a candictate of his choice must feel somewhat ic_elpless as he considers what irapact h_.$ contribution might make or what irlfiuei:Lce he may have, when he considers that other individuals can contribute $3,000 or, in the case of a married couple, $6,000. V_rh_:_.t we are doing here, it seems to me, is r,o give individuals whoare willing to joir because they have a like interest or like philosophy or a like objective, and March 2,8, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL provide some impact, ff they have $50,000, $100,000, or whatever, cornparable to a couple. It is reasonable to assume that the interest of two individuals will be somewhat more narrow in relation to the interest of the general public and the interest of some 50,000 or 60,000 people who join together. So it does not seem unreasonable that this kind of organization would receive the same treatment as a couple who happen to be married, which would represent the interests of only two individuals, I support the amendment. I believe with the restrictions it would be subject to very little abuse. It would be a contribution to those who like to participate and like to know their views are being felt by joining an organization, knowing that the organization might have some Irapact, at least as much as a couple, on the outcome of a race in which they are interested because they support a candidate. Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, it should be recognized that a $3,000 contribution for some individuals means no more than a $5 contribution for other individuals. But more important, I believe, is the fact no automatic implication is attached to individual's contribution under normol circumstances. · On the other hand, when a special interest group, organized to promote particular issues, makes a contribution, there is no question as to what the motive and purpose of that special interest group. NO one would doubt what the purpose or motive is when a milk fund, for example, makes its contributions, I think the American people understand this distinction very well. They do not want the Congress to go in the direction of this amendment. They expect more from this Congress in terms of campaign financing reform. Mr. HATHAWAY. Mr. President, how much time is remaining to both sides? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan has 1 minute remaining and the Senator from Maine has 14 minutes remaining. Mr. HATHAWAY. Mr. President, I just want to point out in conclusion that as far as the amount involved is concerned, the President advocated a $15,000 limitation, at least with respect to Presidential campaigns. It seems to me the $3,000 for individuals and $6,000 for a group limitation, being considerably be10W the amount recommended by the President, is realistic. I do not believe that the distinction which was being made by the distinguished Senator from Michigan with respect to special interest groups can be made between the groups and a married couple. A married couple that is able to contribute $6,000 to a candidate apt to interest have a special interest is asjust a asspecial group. I do not think we can make a legislarive decision about whether a special interest group, couple, or individual should or should not make a contribution. The Senator from Michigan mentioned earlier in his remarks that there are COlastitutional problems involved. Certainly, we do not want to inhibit any person or group in making a contribution; whether RECORD -- SENATE an individual is interested in all legislation before Congress or only in one piece of legislation, he or a group to which he belongs should be able to make a_con tribution. And as ! have said, a group should be able to make the same contribution as a married couple, Mr. President, I know of no reason not to yield back the remainder of my time. Mr. GRIFFIN. I yield back the time on this side. The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time is yielded back. The question is on agreeing to the amendment of t:he Senator from Maine. The yeas and nays have been ordered, and the clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. FULBRIGHT), the Senator from Alaska (Mr. GRAVEL), the Senator :from Wyoming (Mr. (Mr. MCGEE), the Senator from Minnesota MONDALE), the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. PA,STORE), and the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. WInLIAMS) are necessarily absent. I further announce that, if present and voting the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. PASTORE) Would vote "yea." Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. BAKER), the Senator from Maryland (:Mr. BEATm), the Senator from Maryland (Mr. MATH]fAS), and the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. SeHWEXKER) are necessarily absent. I also announce that the Senator from Oregon (Mr. HATFIELD) is absent on official business. I further announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. AIKEN) is absent due to illness in the family. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Oregon (Mr. HATFIELD) would VOte "nay." The result was announced--yeas 46, nays 42, as follows: [No. 93 Leg.] YEAS---46 Abourezk Hartke Moss Bayh Haskell Muskie Bentsen Hathaway Nunn Bible Huddleston Pell Brooke Hughes Randolph Byrd, Robert C. Humphrey Ribicoff Cannon Inouye Sparkman Case Jackson Stafford Church Javits Stennis Clark Johnston Stevens Cook Magnuson Stevenson Cranston Mansfield Symington Dole McGovern Tunney Eagleton Metcalf Young Eastland Metzenbaum Hart Montoya NAYS--42 Allen Ervin Nelson Bartlett Fannin Packwood Bellmen Fong Pearson Bennett Goldwater Percy Biden Grimn Proxmire Brock Gurney Roth Buckley Hansen Scott, Burdick Helms Scott, Hugh Byrd, Hollings William I_ Harry F., Jr. Hruska Taft Chiles Kennedy Talmadge cotton Long Thurmond curtis McClellan Tower Domenici McClure Weicker Dominick McIntyre Aiken Baker Beall Fulbright NOT VOTING--12 . Gravel Mondale Hatfield Pastore Mathias Schweiker McGee Williams S 4711 So Mr. HATHAWAY'Samendment (No. 1082) was agreed to. Mr. HITDDLESXY)N. Mr. President, I move that the Senate reconsider the vote by which the amendment was arced to. Mr. CC_K. I move to lay that notice on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. j % MESSAGE F tOM THE HOUSE A message fror Lthe House of Representatives by Mr. Berry, one of its readlng clerks, anne aced that the House had agreed to the report of the committee of conference _ n the disagreeing votes of the two House: on the amendment of the House to the _ ,ill (S. 2747) to amend the Fair L_bor Si mdards Act of 1938 to increase the mini hum wage rate under that act, to exp_ .d the coverage of the act, and for otl_ filurposes. FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT AMENDMENT_ OF 1974 The Senate continued with the cousideration of the bill (S. 3044) to amend the Federal FAection Camlaaign Act of 1971· to provide for public financing of primary and general election c_unpaigns for Fed-. eral elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating to the financing and _nduct of such campaigns. Ui_ANI1VLOUS-CONSEi_T AGREEi_ENT Mr. MANSFLE_). Mr. President, be-. fore the Senator from Alabama is recogInized, ask unanimous consent that afollowing I should like to make request. the disposition of the amendment to be there on thc offered bebya 30-minute the Senatorlimitation from Alabama Bentsen amendment, which is next in or-. der, the time to be equally divided be-tween the Senator from Texas (Mr. BENTSEN)and 5he maamger of the bill (Mr. CA_NON);and that in addition there be a 10-mir_ute limitation on an amend-. ment to be offered to the amendment, to be divided between the sponsor of the amendment, the distinguished Senator from Texas (Mr. BENTSEN), anffering a floor amendment to S. 3044, 93rd Congress, 2d Session, which would clarify Centred';' intent regarding section 613 of rifle 18. United States Code. This -orovision prohibits political contributions by any agent of a foreign princilyal and also prohibits the solicitations, acceptanco, o_ receipt of any such contribution :from any agent of a foreign principal or from _:he foreign principal directly. The responsibi]ity for enforcing 18 U.S.C. 613 rests with I:he Atlorney General of the United States. In th(_ course of our administration of the Federal :Election Campaign Act of 1971, as i;he sup_;rvisory officer responsible for presidential campaigns, we made several referrals of app_rent instances of foreign contribu_:ions to the Attorney General. We have been i_dvised by the Department of Justice that I:he ter_:_ "foreign principal" as used in sec:ion 61'{ does not have the same meaning as ;'foreign national." The Department's view is I;hat to be a foreign principal within the meaninii: of section 613 it is essential to have ;_m age_.t acting or operating within the lYrtited States. Therefore, in the opinion of i;he Department, the mere acceptance of a political contribution from a "foreign ndI;ional" without evidence to establish that such fo:Eeign national is a "foreign principal" kmving z.n agent within the United States would not constitute a violation of the !;tatute Ervin McGee Williams k(]OMr. ALLEN'S amendment (No. 1110) was rejected, · R'_OFis recognized, Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. Pt'esident, all of us have heard the storie:;, I am sure, ih recent months of the enoFmous amounts xn view of the statutory interpretation placed o_t the existing law by the Department of Justice, it is our opinion that to prohibit :[!oreign contributions to U.S. political cam- _rRd MF, SSAGE ROLLED of money contributedin the last political, campaign by foreign nationals. We have heard of the hundreds cf thousands of dollars sloshing around from one court.try to another, going through foreign banks, being laundered through foreign banks: and we have heard allegation_; of concessions being made by t:he Govern.. l)aigns t;hebar statute should or bean amended expressly a candidate, officer, em-to l:)l()yee or agent of a political committee, or any per,;on acting on behalf of any such candidate (:,r political committee from knowing:.y soliciting, accepting, or receiving any con'::ributie_ from any "foreign national." For _;his purpose the term "foreign national" ,mould be defined to include: meat to foreign contributors. I do not know whether (;hose alle;'atio:ns are true o:L' not_ I an1 not; trying to prejudge them. That would be up to the :our_;s to deter.., mine. I am saying that contributions by foreigners are wrong, and they have no place in the American _olitical system. or (1) is a "foreign an a_y 'kbgentpersonof awho foreign principal" principal" as pre:;early defined in 18 U.S.C. 613; (2) a_zF individual who is :neither a citizen nor a :)ermanent resident of the United States; :,nd ' (3) a-,_y partnership, association, corpora-;ion, organization, or other combination 9f ]i)ersons organized under the laws of or haying its _;)rincipal place of business in a foreign coventry. In te._timony last June before the Sen:_te Ru),_s and Administration Commerce, Philiip ;:{i.Hnghes, who was then Director of the Office of Federal Elections, stated his view that restrictions should be placed on political contributions by foreign nationals ',md, at the very least, that Congress should clarify ,vhat it intended to prohibit when !_t enacted 18 U.S.C. 613. (See Hearings be:::ore thc Senate Committee on Rules and Admini,_t.ration on S. 372 and other Federal election reform bills, 93rd Cong., 1st sess. 262::,,64.) I believe that Mr. Hughes' testimony at _:.hat time continues to represent the post'_ion of i:his offÉce, as well as the Comptroller General, on the issue of political contrlbu::ions bp foreign nationals. We er_dorse your efforts to have the Senate _ THE HOUSE--ENBILL SIGNED A message frei sentatives by Mi reading clerks, Speaker had affix enrolled bill iS. 2 the House of l:tepreHackney, one of its Lnnounced that the d his signature to the 74) to amend certain provisions of law defining widow and widower under th _ civil service retiremeat system, and or other purposes, The Vioe Pr( pident subsequently signed the enrolle_S_lll, _r ]FEDERAL I_]LECTION CAMPAIGN ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1974 The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill iS. 3044) to amend the. Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing of primary and general election campaigns The law is ambiguous and con:[using. The Department of Justice wa.; asked to make an interpretation. Congress thought it had taken care of the r_atter long ago, but the K)epartment of J_stiee said thai; the law, when it refers to fo:ceign prin-, cipals, applied only to ';hose who had. for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating to the financing and conduct of such campaigns. Mr. CHURCH. Mx'. President, I ask unanimous consent that Rfc Glaub, a member of my staff, be accorded the agents, within this country. Therefore_ this left a giant loophol_ for contribu_, tions to be made by foreign individual& It allowed huge sums to flow into the dof_ fcrs of American political candidates in 1972 and it is e';sential that we have leg-_ islation to clarify the situation. privilege of the floor during on this measure, The PRESIDING OFFICER. objection, it is so ordered, Mr. President, I ask unsmimot_ corn sent to have printed in the Rrcoso a let_. ter from iL. Fred Thomp,;on, Director of the Grace of Federal Elections at the 264 the debate Without March 28, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL consider an alyP_opriate amendment to 18 u.s.c. 613 at the time it begins floor debate on S. 3044. We will be pleased to provide furthor information or assistance on this subJect if you desire. Sincerely yours, L. FREI)THOMPSON, Director. Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. President, I wish to point out that last June, in testimony before the Committee on Rules and Administration, Mr. Phillip Hughes, who was then Director of the Office of Federal Elections, stated his views that restrictions should be placed on political contributions by foreign nationals, - President Nixon as well in his recent message on campaign financing and the reform Of campaign financing called for a ban on contributions by foreign na_ionals. My amendment would accomplish that good by making clear that the present ban on contributions by foreign principals extends to foreign nationals as well; and without this ban American elections will continue to be influenced by contributions of foreign nationals. I do not think foreign nationals have any business in Our political campaigns, They cannot vote in our elections so why should we allow tl_em to finance our elections? Their loyalties lie elsewhere; they lie with their own countries and their own governments. Many in this country have expressed concern over the inroads of foreign investment in this country, over the attempts by foreigners to control U.S. buslness. Is it not even more important to try to stop some of these foreigners fro m trying to control our politics? I think this limitation would accomplish that purpose, One additional point I should like to mention relates to fareign citizens living in the United States as resident immigrants. My amendment would exempt foreigners with resident immigrant status from the ban on contributions by foreigners. There are many resident immigarnts in the United States who have lived here for years and whospend most of their adult lives in this country; they pay American taxes and for all intents and purposes are citizens of the United States except perhaps in the strictest legal sense of the word. These individuals should not be precluded from contributlng to the candidate of their choice under the limitations of $3,000 in S. 3044 as well as S. 372 which passed the Senate last summer, Let me say a word about implementation of the amendment. The responsibility will be placed on the candidate or the committee established on behalf of the candidate to refuse donations proferred by foreigners. Some will say that this places an unnecessary burden on the candidate or his committee. I would point out that present disclosure and reporting laws require the name of the donor, his mailing address, occupation and principal place of business on all contributions over $10. It will then be up to the cornmittee or the candidate receiving a donation from abroad to refuse the eontribution coming from a foreigner. Thus there is no additional recordkeeping require- RECORD -- SENATE S 471.5 mont. Having to determine whether a contribution coming from abroad comes from a foreign national or from an American citizen living abroad may be an inconvenience but it is minor compared to the loophole it closes, I know the amendment is not foolproof, There are ways to get around just about every campaign finance measurewe bring about but my amendment goes a long way toward getting at the problem, I repeat that the principle of my amendment has the support of President Nixon. It is my understanding that the Senate Watergate Committee is digging into contributions by foreign nationals and its final report will probably suggest reforms on the present status of the statutes pertaining to foreign contributions, American political campaigns should be for Americans and a large loophole no way is the Senat_)r from Texas excluding an American national who finds himself by reason of his corporate employment living in Japan, Australia, or anywhere else in the world. Is he excludlng that individual from writing his individual check and sending it to a political organization of his choice in tile United States in any election? Mr. BENTSEN. In no way is he precluded from that. He is an American citizen living overseas and he can participate. The American political process should be left to American nationals. Mr. COOK. I do not think the public knows, and. it should be in the RECORD, that in the vicinity of 2 million Americans, who by reason of employmertt, study, :and many, many other situations existing in the commercial world, are locared overseas and live there for long periods of time. They are American citi- would closedto by my theamendment. urge thebeSenate adopt amendment, I Mr. President, I reserve t:he remainder zens; their maintain children voting are American zens. They facilities. Voting Rights Act of 1965 broadened of Mr. my time. COOK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield to me for 3 minutes? Mr. BENTSEN. I am delighted to yield to the Senator from Kentucky. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, first I would like to have the Senator from Texas give ability nationals who live overseas for to American vote. In no way is the Senator from Texas saying that these people are in any way impeded in making a contribution to the political process in their country. Mr. BENTSEN. The Senator fromm me privilege of being a cosponsor of thetheamendment. I ask unanimous con- Kentucky is absolutely right.Senator Mr. COOK. I thank the sent that I may be added as a cosponsor of the amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, I think the Senator from Texas raises an interesting point and we should look at it in reverse. Let us look at the mandate of Congross. Let us look at our creation of the special subcommittee in the Committee on Foreign Relations to investigate the significance of the corporate conglomerate on international affairs. Let us look at the influence that American corporations attempt to exert on other governments. Let us look at it from the standpoint that we in this country are absolutely rather 6hagrined, and sometimes horrified, at the extent of America's infiuence on foreign governments. There are attempts to change governments; there are attempts to bolster a particular candidate at a time the time of an election; and there is the situation we have seen in several situations in South America. Congress is investigating a matter under the leadership of the distinguished Senator from Idaho (Mr. (CHURCH)in regard to Chile. I would say that the significance of all of this is that the United States and those influences in the .United States that are of worldwide signilicance should frankly mind their own business when it comes to the political significance of other countries. In effect, we are saying that those people abroad should mind their own business when it comes to making contributions to political campaigns in the United States. Am I correct in my basic philosophy? Mr. BENTSEN. I agree wholeheartedly with the Senator from Kentucky. Mr. COOK. May I ask the Senator a question? I think this is important. In Texas. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield myself 3 minutes. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is recognized. Mr. CANNON. I have no quarrel with the basic purpose of this amendment, which is directed toward contributions from abroad to influence politicaI cmnpaigns, but I think it should properly 10e pointed out that last year in this country there were, as aliens lawfully here, 4,643,457 people. That is a pretty substantial number of people who were here properly in this country, and we permit them t_) come here for many things other than to come here to be residents. So I want to be sure the Senator knows exactly' what he is doing, because a substantial number of those people are in his own State of Texas, who are lawfully in this country, who are not here as permanent residents, and the only people who would be excluded from this provision are people who are here as permanent residents. I may say the Immigration people themselves say there is some question in their minds as to the propriety of the language in this particular case. I have rLo particular brief with it, but I know last year there were 4,633,457 registered aliens in this country. Those people were here in this country lawfully, but by this amendment the Senator is going 1;o preclude many of those people from participating in the elective process by making contributions, and he is also going to impose on the candidate the question of whether he knew or ought to have known that those people were not properly admitted here for permanent residence at the time they made contributions to his campaign. I would venture to say that a mailing campaign that citiThe that from 265 S 4716 ' was put out would result in that person's mail going to hundreds of people in his own State, including the great State of Texas, who would not be eligible to make contributions under this particular amendment;, ff it is adopted, I simply want to point that out so Senators will know what they are doing. As one of my distinguished colleagues pointed out a low minutes ago, we have to get money from somewhere for these Mr. BF_rrSDIN. This amendment does not _ftect that If he is an Araerican national, living overseas in any foreign country he is allowed to contribute, Mr. GOLDWATER. E/en :if the dra{t is made on a foreign bank? Mr. BENTSEN. Yes, the distinguished Senator from Michigan has something e,nthat. My amendment does not affect lt. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, if the Sen_ ator will yield, may I say to the Senator campaigns. I remember an old song from a few years ago that was titled "Pennies Prom Heaw;n." I am sure we realize that money does not come from heaven to carry out political campaigns, Fo, by the Senator's excluding contributions from people who are lawfully in this courttry, but who are not here as from Arizona that we w:ll face the very situation he i_; talking aborlt with the submission of the ame:_dment by the Senator from Michigan This is not a rqatter which involve:; the present amendment in its present form. The ]?RESIDING OFFICER. Who _ields time? permanent residents, he is creating an undue and an unnecessary burden on the persons who are running for office as well as the persons who are here in this country, and properly so, who would be aflfected by the amendment. As I said initially, I support the thrust or the purpose for which the amendment was originally drawn and intended, but I think, frankly, that it goes further than would be intended by Members of this body ff they were here to hear the discussion on i.t. I am sure it would impose some undue burdens on any person who might run for political onqce, as well as for certain people who are properly here. If the Senator were to restrict the amendment to money coming from abroad, from foreign nationals abroad, or foreign nationals living abroad, or foreign contributions of any sort, I would completely agree with him, because I t_ink that is not correct, Mr. BEN:[_EN. Mr. President/I yield myself 2 additional minutes, The PRF_kqIDINGOFFICER. The Senator from Texas is recognized, Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. President, this amendment was carefully drawn to try to exclude certain people who might be legally in this country passing through here as touriSts. role I doto not have any legitimate playthink in thethey political process of this country, nor do illegal aliens in this country. That privilege to contribute ought to be limited to U.S. citizens and to those who have indicated their intention to live here, are here legally, and are permanent residents, Mr. COOK. Mr. President, may I suggest to the Senator from Texas that, if he is through with the 0asic debate on his amendment, he yield back his time---Mr. BENTSI,TN. Mr. President, i_ the Senator from Nevada is rrepared to yield back his time, I am prepared to yield back my time. Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, will the _enator from Texas acce pt a .suggestion'? It appears there may be more centreversy to my a3nendrnent to the Senator's amendment than anticipated. We had enly 5 minut_ on a side. Perhaps we could make it I0 minutes on a side and u_e it fr(rm tt_, time left on :his amendraent, Mr. BENTSL'N. Mr. President, if the. Senator from Nevada is rrepared to yield back his time for that purpose, I am. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous corment that we yield back t:he time on this amendment and that whatever time is left be added to the 5 minutes to a side on the amendment of the Senator from Michigan. The PRESIDING Ot_'ICER. There are exs_ctly 11 minutes remaining on this amendment, Without objection, it is so ordered. The Senator from Mick igan. Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. PI esident, I send an amendment to the de,;k in the nature of a substitute, which is a modified version of my printed amen, iment No. 1087. The PRESIDING C-FFICER. The clerk will read the amendment. Those people would be and should be allowed to make political contributions in this country'. I think one statement ought to be made in response to the comment made by the Senator from Nevada. It has been stated that no candidate may knowingly solicit or accept such contributions, so he must knowingly have done it in order to be in violation. Mr. GOLI)WATER. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. BENTSEN. I cannot yield with the limited time I have. Mr. GOLDWATER. Can I have 2 mtnutes for a question? Mr. CANNON. I yield 2 minutes. Mr. GOLDWATER. How would this affect a person living in Mexico who is an American, working there, who votes by absentee ballot, who has an account in a Mexican bank, with no checking account in anAmerican bank? The assistant legislalive clerk pro_. ceeded to read the amendment. The amendment to the amendment ia; as follows: In lieu of the language pro'posed to be l_xserteq by amdt. No. 1083 :nsert the follow., lng: ":PSOmS_TmNOFCONTRIBUTI )NS -_,ND EXPENDI-. 'ruBES BY FOREIGNINDIVXX,UALS "SEC. 304. See,;ion 613 oI title 18, United States Code, is amended-"(a) by adding to the se(:tion caption the followirLg:'or drs.wn on fore gn banks'; "(b) by inserting tmr_edlately before 'Whoever' at the beginning of the first par_. agraph the following: '(a)'; and "(c) by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection: 266 c CONGRF, SSIONAL RECORD ---SEN2-,,'IE "'(b)ill the No person rrake ainstrument contribu_. t:.on forts ofmay a wr!tten drawn on a forE,ign bank. Violation of the provision of this subsectitn is punishable by a fine not to exceed $5,000, imprisonment not to exceed five years, or both.'.' Marc;k 23, 197'4 on page 71, line 16, strike, out "304." and lrusert iralieu thereof "305.". On page 76, between lines 2 and 2, insert the following new paragraph: "(2) No candidate may knowingly solicit or ''accept a contribution for his campaign(A) from any person who--"(l) is not a citizen of the United States, and "(it) is not lawfully admitted for permanen; residence, as defined in section 101 (a) (20? of the Immigration and Nationality Act; or "(B) which is made in violation of section 61Sof ibis title.". On l:_.age76, line 3, strike out "(2)" and insertin, lieuthereof"(3)". On page 76, line 6, immediately after "(1)", insert "or (2)". On l_age 7B, line 19, ha:mediately after "6H,", insert "613,". On page 78, line 87, strike out '_by adding at the end" and insert In lieu thereof "by striking out the item relating to section 6]3 anc_ inserting in lieu". on page 78, below Line 22, immediately above Uxe item relating to section 614, insert the fol_owlng: "613. Cntributed. I had 10,000 contributors in my campaign :in 1970, and it w _s a :matter of great pride to me that we were able to establish that b_)ad a ,base. Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, will the Senator from Tennessee yield for a question? Mr. BROCk. I yield, Mr. CLARK. If a candidate chooses not to use Federal money and he collects a certain amount of private money, and he has a hundred dollars left over after a campaign or $100,000 left over, alt the money he raised personally would go back to tile Federal treasury? Mr. BROCK. Or to his national party, It would be al; his option. Mr. CLARI<. So it would not just be Zn alii honesty, I do not know how we could ks;ate those people and return the 3 or 4 cents that some o:! them would get, as a pro rata share, and that is why I did not include it in the a:nendment. The _nator from Kentu,_'ky has raised a valid point. In light of that, I think it might be the better part cf wisdom if I withdrew the amendment and consider that ms a poss ibh; alternative. Until I can rewrite it, M:. President, I will withdraw the amendment, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is wl,.thdrawn. but all the Federal the private :money money that was he raised expended, that is left over as well. Mr. BROCK, That is right. I raised the issue because we have had problems in the past. I think it would be in the interest of Members of the House and the Senate to have this safeguard, to afford them a justification for dealing logically with this excess fund. _r. COOK. Mr. President, .will the Senator yield? Mr. BROCK. I yield, Mr. COOK. I am a little concerned about the language on page 2. Obviously, if we have Federal financing of elections and he has held Federal funds, those must go back to the Treasury. There is no question about that. lVlr. BROCK. That is right. Mr. COOK. But under the Senator's amendment, I am not sure that is what it says. I read from page 2 of the Senator's amendment: · . . shall deposit those funds in the United States Treasury or transfer them to anational committee, What bothers me is that we cannot leave the as.,_umption that funds that haw,' been allocated under a Federal program to subsidize elections could be subject in any way to a choice of whether they would go back to the Treasury or to a national committee, 272 ANT][HIJ _' _1 NG ACT-- OF 1974 Mr. CANNOi_ . Mr. Presicent, I ask the Chair to lay beJ yce the Senate a message from the t{ous of Representatives on S..39. The PRESI[ )ING Oi_PICER (Mr. HELMS) laid ' efore the Senate the amendments of .he House of Representatiwm to the bi] rS. 39) to araend the Federal Aviatio L Act of 1S58 b) provide a more effective iprogram t,)prevent aircraft pficacy, atd for other purposes, which were to ;trike out all after the enacting clause :nd insert: T:ITLE I--ANTI} [JACKING ACT OF 1974 sec. 101. This "Antihijaeking A( sec. 102. Secti( Aviation Act of I relating to the de_ aircraft Jarisdicti_ is amended 1:orea( "(32) The ·term tion of the 'Unite( "(a) civil aircra "lb) aircraft of of the Un[ted Stat "(c) any other States; "rd) any Other States-"ri) that has it lion or last point sta_ms, ff that air, the United States [tie may b_ cited as the of 1974". L 101(32) >f the Federal }58 (49 U.:LC. :[301(32)), litton of the term "special n of the United States", as follows: 'special aircraft jurisdicStates' in(lude,,;-t of the United ;States; he national defense forces s; ircraft within t:ae United rcraft outride the United next scheduled destina_ departur_ in tlhe United _ft next ac ;ually lands in }r March 28, 19 74 '"(Ii) h_Lving 'an (:onventlon for the as defined in the of Unlawful aboard, if that s,:ircraft hinds in States with the (,tle[le d aboard; and "re) ot_er ; leased without crew to s. le_mee who has hi principal place of buslness in the United or if none, who has r_is in theUnited States; _,:txne that aircraft _in flight, which is from the moment whe_ all external doors are ch>sod following until the momsnt when one suc Ldoor is opened for dise_:r_barkat_on or in tle ease of a forced landi::,_, untl_ the authorities take over the t'esponsibi for the aircraft and f,-,:t. 'the persons property aboard.". S_c. 10_. (a) Par_ (2) of subsection (:) of se::tion 902 such Act (49 U.S.C. 1_:72), relating to definition of the term "Mrcraft ')iracy", is by striking out "threat o_ force or and" inserting in lJ _:u thereof "threa f force or violence, or by at_ylb)other form 902 of Section such Act and". is further am_e:nded by redesi subsections (n) a:td (o) t_s (o) and {p), respeclively, and by ting immediately after stlbsectio]t (m) th_ following new subseclion: ' _wmaAr:: rIRACY SPrC:tAL AXRCRAFT J_JRZSmCTmN TaE *aNrrsn STAT_S "(n_ (1) Whoever abroad an aircraft in ll:_;_ht outside the s aircraft Jurisdlct_,:i[n of the United commits 'an off,-:nse', as ,defined in convention for the $ :lpl)resio::_ of Unh ful Seizure of Aircraft, and is aft_;rward in the United States s_,al], be pnnhshed-"(A} bfor not less than t;;enty years; or "(B) ii' the of another person res:t[ts from the or attempted commission by death or by il:;l_I'isonnkent offorthe "('.,>) A person 'an offense', as d_mned t_ the Conv_ 3tlon for the Suppressi:m of Unlawful of Aircraft when. w2tile aboard an in flight, he-';(A) force or threat therect. or by any of intimidation. seizes, o: attempts or to "(B) is art p,,:rforms :)r attempt tv:t. "(;_) Tklis ame if the place of actual landing of _)._.ich (:i _ of the th:is offense, m:_ted outs;tale the reF, istratiort of that '(,t) For purposes a:ircraft is the moment when closed following moment when one di:!;embarkation, or ii la_tding, ,tutti the take over responsibili fo!' the pmqons and lc',, Subsection (oi a,'; ._ reciesignated ltl:is section se:'.tions ri) through anyof, such that act; aircraft, or of a person who to perform any such shall only be applleor the place of aircraft on board defined in paragraph is com:a_itted is sitof the State of of this subsection an to be in flight from the external doors are _until the door i,,_opened for the case of a forced ompetent authorities for the aircraft and aboard.". of such section 902. subsection (b) of striking out "subira)" and inserting in li,-::Ltthereof "subsectl ri) (1) through SEc.104.(a) 902(i) of the (n)". Feder;d Aviation Act of 958 (49 U.S.C. 1472(i) (:.,) is antended to as follows: "(].) W l_oever or attempts to co_zrait a_.rcraft y, as herein defined. shall be ptmished-;(A) by for not less than twenty years; or ;(B) if the death another person resa. Lis from the or attempted co:_'amisslo:a of the by death or by ln:prlsonment for life '_b) Section 902(i such Act is further March 2:8, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL "Sec. '' (f) For the term 'law individuals--"(1) "(2) vested arrest as the to carry out this "(3) authority.", SEC. 203. tton Act of 1958 authority to amended to read "AUTHORITY ,oses of this section, the personnel' means to carry and use such police deems and by appropriate P,,EFUSE lng ;'(22) 'Intrastate citizen of the whether directly or any other intrastate air "(23) 'Intrastate: the carriage men carrier for turbojet-powered lng thirty same State of the SEC. 206. (a) contents contained Federal Aviation under the center OF end of TRA-_;rSPORTATIO lq Administrator shall, any air carrier, intraforeign air carrier to re- _ho does not consent to a as prescribed in section to determine whether he a dangerous weapon, destructive substance, or of any person who does inspection of such whether it unlawdangerous weapon, exsubstance. rules and regulabions Administrator, any such tran_portation of a when, in the opinion transportation womd or safety of flight. for the carriage of .in air transportation or ' an air carrler, or foreign air carrier, hire shall be deemed to that such carriage shall to search suoh perproperty for the pursubsection (a) of this ". of the Federal Aviation 1501-1513) is amended thereof the following CERTAIN PROPERTY Aeronautics Board or orders as may uire that any air carrier ,ort_tion as baggage any traveling in air transcannot lawfully in the aircraft 902(1) of thiS Act, to such person, at a reaof amount insurance ofcondithe such for which such air carfull actual Io_ caUSed by such _1of the Federal Aviation L 1301) , relating to defiby redesignating para(36) as paragraphs (24) and by inserting (21) the followair carrier' means any who undertakes, _ or by a lease or to engage solely in transportation' means or property as a cornor hire,, by capable of carrywithin the States.". portion of the table of 1 the first section of the of 1958 which appears "TITLE III--ORIy AND POWERS AND of "(a) Procedures "(b) Exemption "Sec. 316. Air "(a) Rules and "(b) Personnel. "(c) Training. "(d) Research and rial information. "(e) Overall "(f) Definition." (b) That which appears DU- is amended by addthe following new passengers in air facilities. security. ,merit; confiden- responsibility. such'bable of contents the center heading iS amended by the following new "TITLE The be carried by oabin by reason of must make sonable tocharge, tloned pay, a insurance rier n_ay become or damage to such air carrier.". SRO. 205. Section Act of 1958 (49 nitlons, is gralYhs. (22) through (38), TrsS OF lng at the items: indicia 1111 of the Federal AviaU.S.C. 1511), relating to transportation, is follows: "SEC. 1111. (a) by regulation, state air carrier, fuse to "(1) any search of his 315(a) of this is unlawfully explosive, or "(2) any not consent to a I property to dete fully contains plosive, or other Subject to prescribed by carrier may also passenger Or Of the carrier, might be "(b) Any persons or intrastate air intrastate air for compensation include an s be refu_ed when sons or inspect poses enumerated section is not SEC. 204. Title Act _)f 1958 (49 by adding at the new section: "LIABILITY "sEC. 1116. The shall issue suoh be necessary to receiving for property of a portation, which GANY_.._TION firearms, power of necessary RECORD--SENATE 315. Screening adding at the end item: "Sec. 1116. Liability And amend the certain property.", le so as to read: "An Act to amend the 1958 to Suppression of craft; to provide gram to other purposes." Mr. CANNON. that the Senate AViation Act of ; Convention for the Seizure of Airmore effective propiracy; and for ment of the House a conference with agreeing votes of and that the Chair point the Senate. The motion was S. 39 and request House on the distwo Houses thereon, authorized to apon the part of the President, I move to the amend- to; Presiding Officer soN, Mr. CANNON, SOIq, and Mr. COOK of the Senate. the MESSAGE members of Bicentennial House. message American Revoon the part that the House had disagreed to amendments of the Senate to the bill (] I.R. 7724) to amend the Public Health Act to establish _ national of biomedical research traineeships, and training to assure co_tinued excellence of the United States, and for purposes; agreed to the conference by the Senate on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses thereon, that Mr. STAGGERS, Mr. ROGERS, and Mr. NELSEN agers on the part conference. Mr. DEVINE, appointed manthe House at the _ FEDERAL ELECTION AMENDMENTS CAMPAIGN ACT OF 1974 The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill (S. 3044) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing of primary and general election campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating the financing campaigns. The PRESIDING iS open to further to Mr. President, I sug- gest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING oFFICE_. The clerk will call the roll. The second assistant legislative clerk proceeded to oall the roll. Mr. ][{ASKELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The :PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. ]_IASKELL. Mr. President, I wislh to address a question to the distinguished manager of the bill. Mr. CANNON. Yes. Mr. HASKELL. I would like to ask the floor manager of the bill as to bbs interpretation of the bill as applied to a particular situation. Assume that a mu]ltiple candidate committee engages in cer-rain expenses in connection with the fund raising for a multitude of differen.t candidates. The concern expressed is that possibly the bill would be interpreted to allocate as a contribution to any candidate raising funds from tha_ committee a pro rata share of expenses incurred in raising those funds. I would like to ask the Senator's interpretati0n and intention in that situation and whether the legislation would be so applied. Mr. CANNON. Do I understand tile Mr. MAGNU- Senator to mean a general committee HARTKE, Mr. PF_Rthat is widespread in scope and that is on the part not a political, campaign committee _f the candidate? Mr. HASKELL. That is correct. Mr. CANNON. It is the intention as to THE HOUSE that type committee in the solicitation of funds that the expense of solicitation House of Repreone of its readcould not be chargc_l to the candidate the Senate that, because that committee may be contribof section uting to many, many candidates and the Speaker they are limited in the amount they and Mr. BUTcould contribute to the candidate, but A message from sentatives by Mr. lng clerks, pursuant to the 10(a), Public Law had appointed Mrs. LER as lution of the The and S 4725 Mr. i_[ANSFIELD_ and conduct OFFICER. amendment, of The such bill clude in his himself expense would itemization the candidate have to the incost they expended in raising those particular funds.other hand, if a candidate's On the own campaign connnittee that he designates is out raising money for him, obviously those expenses would be chargeable to the amount he oan spend in his election. Mr. HASKELL. I thank the distinguished Senator from Nevada, That is the way I interpret the legislation. There are Members who expressed, some co:acern. I think this makes clear. lVIr. President, I suggest the record the very absence of a quorum. Mr. President, will Mr. MANSFIELD. the Senator' withhold that request? Mr. HASKELL. I withhold my request. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Se:nator from Tennessee is recognized. AMENDMENT NO. ll0S Mx. BROCK. Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 1105. The PRESIDING OFFICER. 'Tihe amendment will be stated. The amendment was stated as follows: On ];_age 64, between lines 5 and 6, insert the fol}.owing: "SUSI:ENSION OPFRANK FOR MASS MAILINGS, IT_MEDIA'rELYBEFOREELECTIONS "SEC. 318. Notwithstanding any other proviSion of law, no senator, Rel_resentative, i!73 S 4'126 CONGRESSIONAL lxient Commissioner, or Delegate shall ke any mass mailing of a newsletter or ma(ling with a simplified form of address under the frank under section 3210 of title 39, United States Code, during the sixty days Immediately preceding the date on which any election is held in whiCh he is a candidate." on page 64, line 7, strike out "318." and insert in Ueu thereof "319.". On page 64, line 14, strike out "319." and insert in lieu thereof "320.". Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, will the Senator from Tennessee yield? Mr. BROCK. I yield. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, would the Senator be amenable to a 20minute time limitation on the amendment, the time to be divided in the usual fashion between the sponsor of the amendment and the manager of the bill? Mr. BROCK. I am. Mr. MAtq,SFIELD. Mr. President, I make tha/:l_cluest. The-_INC-, OFFICER. Without objection, _he time limit will be set accord(ugly, Mr. BI_DCK. Mr. President, this amendment wmfid simply extend the cu_rent lim/_ on franking from 28 days, which we passed in this body last December, which was a good first step, to 60 days, for mass mailing. We debated this matter last year in the camPaign reform bill. I raise the question again because one cd the most damning criticisms of this bill, and one that I share, is that it still largely remains an incumbent bill. One of the participants in a symposium at the Kennedy Center, in which I also participated, estimated that the incumbency is worth $600,000 over 2 years. That amount of money would have tobe raised to equal the public relations assetm that an incumbent has through mail, and the rest. One distinct advantage to Members is the unlimited use of the frank, right up to the last month of the election. I believe it is important that we try as best we can to g_arantee fairness in the politicalprocess, I also believe that we should provide for people v&no challenge office holders, now and in the future, a reasonable opportunity to make that effort and to have some chance of success. I reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. CANI_ON. Mr. President, I yield tayself2 minutes. I find no great difficulty with this amendment. I just simply point out to my colleagues that it has been only a few months since we acted on this particular point and we limited it to 28 days prior to the electh)n with reference to the sending out of newsletters under the frank, I would point out that the law prohibits now mailing that is related to political activities under the frank, in any event, so I see no particular harm in amending this to 60 (lays. The Senate has never been involved in mass mailing to boxholders, such as the House. This may be of difficulty 'in the other body, but I would have no objection to it if the Senator wants an increase in the period of 32 days over the action which we took a few months ago. 274 RECORD March, 28, 19 74 -- SENATE Mr. BROCK. I thank _;he Senator. He points out that the pr(_)lem with the boxholder frank is with the House and[ Mr. JAVITS. if the bill mittee_., so that riot with the Senate, but ! think it is important that we point out the poten-. tial for abuse here and, at least for this body, express our desire that every per-. son should have access to the political process and should have, as rauch as we can guarantee it, full and free oppor-, tunity to seek his own election, Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield[ back the remainder of my time. Mr, BROCK. Mr. Preside:at, I yield[ back the remainder of my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time on the amendment of the Senator from Tennessee having been y:.elded back, the question is on agreeing to the amendmont. The amendment was agreed to. The PRESIE_ING OFFICER. The bill i,_ open to further amen lmeqlt, Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. P:_esident, I suggest the absence of a quo]mm. There will be no further votes tonigklt, I will say for the information of Senators. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The. clerk will call the roll. The second assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. BROCK. Mr. Presid._nt, ][ask unan(incus. consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withoul objection, it is _'_oordered Mr. BROCK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that 1.we members oi my staff, Mr. J. V. Crockett and Mr. Jim George, be given access t.) the floor dur-. lng the course of debate cn this bill. The PRESIDING OFFICEI_. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BROCK. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The second assistant legislative clerk proceeded to caZtlthe roll. Mr. BROCK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous eom;cut that t ae order for the quorum callbe rescinded. The PRESIDING OFF[CER. Without objection, it is so ordered. ,_ JOINT REFERI_tAf,( ,_ S. 321_',TO CONt.. MI_TEE ON FOB __%IG]q RELATIONS AND COMMITTt i ON BA_NKING, HOUSING AND U 1BAN AFFAIRS Mr. BROCK, Mr President, I ask unanimous con.,_ent !lat ,'L 32:[3, which I introduced earlier th s month, and which was referred to the ._om.mittA_eon Foreign Relations, be jot tly ::eferred to that committee and to th Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Co nmi ;tee. I have discussed this with the _cting chairman of the Foreign Relatio] s C)mmittee, who aisc happens to be ch_ irman of the Banklng, Housing a_nd urr _n Affairs Committee, and he has expre _ed his _fillingness. The PRESIDING _FF[CER. Is there objection? Mr. JAVITS. i_Ir. P _sident, :if the Senator will yield, what i,, the bill about ? Mr. BROCK. This bill would support the establishment o ar international economic policy boa d to advise Congross on matters of ,tenLational policy. would the :[erred seriatim, thne? Mr. BROCK Banking, Committee has man of th_ laad nc particuh lation, but he J stand and So may I that the bill be lng, Housing I;ee? Mr. JAVITS. because I do man, with all big failures, a matter of efficiency, referred to both comcould hold it up, want to have it reto both at the same The chairman of the and Urban Affairs that the chairRelations Committee interest in this leg(snot want to lose any which I fully under- the request to ask referred to the BankUrban Affairs Commit- would object to that, agree with the chair)eot. I think one of our other members of the such as the Sena_r from (Mr. MAlqSFIELD), has been the realize the critical :mlpact on policy of economic policy. I would as soon the Ser_tor leave it as he has it. Mr. ]:1ROCK. referral seriatim il_epreferable? Mr. JAVITS. ); leave it as it is. We ]trove the Leave it as it is. The OFFICER. Without objection, the wilt be so referred. SESSION Mr. _manimous :rote ext_cutive There being proceeded to :Mr. yield to the 0OOK). U.S. Mr. COOK. ffhair to have nations in the U _;vere reported Lmanixnous !_;idered The en bloc. Mr. President, I ask that the Senate go objection, the Senate business. Mr. President, I from Kentucky (Mr. GUtkRD President, I ask the .,;undry nomtCoast Guard which today, and ask that they be conOF_ICER. (A/fY, _ENigETT) objection, it is so ordered. The second slant legislative clerk cead the of Rear Admiral 9Villian_. F. Rea to be commander, _itlantic area, Rear Ad_miral Joseph J. McClelland, to commander, Pacific area. The OFFICER. Without _bjection, the nations will be con_!:idered and confir en bloc. The second legislative clerk read the of the following _'.lamed officers to the _;irade cf rear Rober I. Price, _,Vinford W. James P. Stewart, _',_.H. Robert W. Durfey, and Jar_ies S. Gra The OFFICER. Without ,::_bjection, the will be con_ddered and ed en bloc. Mr. COOK. President, I request '!:h_,t thc of the United States be immediately the confirma'!;ion of _he SENATE FLOOR DEBATES ON 5.3044 MARCH 29, 1974 March 29, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL Less portion of amou_ t paid or payable allowable a_ a deduction for %ax purl _ses (as above and as exp] tined in Note 3 to Schedule: 6) ...... $630, 940,712 Balance allowable as _ subtractlon from provision tax__:_ 4,737,366 EXECUTIVE SES_ EXTRADITION EXECUTIVE U :ON--TREATY Olq ArITH DENMARK, (93D CONG., 2D SESS.) Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, i ask unanimous consent that the Senate go into executive sess _n to con'sider the treaty on extraditio[% with Denmark. The PRESIDIN(_ OFFICER (Mr. Bn)EN). Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk will[read the resolution of ratification. [ The assistant legislative clerk read as follows: ResoZve_, (Two-fLiEd o/tke Senators present concurring therei_ That the Senate advise and consent to ratification of the Treaty on between the United States of .Amaerica and Kingdom of Denmark, on June 22,1972 (Ex. U, 93-1). Mr. Mr. President, I suggest the absence a quorum, The The clerk will call the roll. The second legislative clerk proceeded to call the Mr. MANSFIELD. President, I ask unanimous ;order for the qUOrum call be The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. BIDEN). Without it is so ordered, Under the 12 o'clock having The question is, Wil and consent to the tion? On this question have been ordered, the roll. The assistant the roll. Mr. ROBERT that the Senator C. ALLEN), the Senator BAYH), the Senator CHILES), the Senator CLAr_K), the Senator (Mr. EASTLAND), the Carolina (Mr. ERVIN) Arkansas (Mr. from Maine (Mr. the resolution of on Extradition the Senate advise of ratlficayeas and nays the clerk will call clerk called I announce Alabama (Mr. Indiana (Mr. Florida (Mr. from Iowa (Mr. Mississippi North Senator from the Senator the Sena- tor from South the Senator from the Senator from (Mr. HOLLINGS), (Mr. HUGHES), (Mr. KENNEDY), the METZENBAUM), the sots (Mr. MONDALE) from Ohio (Mr. from MilqneSenator from New Mexico (Mr. tor from Utah (Mr. from Maine (Mr. from Wisconsin (Mr. Senator from the Sena, the Senator XE), the Senator ELSON), and the are necessarily absent, I also announce that Texas (Mr. BENTSEN), Michigan (Mr. HART) (Mr. STENNIS) _e Senator from le Senator from the Senator (] JOHNSTON) that, voting, the CLARK), the HATHAWAY) and (Mr. "yea." Mr. TOWER. ator from Senator from or from _e Senator would are ab- if present and Iowa Maine from each (Mr. (Mr. Ohio vote I 3d (Mr. BEALL), the )ma (Mr. BELLMEN), the Senator from COTTON), the FANNIN), the GOLDWATER), the gan (Mr. S, 4799 LEGISLATIVE ELECTION AMENDMENTS SESSION--FEDERAL CAMPAIGN GP 1974 ACT The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previolm order, the Senate will now return to legislative session and will resnme consideration of the unfinished business, S. 3044, which will be stated by title. The assistant legi:_lative clerk read as follows: Hampshire (Mr. from Arizona (Mr. from Arizona (Mr. from Michithe Senator from A bill (S. 3044) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide .for public _inancing of primary and general elsetion campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law New York (Mr. Jay the Senator from Maryland (Mr. the Senator from Illinois (Mr. PERCY), the Sena'tor from Penns (Mr. HUSH SCOTT) relating to the financing and conduct of suctx campaigns. The PRES1T)ING OFFICER. Under the the the Senator Senator , (Mr. STEVENS), (Mr, TAFT) the from from Senator from from the Senator _ (Mr. BENNETT), and (Mr. WILLIAM L. SCOTT) are absent. I also announce the Senator from Oregon (Mr. HATFI :LO) is absent on Giftcial business, I further that the Senator from Vermont AIKEN) is absent due to illness in the I further that, if present and voting the Vermont (Mr. AIKEN), the from Maryland (Mr. BEALL), the from Oregon (Mr. HATFIELD), from Illinois (Mr. PERCY), and the from Pennsylvania (Mr. HUGH SCOTT) WoUld vote "yea." The yeas and ys resulted--yeas 63, nays 0, as follows: the hour of Senate will the now proceed to vote ratification on 1st session, the with Denmark. from Louisiana sent on RECORD--SENATE EX.] [No. Abourezk Baker Bartlett Bible Biden Brock Brooke Buekley Burdlck Byrd, HarryF.,Jr. Byrd, Robert Cannon case Church Cook Cranston Curtis Dole Domenici Dominick Eagleton Fong Gravel Helms Hrusks Huddl_ Humpl Inouye Long Ma on d McGee Mclnt Nunn NOT VO Alken Allen' Bayh Griffin Beall Hart Bellmen Hatfiek Bennett Bentsen Hollin Chiles Clark Javits Cotton Eastland Kenned Ervin Fannin The NUNN). On this the yeas 0. present and voting affirmative, the is agreed to. previous order, the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. HELMS) is recognized to call up amendment No. 1071, on which there :is a limitation of 30 minutes. AME:[qDMENTNO. 1071. Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I call lip Amendment No. 1971. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to read the amendment. Mr. HELMS. Mx'. President, I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered; and, without objection, the amendment will be printed in the REcoRD. . The amendment is as follows: Strike out everything after the enacting clause _nd insert in lieu thereof the following: COMPLETE DISCLOSURE OF _ALL CONTRIBUTIO:NS AND EXPENDITURES Packwoed Pastors Pearson Pell Proxmire Randolph Ribicoff Roth Schweiker Sparkman Stafford Stevenson Symington Talmadge Thurmond Tower Tunney Weicker Williams Young Mondale Montoya Moss Muskle Nelson Percy Scott, Hugh Scott, WilliamL. Stennis Stevens Taft OFFICER yeas are (Mr. 63 and of the Senators voted in the of ratification SECTION1. (a) Section 301 of 'the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (relating to definition) is amended-(1) by striking out "in an aggregate arnoun'_ exceeding $1,000" In subsection (d); (2) by inserting in _ubsection (e) (1) after "subscription" the following: "(lncludirig any assessment, fee, or membership dues)"; (3) hy striking out In subsection (e) (1) "or for the purpose of influencing the elsetion of delegates to a constitutional conwmtlon for proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States" and inserting in lieu thereof the following: "or for the putpose of financing any operations of a political committee (including a payment made or an obllgat:_on incurred by a corporation or labor organization which, under the provisions of the las'_paragraph of section 610 of title 18, United States Code, does not constitute a contribution by that corporation or labor or-ganizatlon), or for the purpose of paying, at any time, any debt or obligation incurred by a candidate or a political committee in connectlon with any campaign for nomination for election, offer election, to Federal olTme"; (4) q_y amending subsection (a) (3) to read as follows: "(3) funds received by a political cornmittce which are transferred to that cornmitres from another political committee,;" and (5) by striking out paragraph (f) and inserting in lieu thereof the following: "(.f) 'expenditure'--"(1) means a purclhase, payment, distribution, loan, advance, deposit, or gift of money or anything o_ value, made .for the purpc_ of-"(A) influencing the nomination for els.ction, or the election, of any person to Federal 2'77 S 4800 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD_ SEN'AT]E March 29, 1974 office, or to the office of Presidential and Vice Presidential elector; "(B) influencing the result of a primary election held[ for the selection of delegates to a national nominating convention of a political party or for the expression of a preference for the nomination of persons for election to the office of President; "(C) financing any operations of a polltl: cai committee; or "(D) paying, at any time, any debt or obligation incurred by a candidate or acampaign political committee in. connection with any for nomination for election, or for election, to Federal office; "(2) means the transfer of funds by a polltlcal committee to another political cornmattee; . "(3) means a contract, promise, or agreement, whether or not legally enforceable, to make an expenditure; and "(4) means any payment made or obligation incurred, by a corporation or a labor organization which, under the provisions of the last paragraph of section 610 of title 13, United States Code, would not constitute an expenditure by that corporation or labor organization." (1) by striking out "in excess of $10" in subsection (h); (2) by striking out "in excess of $10," in subsection (e) (2); and (3) by striking out beginning with "in excess of $100- through "exceeds $100" tn sub: section (d). (c) Section 303 of such Act (relating to registration of political committees; statemeats) is amended-- Mr. HELMS. Mr. Pres [dent, I ask for tZhe yeas and nays. The :yeas and nays were ordered, Mr. HELMS. Mr. Pres [dent, on Tues... day, ! submitted an amendment to $_ 3044, the Federal Election Campaign Act Amendmqnts of 1974. Basically, this amendment in the nature of a substitute calls for full disclosure of all campaigrt contributions from every source, and of all campaign expenditures. Additionally, this amerdment plugs up a loophole in the 1971 Federal Election Campaign Act regarding :he reporting of contributions made immEdiately prior to election day. Under the 1971 act as it now stands, section 304 requires that each treasurer ,::Dr1.5 days before the election, and COYared c:mtributions received by Oetober 16. Ali contributions received after dcI:ober 21_ will be reported on January 31, :t975, except for those contributions received after October 31 which were in excess of $5,000. There is a 5-day period between October 26 and October 31 when any large contribution can be received :'_nd go unreported until January 31, long after the election and of no help to the public in their determination of which candidate they desire to vote for. Mr. President, what my amendment in part does is to end this inequity in the law. By requiring that all contributions received and expenditures made within of a political committee shall be required to report receipts and expenditures on the 10th day of March, Iffne, and Sop.. tember; on the 15th and 5th days frame-, diately prior to the gener_l election; and on the 31st of January immediately after t;ae election. '[lnder th:.s section, the report which must be filed must be corn-. I:.he 10-day period Prior to the election be reported within 24 hours of their receipt, this glaring loophole in the 1971 act effectively is plugged up. Such a provision will go a long way in restoring public confidence in the election process: for example, much of the alleged last-minute "vote buying" would be curtailed by pub- plete as of 5 days prior to the date of filing. This works well for all filing dates except one: That is the reporting date 5 days before the election. On that date, a repor5 must be filed lor all contributions received since the last reporting period, th,_ date of filing: ]ic exposure or else brought to the publie's attention. The fundamental principle of this :amendraent is to require that all eonI:ributions and expenditures be fully-disclosed lx) the public so that each citizen 'will ha_e full knowledge of where every (1) by striking out "in an aggregate amount excet._ding $1,000" in subsection (a); (2) by striking out beginning with "or, if later" through "in excess of $1,000" in such subsection; and (3) by striking out "in an aggregate amount exceeding $1,000" in subsection (d). (d) Section 304 (relating to reports by political and candidates) is amem/ed-- coramlttees (1) by striking out "in an aggregate amount or value in excess of $100," each place it appears in paragraphs (2), (5), and (9) of subsection (b); and (2) by striking out "in excess of $i00" each place it appears in paragraphs (7) and (10) of such subsection, (e) Section 305 of such Act (relating to reports by otlhers than political committees) is amendedin excess by striking out within "in an a aggregate amount of $100 calendar year", X_EDL_rr mSCLOSVRE OF LAST _rNWE COSTRmTJTIONSAND EXPENDITUi_ES for which is 15 days prior to tlae election, Since the "5-day" report must be filed 5 days prior to the electio a but must in... clude only th(_e contributions received at a period ending 10 i ays before the election, there is a time lag of 10 days before t21e election whe:_ no reporting Of campaign contribution_ need be made, _th one exception; That exception, a_. hdd out in section 304(a), states that any contribution of $5,000 ol more received after the last report ii. _led--5 days before the election--must be reported within 48 hour of its receipt, While this provision atLempts to cover the disclosure of large last-minute contributions, it is obviously inad,_uate. For example,, if a large con';ribution, more than $5,000 le_; us say, were given tc a campaign committee coming under the purview of the 1971 act, :md '_his money were given 9 days prior Lo the election, dollar which supports a particular candidate comes from and where it goes. This amendment, as a substitute for the public financing and other provisions of 13. 3044, avoids serious eonstitutibnal questions that have been raised about the provisions of S. 3044 which limit campaign expenditures and limit the amount of money that any individual may give to a candidate. S. 3044's restrictions m:l an individual's freedom of political expression raises the doubt in my mJnd as to whether the legislation will stand the test of the Constitution. A recent di_trict court ruling (ACLU, Inc. v. W. Pat Jennings, 366 F.S. 1041, U.S.D.C., D.C., Nov. 14, 1973) klready has brought :into question limitations on the manner iin which money may be spent on media :_tvertising. This case is only the first in a long line of attacks that ! see coming, and all for good reason: sueh limitations SEC. 2. _he last sentence of section 304(a) of _he Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (relating to reports by political cornmlttees and candidates) is amended to read as follows: "Such reports shall be complete as of such date as the supervisory officer may prescribe, which shall be not less than five days before the date of filing, except that any contribution received beginning or expend(turo made d_lng the period ten days before the date of the election and ending on the date of the election shall be reported within twenty-four hours after such contribution or expenditure is received or made, respectively.". DISCLOSURE B_/' CAi_DmATE O_ t_NOWlq[ I_qDE]PENDENTCONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPEi_DrrLrRES SEC. 3. Section 305 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 is amended by desighating the first paragraph thereof as subsection (a) and by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection: '(b) A candidate who knows of such a contribution or expenditure a person shall include the identity by of such person and amount of such contribution or expenditure in the statements he files under section 304." it would go unreported ur tfi the January 31 reporting da':e, long af;er the election, I]_ the main purpose of disfiosi:ng political campaign contributions i_, to let the public know who supports a candidate and ti) whom _hat candidate may be beholden after an election, then the 1971 act does not do the job. As it now ,';lands, the 1971 act leaves a 5-day period of limbo between the closing date for the last filing period :prior to t_he elect(da and the filing date itself, when largecolttributionsover $5,000 must begin to be reported within 4:9hours of receipt. TO clarify th:is further, let me use exa:t dates, 'such as will be encountered by campaign treasurers during the upoom... ing election campaigns this fall. Under the 1971 act, there is a filing date 15 days prfor _o the election, or _n October 21.; and one 5 days prior to ;he election, or Ol.q October 31. The report due on dctober 31 must be complete as of October 2!], or 10 days prior to tie elect/on, and covers contributions received since the last filing--_vhlch was dui on October 21, .--:not only on media spending, but also on the size of contributions--are an infringement on constitutional freedoms guaranteed by the first amendment. Mr. t:_cesident, amendment No. 1071 to S. 3044 gives the American people true reform in the financing and conducting 0f Federal elections. It is a realistic and needed reform measure, based on full disclosure and the plugging-_of a bad l.oophole in the existing Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971. Further, Mr. il?resident, this substitute amendment, if _maeted into law, will stand the test of I:.he courts and the Constitution. :Mr. President, there is one further [_rovision in amendment number 1071 _o S. 3044 to which I want to address myself. Too often, political candidates r'ceive support from groups not directly :_onnected with their campaigns but which nonetheless provide assistance to khem. I speak here not only of so-called _;oft money contributions from powerful tabor union bosses that we hear so much about these days; but also, I speak of the 278 March 29, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE aid provided by other organizations, formed for the specific purpose of rallylng support around a particular candidate by rallying support for a particular issue which he espouses, thereby evading the letter and the spirit of the 1971 Act. Amendment 1071 takes care of these groups also by requiring that they report their expenditures made on behalf of a candidate; and further, by requiring that each candidate who has knowledge of any contribution ' made to him shall report the contribution and the person making it. This, in effect, places the burden on the candidate and his committee to report the receipt Of "soft money" contributions, aid from issue groups, et cetera, Mr. President, we will never have campaignreform with public financing. Cornpetition for campaign dollars and voter support, with full disclosure of where ali of the money came from and is going, is the way to have fair and honest elections. Take away the competition, as public financing will do, and you take away co'n- S 4801 stitutionally guaranteed rights of expres-. sion, you encourage candidates to be un-. responsive to the people, and you effectively destroy that which you only meant to reform. Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-. sent to have printed in the RECORD a table which demonstrates how my amendment would close the 5-day loophole. There being no objection, the table was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: HELM'SAMENDMENT CLOSES 5-DAYLOOPHOLE Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday 1. October.... 2 3 6 ............ 7........ 8__........ 9 ...... l0 13_.............. 14.................... 15...... 20..... 21.Filing datefor report 22...... due15daysbeforeelection. 28_........... 292 ..... 16.Closingdatefor report 17 due15daysbeforeelection. 23 .. 7.4 ........... 27_............ '3 ................ 10................ 302 4................... 5.............. 6 11................. 12.................... 13 .............. .... ........ .............. Friday Saturday 4......................... 5. 11......................... 12 ............ 18...................... 19. ............... 25...................... 26.1Closingdatefor report due5daysbeforeelection. 31._Filing datefor report 1. November.= ...... i .... 2, due5 daysbeforeelection. 7 ................. 8...................... *.... 9. 14 ................. 15......................... 16. A sodatewhenreportingof contributions morethan$5000must bemadewithin 48hours. Otherfilingdatesundersec.304(a)oftheFederalElections Campait:n Actof 1971are asfollows: The5-daygapwhenlargecontributionscan comein unreporteduntil Jan. 31, afterthe Mar.10,1974;June10,1974;Sept.10,1974;Jan.31,1975. electionis fromOct.27throughOct.3). Mr. HELMS. *Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. CANNON.' Mr. President, I yield myself 2 minut'es_ I do not think that a frivolous amendment such as this deserves 'more than 2 minutes time in response. I wish to say to my colleagues that all this does is knock out public financing; it knocks out the central campaign cornmittee which many people feel is imporrant; and it knocks out the Federal Election Commission which would be in this _ct. Furthermore, it requires complete disclosure of every penny of contributions. If a person makes a 25-cent contribution, there would be_ $1 worthof paperwork to do the filing and reporting of the terms and provisions of this proposal, We have a rather full disclosure provision in S. 372. The distinguished Senator from Rhode Island and many_other Senators spent a lot of time on that matter, helped in its passage, and it was passed by the House. But this amendment would require absolute disclosure of the name, address, and principal place of business of every person making every contribution. He could not pass the hat at a political gathering. He could not send out a solicitation by mail and have people s_nd tn $1 or $2 in contributions without having to spend more than he actually received to carry - out the reporting provision. Again I say to my colleagues that if they are opposed to the bill as it is now, vote for this amendment because all it is intended to do is to kill the bill as now written, Mr. l_resident, I am prepared to yield back my time. Mr. H_IS. Mr. President, I would like to propound a question to the distinguished Senator from Nevada. Does the Senator agree that the loophole I described in the present act does exist? Mr. CANNON. I am sorry. ! did not hear the description of the so-called loophole. If the Senator will describe it to me, I shall be glad to respond, Mr. HELMS. Between the 10th day before election day and the 5th day before election daY, as the law stands now, it is wide open. Candidates can do anything they want without the public knowing what is going on because no report is required in that period until January 31 of the following year. Furthor, under existing law, in the final five days before election day, contributions over $.5,000 must be reported within 48 hours. That is a loophole. This means that anything under $5,000 does not have to be reported, if contributed during the fifial 5 days of the campaign. Second, it means that the days before the election, 10 through 6, are the big holes because nothing is required to be reported until January 31. Third, the final days, 5 through 1, are only partially covered that is, the 48 hours' reporting requirement, Mr. CANNON. I would be happy to respond to the Senator. Under existing law, if a person receives $5,090 it must bereported within 48 hours. If the candidate received a campaign contribution of $5,000, 54 hour§ before the election he has to file the complete report on it. Under this bill the Senator is saying this this is a loophole; under this bill he cannot receive a contribution of $5,000. Mr. HELMS. Oh, yes he can. Mr. CANNON. The amount he can receive from any one person is $3,000. There ts still the 5-day reporting under the terms of this bill. It is $6,000 from the committee but $3,000 is the maximum from an individual. We adopted the $6,000 amendment yesterday so that a committee could give the same as a hus.. band and wife, who together can glw) $6,000. But one individual can only giw) $3,900 under the terms of this bill as it stands now, and the filing is required 5 days before the election. Mr. President, I am prepared to yield back the remainder of my time. Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, will Some.. one yield me 30 seconds to ask a ques.tion? Mr. HELMS. I yield to the Senator' from Tennessee. Mr. BAKER. Is It lawful unde r the, present bill or under the amendment as proposed by the Senator from North. Carolina to contribute anything during those 5 days before the election? Mr. CANNON. Is it lawful to do so? Yes. Mr. BAKER. When is that reported? Mr. CANNON. There is a reporting period.. :[t is not necessary to report be-. fore the election because the committee determ_aed that between the 5 days and. the election it is really a bookkeeping process that cannot be reported and pub-. licized in that time. But the dangers of the big contributions have been taken out of the present bill. This is where the last minute big contributions entered into tt in .previous periods of _ime. This was an important loophole. . Mr. t._AKER. It still is. I a m not con-. vinced ,that a way could not be found through the proliferation of committees to make possible a great many $5,000 contributions. I have an amendment I will call up later which would place a prohibition on the receipt of any campaign contrlbu*. tions at all, say 10 days before the elec-. tion, so there will be full disclosure be-. fore election day. May :£ ask one question of the Sena-. tot from North Carolina? 279 S 4802 CONGRESSIONAL RI]CORD --- S.ENATE March 29, 19 74 .Mr. HF.LMS. I am delighted to yield. Mr. BAKER. Do I understand the Sen_ ator's araendment removes the limitation on contribution? Mr, HF.LMS. No, it does not address itself to limi_tion. It specifies what will be reported. But it leaves the limitations as they are. Mr. BAKER. I do not think it makes much difference. I am not sure how I am going to vote on this amendment, but I want my colleagues to know that there is :mother amendment coming up which would make it unlawful to receive contributions a certain number of days before the election. Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, will the manager of the bill yield for a ques._ tion? Mr. CANNON. I yield, Mr. PASTORE..Is not the main thrust of the amendment which is presently being considered to do away with pub.lic financing? Mr. CANNON. Yes. Mr. PASTORE. That is the main thrust of the amendment. The other part is a sweetener, and I think if it is to be considered at all, it ought to be consid_ered separately. The main thrust of the amendment is to knock out public fi.nancing. That is another way of getting around the so-called Allen amendment that was defeated. Mr. HELMS. One ofthe main thrusf_ of the araendment is indeed to prevent putting the burden of campaign ex.penses on the backs of the taxpayer. The Senator is correct, but that ts just one of the thrusts of the amendment. There is nothing devious about it. I think I haw_ been as franck and open about this amendment as I can be. If Senators want to put the burden of financing political campaigns on the taxpayers, that is, of course, their prerogative. If they want to leave this gap, where hanky-panky will continue, that is their business, but I am unalterably opposed to it. But, the Sen.. ator is correct; this amendmentwillpre.. vent both. Senators may vote their wishes on the matter. Mr. PASTORE. I have not accused the Senator of any deviousness. I am merely saying the main thrust of the amend-, ment is to do away with public financing, That is the main thrust of it. I think we ought to lmow that. Mr. HELMS. That is one of the thrust_ of it. opposed There was no attempt to digress, I am to public financing of po-. litical campaigns. There is no question Monday, and that i_.mediately fonow, lng the disl_)sition thereof, the Bellman amendment (No. 1094_ be called up, o_t which there :is a time limitation, and t]aa_:; on the disposition oi amendment Nc. 1094 by Mr. BELLMON, amendment No, 1095 by Mr. BELLMON be called up, and that upon disposition of amendment No. 1095 by Mr. BELLMON, amendment No. 1081 by Mr. BUCKLEY be called up, and, that there he a time limitation on the Bugkley amendment )f 1 hour, to be equally divided and 2ontrolled in ac, cordance with the usual form. These requests have been cleared o_L _th sides. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withou; objection, it is so order_. Mr. CANY4!ON. Mr. President, I yie]ci back: the remainder of my time. The PRESIDING O1;FICI_L_R.The ques_ tion is on agreeing to the amendment o:i the Senator from North Carolina. Th, yeas and nays have been ordered, ant the clerk will call the roll. The second assistant legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that the Senator fre_ Alabama (M:r. ALLEN), the Senator f ._om Indiana (Mr BAY]_I), the Senator from Iowa (Mr, CLARK), the Senator from Florida (_I:r CHILES), the, Senator from Mississipp: (Mr. EASTLAB'D),the Senator from No]rtk Carolina (Mr. ERVIN), the Senator fron_ Arkansas (Mir. FULBRI, IHT), the Senato__, from Maine (Mr. HATIqAWAY), the Sena_ tor from South Carolina (M[r.._-V-IOLLINGS) the Senator from Io_a (Mr. HUGHES) the Senator from Massachusetts (_J:c KENNEDY), t:._e Senator from Ohio (_lr ME_I_ZENBAUM), the Senator fron_ Minnesota (]_Ir. MOND _LE),the SenaLm from N_ l_.[exico (M,,. MONTOYA), th_ _ Senator from Utah (iVY,.Moss), the Sen_ ator from Maine (Mr. IfiUSEIE), the Senator from Wisconsin (Mr. NELSON), ant the Senator from Mississippi (_/I:c ST_.rrNrS) are necessarily _b:_ent. I also announce taat the Senato_ from Texas _Mr. BENT_EN), the Senai_0_ 1'rom Michigan (Mr. HA_,T), and thc Senator from. Louisiana (M:_. JOHNS_O_) are absent on official business, I further a:._nounce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Iowa (Mr CLARK)and the Senator from Ohio (Mr, METZE]NfBAUM) would es,ch vote "nay." Mr. TOWER. I anncqmce that the Sero ator from Maryland (Mr. BEALL), th6 Senator from. Oklahoma (i_[r. BELLMO]¢) the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. about that. Thisof amendment the reporting contributions improves provi.., sions. BSOCK), the COTTON) Senator J'rom New Hamp.shire (Mr. the .qenator from Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, will the manager of the biU yield me 1 minute'..' Mr. CANNON. I yield 1 minute to the Senator from West Virginia. Arizona (Mr. FANNIN), the Senator from of his secretaries,: nd he announced that Ar_ona (Mr. GOLrWA:mS), the Sena_>0r approved on iV[arch and 27, sign,_d 19' 4, the the act President (S. 2315)had to from Michig_m (Mr. GRIFF:m), the Senamend the minimum limits of compensaator from New York iMr. JAVITS), the tion of Senate cor_mittee employees and Senator from Maryland (Mr. M.ATHIAS)· 'tO amend the inc icia _ ' on the Senator from IlliLois (Mr. PE_C_e) · franked mail, and ifor other r,_qmrements purposes. the Senator from P,mnsylvania (Mr. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, is the order on toMonday vote on Weicker amendment at 3the p.m.? The Pi_,ESIDING OFFICER. Apprexl_. mately. UI_A:N_OUS-CONSENT AGREF_ENT Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I ask unani-, mous consent that the vote on the Welcker :_,nendment occur at 3 p.ra. on 280 YIvca_ SCOT_), thethe Senator (Mr. STEVENS), S_nator from fromAlaska Okic (Mr. T_FT), the Senaior from Virginia (Mr. WrLLZA_ 'L. SCOT:') are necessarily absent, I also anncunce that the Senator fr(mq Oregon (Mr. HATFIELD] iS absent on official business, I further announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. An_,_) is absent due to illness in t,he famliy. I li'arther announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mn HUGH SCOT_), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. TAFT) would each vote "nay." On this vote, the Senator from Maryland (Mr. BEALL) ispaired with the Senator from Oregon (Mr. HATFIELD). If present and voting, the Senator from Maryland would vote "yea" and the Senator from oregon would vote "nay." The result was announced--yeas 20, nays 43, as follows: Baker [No. 99 Leg.] YEAS---20 Fong Gurney Hansen Helms Hruska McClellan lqAYS----43 Dominlck Bartlett Benn._tt Buek)ey Byrd, HarTy P., Curtis; Abouc'ezk Jr. Hartke McCIure Nunn Roth Tatmadge Thurznond Tower Welcker Pearson Bible Haskell Pell Bidei_. Huddleston Proxmire Brool::e Humphrey Randolph Burd Lck Inouye Ribicoff Byrd, Robert C. Jackson Schwelker cannon Long Spaxkman Case Magnuson Stafford Chur cica Mansfield Stevenson Cook McGee Symington Cranston McGovern Tunney Dole McIntyre Williams Dome:nlci Metcalf Young Eagleton Packwood Graw_,l Pastore NOT VOTING_37 Aiker Fulbright Mondale Allen Goldwater Montoya Bayh Griffin Moss Beall Hart Muskle Bellmon Hatfield Nelson Bent_en Hathaway Percy Brock Holllngs Scott, Hugh Chiles Hughes Scott, Clark Javlts Wfillam L. cotto:a Johnston Stennls Eastl:;_lld Kennedy Stevens Ervin Mathlas Taft Fann]n _l[etzenbaura Se :Mr. HELMS' amendment (No. 1071) was rejected. Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Dorothy Parker Of Senator FONO'S staff be accorded the privilege of the floor during the consideration of S. 3044. The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, it is so ordered. MESSAGE FRO_ APPRO¥ _rHE PRESIDENT-kL OF Brr,r, A message in w 'iting the President of the Unitec States :Dom was communicateq to the Sena e by Mr. Hefting, one LEGIsLATI /-E PROGRAM Mr. TOWER. ]_r. President, I ask unanimous consen that I be recognized out of order to en_ _ge in a colloquy with the distinguished Senator from West Virginia concernin the further business' of the Senate. March 29, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE Without ob- S 4803 The VICE PRESE )ENT. Without objection, it is so ordE Rd. Mr. TOWER. I _ )uid simply like to ask the Senator from _rest Virginia what he can project for u in the way of remaining Senate busi less today, and, in addition to the Mort( ay orders, what he might anticipate thr, ughout next week. Mr. ROBERT C. B_ X_D. Mr. President, in response to the ( Lstinguished Senator's inquiry, I have i adeavored, on both sides of the aisle, to h quire as to whether or not there are _.ther amendments which we do not alreE r know about that could be called up th afternoon. I find that there are no Senl ors who are ready to call up further ame Ldments this afternoon, with the except Lon of the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. [-IUDDLESTON), who has an amendment c i which there is a time limitation of 30 ainutes, and there is every indication thi ;the distinguished manager of the bi] will accept the amendment, in which ase there may not be a rollcall vote on t iai amendment, In that event, ther _ will be no more rollcall votes today. 4n amendment by the SenaJ_or from _onnecticut (Mr. WrXCKE_) 'will be Iai 4 down today, but the distinguished autl_r of that amendment wishes to talk at_omewill length it, and consequently theJ_ be no onvote The VICE jection, it is so Mr. Senator from that he will day, and ! am the distinguished will accept it. It bu Mr. distinguished is there any ment could be Mr. that he is here. But we can do it, it will not take day. Mr. ROBERT C. he would want to is acceptable voice vote, he can Monday. Mr. also that we would the but it may not be up in the Senate week. It might be cause it will be a there will be on a lot lot of debate it. on The that Senate amendment will tkt Iday. .n adjourn until Monday at noon. AftAr two special orders on Monday of 5 minutes each, there will be routine norning business until 1 o'clock, at whie I time the Senate will resume the corr lderation of the Weicker amendment, _ Lth a vote to occur on that amendment aJ ;er 2 hours of debate, at 3 p_m. Following the vote on the Weicker amendment, the Senat(: from Oklahoma (Mr. BELLMON) has tw, on each of which there is , amendments 30-minute limitation, and they will be taken up in succession, with yea and r _y votes thereon, at the conclusion of w rich a Senator, I believe Mr. ROTH---Or _ather, I am informed, Mr. BUCKLEY- -has an amendmerit on which there 9 a 1-hour limitation, and there will be rollcall vote on that amendment, So as it looks from lq re, there will be at least four rollcall vol _s on Monday. Mr. Mr. that. But I wanted the Senator ment. I have talked the bill; I talked tor from Nevada, over the weekend amendment, Mr. ROBERT C. Mr. TOWER. Can th, Senator project what our business is IH ely to be beyond Monday? I am trying-t_ get his overview of the entire week, if t] at is possible, to the extent that the di tinguished Senator from West Virgini knews. Mr. ROBERT C. BYlq ). The principal thing would be--and ] have discussed this with thethe disting leader--that Sena: ished _ will majority continue with the consideration qfthe unfinished business, with no-fault iSsurance waiting in the wings at some l_int, and the education bill coming along also. So we have three difficult pieces of legislation which will require some time for the Senate to complete. A busy _veek lies ahead. Mr. TOWER. I thank the Senator from West Virginia. ! Mr. President, I ask _nanimous consent that the order to tal_up the amendment of the Senator fr_m New Mexico The VICE PRESIDENT. Under the previous order, the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. HUDDLESTON) iS recognized to call up an amendment, on which there is to be a vote in 30 minutes at the latest, Mr. HUDDLESTON. Mr. President, I call up my Amendment No. 1114. The VICE PRESIDENT. The amendment will be stated. The legislative clerk proceeded to read the amendment, Mr. HUDDLESTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, it is so ordered, Mr. HUDDLESTON'S amendment (No. 1114) is as follows: On page 25, beginning with line 10, strike out through llne 14 and Insert In lieuthereo£ debates by major candidates, it is highly desirable. However, as writtml, it is subject to great abase that could be detrimental to the election process and to the public interest. It would, fo]' instance, permit each broadcast station to be sole judge of which candidates could use its facili.. ties. A station could give one candidate an unlimited amount of free time while severely limiting or denying his oppo-. nents any use at all. Some candidates could be totally precluded from any broadcast exposure. As a broadcast station owner and man.. ager for some 20 years, I believe that the vast majority of the Nation's broadcast-. ers would be scrupulously fair in provid-. lng all candidates an opportunity to usc their facilities. Yet the possibility for the above mentioned abuses does exist a.,; the revision is presently contained in sec-, tion 201(a) of S. 3044. Therei!ore, my amendment would per.. mit the automatic waiving of the equal time requirement of ,,;ection 315 of the Commurdcations Act of 1934 for Presi- (Mr. DOMENICI) be vacaTd, the following: dential Mr. President, the an amendment probably on Monthat perhaps from Nevada not take much time, May I ask the from Washington, that that amendup today? Well, I do not know can if he wants to. think, very quickly; 5 minutes on MortIn the event it up today, if it mn be handled by it either today or I want to suggest to proceed on _ as soon as possible, ready for taking early part of next in the week, be;, complex bill, and amendments and a FEDERAL ELECTION AMENDMENTS Yes.understand We all to give notice that has an amendthe authors of with the SenaI am hopeful that will accept that well. CAMPAIGN OF 1974 ACT The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill (S. 3044) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing of primary and general election campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating to the financing and conduct of such campaigns, A1V_ENDMENT _0. _4 sec. 201. (a) Section 315(a) of the Com.. munlcattons Act of 1934 (47 U,8.C. 315(a) is amend(._d(A)"; by inserting "(1)" immediately after "(a) (B) by redesignatlng paragraphs (1), (3), (3), and (4) as subparagraphs (A), (B), (C), and (D), respectively; and (C) by adding at the end thereof the fol-. lowing new paragraphs:. "(2) The obligation imposed by the first sentence of paragraph upon acandidate licensee with respect to a legally(I)qualified for any elective office (other than the offices of President and Vice President) shall be met; by such licensee with respect to such candidate if-"(A) tim licensee makes available to such candidate, not less than five minutes oI broadcast time without charge; the mail licensee notifies by"(B) certified at least fifteensuch dayscandidate prior to the election of the availability of such time; and "(c) such broadcast will cover, in whole or in part, the geographical area in which such election is held. "(3) Iq()candidate shall be entitled to the use pursuant (2)to un.. an offer ofby broadcast a licensee facilities under paragraph less such candidate not[ties the licensee in writing of his acceptanc,., of thc offer within forty-eight hours after receipt of the offer." Mr. HUDDLESTON. iVfr. President, the purpose of the amendment is quite simple: To insure every legallytoqualified candidate has that an opportunity present his views. In order to do that, I am seeking tx) amend _,;ection 201(a) of the reported bill. The purpose of section 201(a) of S. 3044, as reported, is to encourage broad.. cast stations to schedule debates or dis-. cussion programs featuring office. the The major candidates for a particular re.. quirement that all candidates for the same omce be given equal time when there are numerous candidates, some of a "minor" nature, has proven to be a significant deterrent to this type of pro-. graming To the extent that the revision proposed by theappearances, committee promotes joint broadcast including and Vice Presidential races--but 281 S 4804 CO_.qGRZESSIONAL for other elections it could be waived only ff the broadcast station offers 5 minutes of free time to ali candidates seeking the same office. In my judgment, the requirement of 5 minutes of time for each candidate for a particular office, even ff there are seeeral, would not be such an onerous burden on the broadcast station as to preclude _Lhe scheduling of debates or discussions with the leading candidates and at the same time would insure that every candidate would have at least a minimal opportunity to present his views, Again, calling on my experience as a broadcaster, I am convinced that' this modification is in the best interest of the election processes, the broadcast industry, and most importantly, the general public. Mr. President, I believe the managers of the bill are in general agreement with this proposed amendment. I urge its adoption and reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. CAi_q_ION. Mr. President, may I ask a question of the distinguished author of amendment? Do I correctly understand now lhat section 315 would be waived With respect to the President and the Vice President? Mr. H_DDLESTON. That is correct, automatically, Mr. CANNON. With respect to the other offices, it would be waived only in the event the broadcasters were to give 5 minutes to every candidate or to every major candidate; is that not correct? Mr. HUDDI_STON. To each candidate running for the same oence, not merely major contenders. M_.. CA:NNON. To each candidate running for the same office, May I _k the Senator further, the pending bill relates only to Federal elections. Does the Senator intend by his amendment to extend this beyond Federal elections to elections of a stateWide nature for the purpose of section 3157 Mr. HUDDLESTON. That is correct. The only differentiation in the elections in my amendment is the election for President ',and Vice President. They can be treated legitimately as a separate case because that is a nationwide contest, of course, and they are viewed by alt the citizens this offices countrywould at the time. So those oftwo be same automatically exempt from the equal time requlrement_,_ of section 315 of the Cornnlunications Act. Beyond that, all other races whether for Congress, the school board, the Crow ernor, whatever, would be treated the same. A station could be exempted, provided it offered all candidates seeking the same office 5 minutes free time. The reason I believe it should apply to ali levels and not just Federal is thai the broadcast stations then would be able to _reat all elections in the same way and Would not have to keep a separate set of books or regulations for candidates rmming for the Senate, for Con_ dress, for' Governor, or whatever, Mr. CAlq_ION. But this amendment WOuld impose no requirement on the broadcasters to furnish free time? Mr. HUDDLESTON. No, sir. 282 RECORD-- SEN ,UtE March 29, 1974 Mr. CANNON. If they furnish free authc,rized me to say that; he is prepared time, they would have to give the tirae to accept the amendment., to every candidate? Mr,. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield Mr. I-HTDDLESTON. '[_nat is correct. _J._ back the remainder of my time. they give one candidat,_ free time, then Mr. HUDDLESTON. Mr. President, I they must offer at lea_t 5 :minutes free yield _ck the remainder of my time. time to every other canc[idate seeking the The VICE PRESIDENT. All time on same office, this :_aendment has now been yielded Mr. CANNON. Would ;hat be on a race-, back. by-race basis? Per ex_:nple, let us sup-. Th,_, question is on agreeing to the pose a broadcaster determined, in a race amenchnent--No. 1114--4ff the Senator far the governorship, tLat he would give from :Kentucky (Mr. HUm)LESTON). the candidates free time a:ad therefore Tho amendment was agreed to. he would have to give E,very candidate 5 minutes free 1lime. If that were the cas',e, and there were a candidate running for SENATOR BUCKLEY ON attorney general at the _ame time, would[ CAMPAIGN REFOR_ he have to, likewise, th_;n give that time Mr ROTH. Mr. President, in the most to the other candidate? receni; issue of the publication, Human Mr_ HUDDLESTON. No sir, he would. Events, the distinguished junior Sennot. It would k_ strictly on a race-by-race ,'_tor l'rom New York (Mr. BUCKLrY) has basis. I-re could seek exemption in the prese:r_ted a clear analys:is of the camrace for Governor but not for any other paig_ reform legislation which is now race going on at the sarr_e time. The being considered on the Senate floor. amendment applies to all car.Ldidatesrrm-. After observing that the great system ning for the same office, of campaign financing needs reform, Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, will the, f_enator BUCKLEY states his belief that Senator from Kentucky yield? any new legislation should encourage, Mr, HUDDLESTON. I yield, rather than diminish, each citizen's parMr. PASTORE. I ha, re looked at thls ticipation in the political process. I conamendment. As a matt_,r of fact, I have cur ir_ my colleague's position and X am had a talk with the distinguished sportpleased that he has expressed his supsor of it. It is quite an hnprcvement ov,_r port :i!or my proposal that, as an alterthe language in the btu as presently natiw:; to "public financing" of elections, drawn. This would exenpt it complete[y the maximum tax credit allowable for from the office of President and Vice President, which is desirable, acreased poli.tlcal into acontribution level which should will givebe each As bhe Senate knows, I have remarked priva_:,e individual a gre_ter incentive on this a hum'her of times. V_qxen I talked to vo]lmtarily contribute to the candito the presidents of the ,,arious networks, date c_,fhis or her choice. ABC, CBS, and NBC, lhey did promise The detailed responses which Senator that if we lfft_._d the exe:nption from s_BUCKLEY has made to the probing question 315, they would b,.· wiJ:ling to give tions presented in this interview deserve adequate time to candidates for the the considered attention of every public Presidency and the Vice Presidency. official who is committed, to supporting Everyone knows how expensive that is true %ampaign reform" legislation. I and what a be,on it wouJ d be in the ca.rau.rge each of my colleagues to study Senapaign, 'as we are now talking a:bout a tot ]ClUCKLEY'Scomments and to give limitation of :_unds. them _heir careful attention throughout As to other Federal ,)ffices and Sta_e the debate on S. 3044 and other legislaof/ices, there, I am af.'aid, that ff we tion cesigned to reform the conduct and lifted it completely, we could open up a financing of political campaigns. can of worms because we have many I ask unanimous consent that the people who fe_;1that in many cases--ar,d S_nator's comments be printed in the this sensitivity has some merit -if we le:[t It_co_D. it entirely to the discretion of the local Th_ PRESIDING OFF][CER. Without stations whether radio or television, we objection, it is so ordered. would be more or less at the mercy _f the owner who could us_ the medium 1_ [rrcm Human Events, March 30, 1974] his own advantage day iffter day editor[BENATOR BUCKLEYON' CA_//PAIGIq RE_vOaM alizing on radio and television. There is (N_,_.--_e senate is scheduled to take no objection to editorializing, of course, _:p ca-)_f_paignreform legislation this week. expressly favoring one l)articular cand[The _!_illamong under many conside_'ation--S 3044-i:_cluiles, changes, a proposal date. But if he could d) that day after /,_r p_,blie financing o! campaigns. Sen. day and not give the oprosition any time, _uck_y (C.-R.-N.Y.) has made an in-de?_t_ we could be in serious tr)uble, study o! the entire measure an_l in the/elThat ihas b_mn discussed on the floor to_oing exclusive interview, discusses the of the Senate for a lonf' time. With this- numerous practical and constitutional obprovision, if they give time to anyone, _eetions to the bilL) they h_:ve to give 5 minute's to all, to that Q. President Nixon recently made a rather lengthy statement on campaign reform. What particular office. 80 T ')hink this is ail was year reaction to his proposals? improvement and I will support it. ,_. There were too many proposals included M_,. CANNON. Mr. Presidlent, on the in his package _o allow me to give you anybasis of that explanation, ! am wiUing thing _:_venapproaching a definitive answer to accept the amendment, here, 'l:Rtt I will saywith that theI find In genera:L agreement thrustmyself of his Mr. TOWEB. 1_'. Pres[den_, I have disproposal_--espeeially as compared with those cussed this with the distinguished minorIncluded in S 3044, the hilt recently reported ity manager, the distinguished Senator out of _he Senate Committ¢_ on Rules and :from Kentucky (Mr. CooK), and he hs_s Admln:istratlon. March 29, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL The President's proposals seem designed to deal with the problems in our present systern, while the Senate bill we will hays before us shortly would scrap that system. I would be among the first to admit that our present system of selecting candidates and financing campaigns needs reform, but I am not at all convinced that we should abandon it for a scheme that would diminish citizen participation in polities and, tn all probability, would create more problems than it would solve, Q. S 3044 is the bill that includes public financing of presidential, Senate and House campaigns, isn't it? A. That's right. The bill that we will soon debate includes provisions that would allow candidates for any federal office to draw on tax f'ands to finance their campaigns. The system would replace the essentially private system now in effect and would cost the American taxpayer some $358 million every four years, More importantly, however, this scheme presents us with grave constitutional and practical questions that I hope will be fully debated on the floor of the Senate before we vote. Q. Why do you object so strongly to public financing? A. I object because I am convinced that such drastic measures are needed to clear up the problems we confront, because ! suspect that the proposals as drawn are unconstitutional and because if implemented they would alter the political landscape of this country in a way that many don't even suspect and very few would support, Those in and out of Congress who advocate public financing are selling it as a cure-all for our national and political ills. For example. Sen. Kennedy recently went so far as to say that "most, and probably all, of the serious problems facing this country today have their roots in the way we finance political campaigns .... " This statement reminds one of the hyperbole associated with the selling of New Frontier and Great Society programs in the '60s. The American people were asked then to accept expensive and untried programs as panaceas for all our ills. Those programs didn't work. They were oversold, vastly more expensive than anyone anticipated, and left us with more problems than they solved. Public financing is a Great Society approach to another problem of public concern and like other solutions based on the theory that federal dollars will solve everything should be rejected, Q. In what ways should public financing "alter the political landscape"? A. In several very important if not totally predictable ways. First, under our present system potential candidates must essentially compete for prirate support, and to attract that support they have to address themselves to issues of major importance to the people who will be contributing to their campaigns and voting for them on election day. Public financing might allow candidates to ignore these issues, fuzz their stands and run campaigns in which intelligent debate on important matters is subordinated to a "Madison Avenue" approach to the voters, Let me give you a couple of examples. Durlng the course of the 1972 campaign, it is reported that Sen. McGovern was forced by tho need for campaign money to place greater emphasis on his support of a Vietnam pullout than his political advisers thought wise. They felt that he should have downplayed the issue and concentrated on others that might be better received by the electorate, I don't doubt for a minute that the senator's emphasis on his Vietnam position hurt him, but I wonder if we really want to move toward a system that would allow a candidate to avoid such issues or gloss over positions of concern to millions of Americans. RECORD-- SENATE S 4805 The need to court the support of other groups creates similar problems. Those who believe that we should maintain a friendly stance toward Israel, for example, as well as those who think a candidate should support union positions on a whole spectrum of issues want to know where a candidate stands before they give him their vocal and financial support. The need to complete for campaign dollars forces candidates to address many issues and I consider this vital to the maintenance of a sound democratic system, Second, millions of Americans now contribute voluntarily to federal, state and local political campaigns. These people see their decision to contribute to one campaign or another as a means of political expression. Public financing of federal general election campaigns would deprive people of an opportunity to participate and to express their strongly held opinions. They would still be contributing, of course, since the Senate proposal will cost them hundreds of millions of dollars in tax money, But their participation would be compulsory and would involve the use of their money to support candidates and positions they find morally and politically reprehensible, Third, the proposal reported out of the Senate Rules Committee, like similar proposais advanced in the past, combines public financing with strict limits on expenditures, These limits must, on the whole, work to the benefits of incumbents, since they are lower than the amount that a challenger might have to spend presently in a hotly contested race if he wants to overcome the advantages of his opponent's incumbency, Fourth, the various schemes devised to distribute federal dollars among various candidates and between the parties has to affect power relationships that now exist. Thus, if you give money directly to the candidate you further weaken the party system. If you give the money to the national party, you strengthen the national party organization relative to the state parties. If you aren't extremely careful you will free,_e out or lock in minor parties. These are real problems with significant policy consequences that those who.drew up the various public financing proposals tended to ignore. Public financing will have two significant effects on third parties, neither desirable. In the first place, it will discriminate against genuine national third-party movements (such as that of George Wallace in 1968) because such parties haven't had the chance to establish a voting record of the kind required to qualify for financing. On the other hand, once a third party qualifies for future federal vested interest arises in keepingfinancing, it alive_ a posed by the law. This had the effect of restricting the freedom both of individuals wishing to buy ads and of newspapers and other media that might carry them and, in the opinion of the D.C. court, violated the 1st Amendment. Q. Bu'_ Senator, according to the report prepared by the Senate Rules Committee on S 3044, it is claimed that these questions were examined and that the committee was satisfied that objection,_ involving the effect of the legislation on existing political arrangements were without real functions. A. I cern only say that I must respectfully disagree with my colleagues on the Rules Committee. The committee report discusses a. number of compromises worked out tn the process of drawing up S 3044, but I don't think these compromises do very much to answer the objections I have raised. The ethlcal, constitutional and practical questions remain. The fact ts that the ultimate impact c,f a proposal of this kind on our present party structur,_ cannot be accurately predicted. $ 3044 may either strengthen parties because of the crucial control the party receives over what the committee calls the "margins_l increment" of campaign contributions, or it may further weaken the parties because the government subsidy is almost assured to the candidate, thereby relieving him of substantial reliance on the "insurance" the party treasury provides. One can't be sure and that alo_ae should lead one to doubt the wisdom of supporting the bill as drawn. As for third parties, the effect of the bill is equally unclear. It does avoid basing sup-. port for third parties simply on performance in the last election and. thus "perpetuating" parties '_ha% are no longer viable. But the proposal do_s not deal, for instance, with the possibility of a s}pit in one of the two major parties---where two or more groups claim the mantle of the old party. Q. Se:aator Buckley, advocates of publJ.c financing of federal election campaigns claim that political campaigning in America is such an expe:nsive proposition that only the ve_'y wealthy and those beholden to special In.. terests can really afford to run for office. Do you agree with this claim? A. No. I do not. Pirst, it is erronecus to charge that we spend an exorbitant amount on political cam.palgns :in this country. In relative terms we spend far less on our campaigns than h_ spent by other democracies and, frankly, I think we get more for our money. Thus, while we spent approximately $1.12 per vote, in all our 1968 campaigns, the last year for which we haw_ comparative figures, even if the George Wallace who gave it its sole reason for existence should move on. Thus we run the risk of financing a proliferation of parties that could destroy the stability we have historically enjoyed through our two-party system. Q. You say public financing raises grave constitutional questions. Are you saying that these plans might be struck down in the courts? A. It is obviously rather difficult to say in advance just how the courts might decide when we don't know how the case will be brought before them, but I do think there i_ a real possibility that subsidies, expenditure limiSations and contribution ,ceilings could all be found unconstitutional. All of these proposals raise 1st Amendment questions since they all either ban, limit or direct a citizen's right of free speech, In this light it is interesting to note that a three-Judge panel in ttxe District of Columbis has already found portions of the 1971 act unconstitutional, The 1971 Act prohibits the media from charging for political advertising unless the candidate certifies that the charge will not cause his spending to exceed the limits ira- An index Israel was ofspending comparative more cost than of$211968 perreveals vote. that political expenditures in democratic countries vary widely from 27 cents in Aus.tralia to the far greater amount spent in Israel. _This index shows the U.S. near the bottOmsuch countriesin per vOteas IndiaexpenditureSand Japan.al°rig with Second, I think we should make it clear that th_ evidence suggests that most contributors--large as well as small--givemoney to didate's c_nd:{dates beliefs, because not because they support they aretheoutto canbuy themselves a congressman, a governor or a President. Many of those advocating federal financing forget this ill their desire to condemn private campaign funding as an evil has run for public office re,do thatAnyone must who be abolished. izes that most of those who give to a campaign are honest public-spirited people who simply want to see a candidate they suppo:rL elected because they believe the country will benefit from his point of view. To suggest otherwise impresses me as insulting to those who seek elective office and to t2xe millions of Americans who contribute to their campaigns. I don't mean to imply that there aren't ex., 2_: 3 S 4806 CONGRESSIOI"_'AL ceptions to this rule. There are dishonest people in politics as there are in other professions, but they certainly don't dominate the profession, Q. But doesn't the wealthy candidate have a real advantage under our current system? A. Oh, he has an advantage all right, but I'm not sure it's as great as some people would have us believe. I say this because I am convinced that given adequate time a viable candidate will be able to attract the financial support he needs to get his campaign off the ground and thereby overcome the initial advantage of a personally wealthy opponent. And I am also convinced that a candidate who doesn't appeal to the average voter won't get very far regardless of how much money he throws into his own campaign, My own campaign :for the Senate back in 1970 illustrates this point rather clearly. I was running that year as the candidate of a minor party against a man who was willing and able ts, invest more than $2 million of his family's money in a campaign in which he began as the favorite, I couldn't possibly match him personally, but I was able to attract the support of more than 40,000 citizez.s who agreed with my posttions on the issue_. We still weren't able to match my opponent dollar for dollar--he spent twioe as much as we did--but we raised enough to run a creditable campaign, and we did manage to beat him at the polls, At the national level it is just as difficult to say that money is the determining factor and the evldenee certainly suggests that personal wealth won't get a man to the White House. If it were the case that the richest man always comes out on 'top, Rockefeller would have triumphed over Goldwater in 1964, Taft over Elsenb.ower in 1952 and neither Nixon nor Stevenson would ever h.ave received their parties'nominations What I'm saying, of course, is'that while money is important it isn't everything, Q. Wouldn't public financing assist challengers trying to uzmeat entrenched congressmen and senators who have lost touch with their constituents? A. I don't like to think of myself as oVerly cynical, but neither am I naive enough to believe that majorities in the House and Senate are about to support legislation that won't at least give them a fair shake, The fact is that most of the "reforms" we have been discussing work to the advantage of the incumbent--not the challenger. The incumbent has built-in advantages that are difficult to overcome under the best of circumstances and might well be impossible to offset if the challenger is forced, for example, to observe an unrealistically low spending limit, Incumbents are constantly in the public eye. They legitimately command TV and radio news coverage that is exempt from the "equal time" provisions of current law. They can regularly communicate with constituents on legislative issues, using franking privileges. ,Over the years they will have helped tens of thousands of constituents with specific problems involving the federal government. These all add up to a massiv'e advantage for the incumbent which may well require greater spending by a challenger to overcome, _. What kind of candidates will benefit from public financing? A. Any candidate who is better known when the campaign begins or is in a position to mobilize non-monetary resources must benelit as compared to less-known candidates and those whose supporters aren't in a position to give them such help. This is necessarily true because the spendlng and contributlorm limits that are an integral pa_$ of all the public funding proposals I have seen even out only one of the factors thai; will determine the outcome of given ca_npaign. Other factors therefore 284 RECORD -- SEN ,.ti.rE become increasingly impo:_tant and may well determine the winner on elec_lon day. Thus, incumbents who are usually better knowI1 -than their chalhmgers benefit because experience has shawn that a ch_llenger often he_ to spend significantly more than his incumbent opponent simply to achieve a minimum degree of recog_Lition, In addition, consider the mlv'antage that a candidate whose backers can donate time to his campaign will ha'Ts over one whrme backers Just don't have tae time to donate. In this conte_:t one can easily imagine a situation in which a liberal campus-oriented candidate might swamp _ man whose support comes primarily frorl blue collar, mid_ die-class workers who would contribute money to their max_, but don't have time t_j work in his campaign. Or consider the candidate running on an issue that attracts the wmal _md "indepen._ dent s_pport of groups that can provide indirect support without falling under the limitations imposed by law. The effectiveness of the anti-war movement and the way in which issue-oriented anti-war activists were able 'Lo mesh their effo_ts with those of friendly candidates illustrates the problem. David Broder of the Was hington Post noted in a very perceptive analysis of congressional maneuvering on this issue theft most mem. bers seem to sense that _hese reforms will, in fact, help a certain kind of candidate. His comments on this are wortil quoting at length. . . . iT]he 7ores by wMch the public fi.nancing proposal was passed in the Sen_ ate had a maxked partisan _nd ideological coloration. Most Democrats anti most liberals in both parties supportec, public finanetrtg; most Republicans and most conservatives in both parties voted against it. "The presumption that liberals and Dern_ ocrats would benefit from the change Ls strengthened by the realization that morJey is Just one of the source_ of influence on a political contest. If access to large sums ts eliminated as a potential adw_ntage of one candidate or party by the provision of equal public s ubsidi_ for ali, then the election outcome will Likely be ¢[etermined by the ability to mobilize other forces, "The most important of these other factors are probably manpower s nd publicity. Leg.islation that eliminates tae dollar influence on politics automatically enhances the in.fiuence of those who can provide manpower or publicity fo_ the campaign, "TLqat immediately coz Jure,; up, for tq;e._ publicans and 2onservatives, the union boss, the newspaper editor and the television an.chorman--three lndividu:_ls 9a whom the,,, axe rather reluctant to ertrust their fate o:_ electing the next President." Q. You indicated a fe_ minutes ago tBa'_ public financing will cost the American te.x.payer hundreds of millions of dollars and that many Americans mig at be forced to glw_ to candidates and carrpaigns they fi:nd repugna_lt, A. That's ri_;ht; It is _stimated that tt_e plan envisi0n_l by the _,ponsors of S 3044 would cost nearly $360 :nillion every fo_l:t' years and other plans that have been dis.cussed might _×mt even _nore. Necessaxily, this will involve spending tax dollars, extracted from i_dividuals for the support of canclidates and causes with whlr_h may of them will profoundly disagree. The fundamental o'oJection to this sort of thing was perlhaps best summ_d up nearly 200 years ago by Thomas Jefferso:a who wrote: "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinIu[ and tyrannical." Q. But won't this money be voluntarl,.y designated by taxpayers particlLpating in t'Ae cheek-off plan that has be, m in effect now for more than two years? A. Not exac':ly. As yo_x may recall, tlae_ March 29, 1974 check.,off was originally established to give individual taxpayers a chance to direct one dollar of their tax money to the political party of their choice for use in the next presicLential campaign. Whim it was extended by the Congress last year, :aowever, the ground rules were changed so that this year taxpayers are not able to ,_elect the party to which their dollar is to be directed. They are simply allowed to designatc that the dollar shcmld go into the ;Presidential Election Campaign Fund to be divideci up at a later date. Thus, while the taxpayer may still refrain from participating ;se m_ty well be directing his dollar to the opposition party if he elects to participate. A theoretical example will illustrate this. Let us assume that two candidates run in 1976 _nd that the money to be divided up amounts to $10 million dollars. Half of this would go to each candidate, but let us further assume that 60 per cent of this money or $6 million is contributed by Democrats. Under this set of circumstances a million Demo:_'rats would unwittingly be contributing to the campaign of a candidate they don't support and for whom they probably 'won't vote. If E; 3044 passes things will get even worse. During the first year only 2.8 per cent of the tax-paying public elected to contribute to the fund. This disappointing paxticlpation _as generally attributed to the fact that it was difficult to elect to participate. There:I'ore this year the form was simplified and a great effort is being made to get pecple to participate. As a result about 15 pe_ cent of those :filing appear to be participating and while 'this lrmrease seems to waxm the hearts of those who have plans for this money it will not raise nearly enough money to finance the comprehensive plan the sponsors of S :3044 l_.ave in mind. Therefore they have found a way to increase participation. Under the terms of S 3044 the check-off would be doubled to allow $2 from each Individual to go into 'the fund, but the individual taxpayer will no longer have to designate. Instead, his 82 wi!t be automatically designated for him unless he objects. This is a scheme designed to increase participation reminiscent of the 'way book clubs used to sell books by telling 'their members they would receive the mont!x's selection unless they chose not to. As I recall, Ralph Nader and his friends didn't like this practice when book clubs were engaged in it and one can only hope that 'they will be equally outraged now that 'Uncle Sam is in the act. But S 3044 goes further' still. If enough people resist in spite of the government's effort_; to get them to participate, the Congress will be authorized 1;o make up the difference out of general revenues. So, after all is said, it appears that the check-off is little more than a fraud on the taxpayer. This to me is one of the most objectionable features of this whole scheme. It is an attempt to make people think they axe participal:ing and exercising free choice when in fact their choices are being made for them by thc government. Q. iii there are problen_ and you ca_l't support public financing, Just what sort of reforn_ do you favor? A. I said earlier that I prefer the general thrus'l: of the President's message on campaign reform as compared to the directio_x represented by S; 3044. The President, unlike the sponsors of the Senate legislation we will soon be debating, seems to grasp the problems inherent in any overly rigid regulation e:f individual and group political activity in a f_:ee society. We have to recognize tha,t any regulation of polltlcal activity raises serious constitutional questions and involves limitations on the fr,i;edom of our citizens. This has to be kept _x mind as we analyze and judge the March 29, 19 7_ CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE $ 480'{' various "reform" proposals now before us. our Job involves a balancing of competing and often contradictory interests that Just Isn't as easy as it might appear to the casual observer, Thus, while we are called upon to do what we can to eliminate abusers, we must do so with an eye toward side effects that could render the cure worse than the disease, I happen to believe rather strongly that this is the case with public financing and with proposals that would impose arbitrary limits on campaign spending and, thereby, on political activity, The same problem must be faced if we decide to limit the size of individual political contributions. In this area, however, I would not oppose reasonable limits that would neither unduly discriminate against those who wish to support candidates they admire or gtve too great an advantage to other groups able to make substantial non-monotary contributions, The least dangerous form of regulation and the one I suspect might prove most effective in the long run is the one which simply.linposes disclosure requirements on candidates and political committees. The 1971 Act-which has never really been tested--was passed on the theory that major abuses could best be handled by full and open disclosure, The theory was that if candidates want to accept sizable contributions from people associated with one interest or cause as dpposed to another, they should be allowed to do so as long as they are willing to disclose receipt of the money. The voter might then decide if he wants to support the candidate in spite of--or because of--the financial support he has received. The far-reaching disclosure requirements written into the 1971 Act went in effect in April 1972 after much of the money used to finance the 1972 campaigns had already been raised. This money--raised prior to April 7, 1972---didnot have to be reported in detail A. Well, you may recall that Sen. Muskie's 1972 primary campaign reportedly ran into trouble after April 1972 because a number of his larger contributors were Republicans who didn't want it publicly known that they were supporting a Democrat. The disclosure requirements included in the 1971 Act clearly inhibited their willingness to give and, therefore, at least arguably had what constitutional lawyers call a "chilling effect" on their right of self-expression. These were large contributors with prominent names. Perhaps their decision to give should not be viewed as lamentable in the context of the purpose of the act. Q. Senator, are there any other "reforms" that you think Worthy of consideration? A. Well, there are a good many proposals being circulated that we haven't had a real chance to discuss, but I'm afraid most of them raise more questions than they answer, S. 3044 does contain one proposal that might be worth consideration and has, tn fact, been raised separately by a number of senators. Under our current tax laws a taxpayer can claim either a tax credit or a deduction for political contributions to candidates, political committees or parties of his choice. The allowable tax credit that can now be claimed amounts to $12.50 per individual or $25 on a Joint return and the deduction If limited to $50 or $100 on a Joint return, The authors of S. 3044 would double the allowable credits and deductions. Sen. Wtlliam V. Roth (R-Del.) has proposed that we go even further by increasing the allowable credit to $150 per individual or $300 for those filing Joint returns, These proposals would presumably increase the incentive for private giving without limiting the freedom of choice of the individual contributor. If any proposal designed to broaden the base of campaign funding is worth consideration would think this is it. and it was financed manythisof unreported the activities money that that have been included in what has come to be known as the Watergate affair. I feel that the 1971 Act, as amended last year, deserves a real test before we scrap it. EX_NSION OF _ CIAL COMMIT_I FILE ITS REPel Mr. CHURCH. _ _ E FOR THE SPE_,E ON .AGING TO _T '.r. President, I ask an area by means et commercial vehicle" (e) Subsection vising the first tw, Secreta_7 of the of Agriculture shallI It didn't get that test in 1972, but it will this fall. I would hope, therefore, that we will wait until 1975 before considering the truly radical changes under consideration, On the other hand, there are a few loop- unanimous 29 to April o move from te by which riding for the issu, _ce of a lifetime admission permit (to be k lown as the 'Golden Age holes that we can close right away. It seems to me, for example, that we might move immediately to ban cash contributions and expenditures of more than, say, $100. But consider the smaller contributor who might want to give to a candidate viewed with hostility by his employer, his friends and others in a position to retaliate. How about the bank teller who wants to glve $10 to a candidate who wants to nationalize banks? Or the City Hall employe who might want to give $5 to the man running against the incumbent mayor? What effect might the knowledge that one's employer could uncover the fact of the contribution have on the decision to give? The problem is obvious when we remember that the White House "enemies list" was drawn up in part from campaign disclosure reports. Still, it is a problem that we may have to live with if we are to accomplish the minimai reform necessary to "clean up" our existlng system. Q. So you believe that "full disclosure" is the answer? A. Essentially. [But I don't want you to get the idea that disclosure laws will solve all our problems or that they themselves don't create new problems. I simply feel that they create fewer problems and are more likely to eliminate gross abuses than the other measures we have discussed, Q. You say that "full disclosure" laws also create new problems. What kind of new problems? Interior and InSl [ar Affairs with an amendment to stri] e out all after the eh-. acting clause and il sert: That section 4 of th Land and Water Con-. servation Fund Act sf 1965 (78 Stat. 789), as amemled (16 U.E C. 4001-6a), is further amended as follows (a) The heading the section is revised[ reread: "ADMmSION AND I1_ FEES; ESTABLISHMENT AND REI LATIONS". (b) The second s, ntence of seetlon 4(a) is amended to read "No admission fees of any kind shall be ch: rged or imposed for eh.. trance into any oth_ r federally owned areas which are operated a Ldmaintained by a Fed.. eral agency and use, for outdoor recreation purposes." (c) Subsection (a (1} is revised to read:: "(1) For admissi¢ _ into any such deslg.. hated area, an annu _I admission permit (to be known as the Oo1_ sn Eagle P*assport) shall be available, for a f_ _ of not more than $10. The permittee and a _yperson accompanylnF him in a single, priw ;e, noncommercial vehtcle, or alternatively the permlttee and h_s spouse, children, ar 1 parents accompaning him where entry to _ ae area is by any mean:_ other than private, noncommercial vehicle, shall be entitled to general admission into any area designated mrsuant to this subsec.tion. ThE_annual per att shall be valid during the calendar year fo] which the annual fee is paid. The annual p_ _mit shall not authorize any uses for whi h additional fees are charged :pursuant tc subsections (b) and (c) of this section. ThE annual permlt shall l:q_ nontransferable an¢ the unlawful use thereof shall be punish ble in accordance with regulations astablis ed pursuant to subsection (e). The annu .1 permit shall be available for purchase ,t any such designated area." ) (2) "or is revised by deleting(d) in Subsection the first sero0 mc_: who enter sucll consent 30 the March the re- _er _han by private, non- ) (4) is amended by resentences to read: "The crier the Secretary istablishandprocedures pro- port of the Special ¢ommittee on Aging, "Developments in _ ;lng 1973, January-- Passport') to any ci izen of, or person demiciled in, the United States sixty-two years of March 1974/' shall t _ submitted, I am making thi, request in order to give additional timt for the completion Of minority views, age or older applyi, g for such permit. Sucll permit shall be tra: sferable, shall be issued without charge, and shall entitle the permit;tee and any person accompanying him in a single, private, :ad commercial vehicle, or alternatively, the, F _rmittee and his spouse and chihtren accom anying him where entry to the area is by an' other means other than private, noncomerct _1vehicle, to general admission into any ea designated pursuant to this subsection. (f) In subsectior (b) the first paragraph is reviseci to read: "(b) ttECREATION JSE FEES.--Each Federal agency developing, administering, providing or furnishing at Ft leral expense, specialized outdoor recreatior sites, facilities, equipment, or services __all. in accordance with this subsection an subsection (d) of this section, provide fc the collection of daily recreation use fees the place of use or any reasonably conver ent location: Proq)idedl, That in no event s tall there be a charge by any such agency fo the use, either singly or The PRESIDING OFFICER. objection, it is so r _dered. Without AMENDMENT OF THE LA,ND AND WATER CONS] :RVATION FUND ACT Mr. ROBERT C. I at the direction of t_ jority leader, I ask that the Senate pr, eration of Calendar YRD. Mr. President, e distinguished maunanimous consent coed to the cortaidNo. 719, S. 2844. . )ENT. '2['he bill will The VICE PRES] be stated by title, The legislative clc :k read as follows: S. 2844 to amend he Land and Water Conservation Fund Ac , as amended, to provide for collection of fees at additional c: other purposes, The VICE PRESI jection to the presc thebill? ;pecial recreation rnpgrourtds, and use for )ENT. Is there it consideration obof There being no dj jection, the Senate proceeded to eonside ' the bill, which had been reported from the Committee on in any combinatior of drinking water, waycenters, scenic road drlv ,s, toilet facilities, picnic side exhibits, , overlook sites, visitors' tables, or boat :raaps: PrevieWed, however, That a fee shall be, barged for picnic areas or boat ramps, with specialized facilities or services: Providec[, urtl[er, That in no event shall there be a c: argo for the use of any campground not h: vlng the following--tent or trailer spaces, d_ nklng water, access road, refuse containers, t diet facilities, and simple 285 S 4808 CONGRESSIONA.L RECORD --- SE]NATE devices for containing a campfire (where campfires are permitted). Any Golden Age Passport permittee shall be entitled upon presentation of such permit to utilize such special recreation facilities at a rate of 50 per centum of the established use fee." (g) In subsection (b) paragraph "(1)" is deleted; the paragraph designation "2' is redesignated as subsection "(c) RECREATIOlq' PERMrrs.--"; and subsequent subsections are redesignatcd accordingly, (h) In new subsection (d) the second sentence is revised to read: "Clear notice that a fee has been established pursuant to this section shall be prominently posted at each area and at appropriate locations there.in and shall be included in publications dis_ tributed at ,,;uch areas." (leAST GUARD ! The legislatix[e clerk lo-ad the nominati(ms in the U.SI Coast Guard, which had been reported tor their past present continued support; are confident of the future and vow to corn the gains that we all ihave won toget ._> that the sacrifices leu have on our behalf will E.ever 9e thought to he been made in vain. tn ti:ds hottr of com_lnion, the people and army ,}.¢ the Republic _f Vier Nam also turn om' t)roughts to the 5[5,000 Americans who accept_!,d to make the[supreme sacrifice of their _ives for the cause of freedom in Viet iXram. T'o them and to [he bereaved familles of these heroes, we c_n only incline ourselves :.n the deepest ext[resston of our respec_ and ._:¢_bitude, pra.yin_ float they rest ia March 29, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL heaven in the happ_ knowledge that they had contrlbutednosrr fll share to the defense of human dignity on earth. My final expressior _ of thanks on behalf of the Vietnamese ns ion go to the parents, wives, sons and daug] _rs of the millions of Americans veterans w; .o had participated in the conflict in our 1E ad, for without their faith and silent acqui scence in the heroism of their men, the Vie; Nam War could not have been brought ix a successful end. To them and to their belo' ed husbands and sons, we wish a most merr rable Viet Nam Vetcrane Day. Thank you and may God bless you all. NGUYEN rAN THm_r, ·resieZent o/the aubl/e o! Vietnam. AMENDMENT OF rile LAND AND WATER CONSE _VAX_ION FUND ACT The Senate contix aed with the consideration of the bill S. 2844) to amend the Land and Water _onservation Fund Act, as amended, to arovide for colleetion of special recrea ion use fees at additional campgrounc ;, and for other purposes, Mr. ROBERT C. B_ RD. Mr. President, I ask for 1 minute, ae time not to be charged agairist eith r side. The PRESIDING ( _-'ICER. Without objection, it is so ord_red. Mr. ROBERT C. B_2 ._,D. Mr. President, I ask unanimous cons _nt that S. 2844 be temporarily laid aside md that the Senate resume considers ion of the unfinished business. The PRESIDING C .*_FICER. Without objection, it is so e_ FEDERAL ELECTION AMENDMENTS _ed. CAMPAIGN OF 1974 ACT The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill (S. 3044) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing of primary and general election campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating to the financing and conduct of such campaigns. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum, Tho _IDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consen't that the order for the quorum call be rescinded, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk. The PRESIDING The amendment will be stated,OFFICER. The legislative clerk read as follows: On page 20, between lines 22 and 23, insert the following: "(d) No payment _hall be made under thts title to any candidate for any campaign in connection with any election occurring before January 1, 1976. Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the name of the distinguished senior Senator from Washington (Mr. I_fA6NUSON) be added as a cosponsor of this amendment, RECORD-- The PRESIDING OI_ICEI_. objection, iris so ordered. Mr. CHIYRCH. Mr. President, SENATE Without the pur- of this amendment is very plain, There is an element of self-interest, ff pose not conflict-of-interest, for Members of the Senate who are approaching their own campaigns for reelection in 1974 to vote for Federal funding in their campaigns. This amendment would put over until the election of 1976 the public funding provisions of the act, and thus WoUld eliminate any self-serving by Senators who face elections this year. It is on that basis the amendment iS offered, and I hope it will be accepted, Mr. CANNON. I yield myself 2 minutes, Mr. President, this is a good amendment. I do not believe that the committee contemplated that if this bill were passed, it could take effect prior to the 1976 elections. While we did not write that specifically into the bill, I would have no hesitancy to accept the amendmerit, to make clear that it could not apply prior to the 1976 elections. Therefore, I am willing to accept the amendmerit, and I yield back the remainder of my time. Mr. CHURCH. I thank the Senator very much. I yield back the remainder of my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time on the amendment is yielded back. The question is on agreeing to the amendment of the Senator from Idaho. The amendment was agreed to. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, there be no further action finishedwillbusiness, S. 3044, today,on the unI ask now that the Senate resume con-sideration of S. 2844. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered, AMENDMENT WATER LAND AND I._WJNDACT The with the consideration of the bill S. 2844) to amend the Land and Conservation Fund Act, as amended, provide for collection of special Eec: cation use fees at additional and for other purposes, Mr. ROBERT C. Mr. President, I suggest the absenc of a quorum. I ask that the time not charged against either side. The PRESIDING Without objection, it is so The clerk will call roll. The legislative proceeded to call the roll. Mr. ROBERT C. Mr. President, I ask unanimous that the order for the quorum call b rescinded. The PRESIDING objection, it is so Mr. ROBERT C. at the direction of ator from Nevada unanimous tracts from the printed in the S. 2844. There being no obj_ were ordered to be as follows: Without Mr. President, BIBLE), I appropriate report in explanation ask exbe of the extracts the REC0RI), The amend S 4809 PVR! 0s_. OF BILL purpose of 5. 2844, as amended, is t<, t]ae Land and Water Conservations. runn Act in ordel to clarify that Act in rev-. oral respects relal ag primarily to user fees 93-_ [, on Public Federal:Law recrea tonenacted laads. in August 1973, amended the Lan L and Water ConservatiorL Fund Act in a ma der which was interpreted so as to curtail se, erely the number of camp-. sites for 'which u., .'r fees may be charged by Federal agencies. 3. 2844, as reported, seek.,; to clarify the sit ration my detailing those facilities and ser_ .cee for which no fee may be charged while retaining the general crl-t_ria for all other: mcilities. In addition, th, bill makes clear that the Golden Eagle and .qolden Age passports allow entry by means ather than private, non.commercial vehk e, and may be used by parties entering, for example, on foot, by commerc!Lal bus, ¢ by horseback. It also pro.vides that the G, den Age Passport will be a lifetime passpo_ _, rat:her than one which must be reissued I nnually. The bill also gl ,es the head of any Fed.eral agency the a ithority to contract with any public or priw te entity to provide visitor reservation _servlc s and allows the states when utilizing the Land with and Water Ccns_rvatic m l_nies Fund from in connection land acquisition f r state parks to waive the applicability of ti _ Uniform Relocation As.sistance and P_ _1 Property Aequisitte:n Policies Act of 19 0 in cases where a land.owner elects to re sin a right of use and Ge.cupancy. SACKC_)UN'D ANDNEED Historically, the fee program has encoun.. tered problems, e: ,ecia!ly with areas under the jurisdiction the U.S. Corps o:_ Engineers, in cornc _ction with Army the collection of recreation use ecs. it was the intent o!C Congress that recz _ation use fees should be limited substantialto those lnvest_ : nance and that no be collected ¢or t] virtually all visitm; _ollittes tent and which regular require mainte.-a _ecreation use fees should e use of facilities which might reasonably expect; to utilize, as i itor centers,such waysi¢ The 1973 amend: ter Conservation spell out and mak not intend to an_ cilitles or combi_ visitors have trad: charge irt Corps pi The Interior De amendment in a v berof campgrounc; be charged by Fed, this interpretation of reven_es by the Forest Service, the and other agencies campground fees Departments felt collection. If not been estimated to )ads, trails, oroverlooks, vls._'exhibits, picnic are_. rant to the Land and Wa.,'und Act was meant to clear that Congress does aorize fees for those fa._tion of facilities which ;ionally received wlthou_ aject areas. ,artment interpreted thi.s _y that limited the num.. which use could ralforagencies. Thefees effect o:[ ass been a substantial loss _Tational Park Service, the Army Corps of Engineers _hich had been collecting campgrounds which the ) longer qualified for fee _rected, the total loss has be 1)etween $7.2 million and $8.2 million p_ r year. result Because of the of the enac'p merit 'oblems of which Public arose Law as93-a 81 and its interpr tation by the Executive agencies, 8. 2844 _ m introduced. The Com.mittee is, hopeful ;hat this legislation will rectify the situatic and that finally a uni.form and equltab] fe_, system on Federal recreation lands ca be ._stablished. SECTION-BY-SECTXOi_ANALYSZS OF S. 2844, A8 _ _Em,ro 1. section 1 (b) emends the second sen.tence of section 40 ) of the Land and Water conservation Act.--This makes it clear Fun( that ;he prohibition amendmen_b on charg.. lng admission fe_ for entrance into areas, other than designs ed units of the National Park System admin stered by the Departmenl; of the Interior and !esignated National Rec.- 287 S 4810 CONGRESSION reation by the Departmerit to federally owned areas and mainrained by a Outdoor recreation sites in. and are operated and by a vaxle_y of non-Federal pu entities and private, nonprofit _or a variety of putposes. For example, 2(b) of the Federal Water ProJE Recreation Act, 79 Stat. 214, 16 U.S.C. § (b) (1970), authorizes non-Federal to collect ontrance and user fees _ water project recreation sltes in pay the separable costs of the to recreation and fish This amendment interpretation section 4(aa doesthatnot tle_pply in Under the language ff the prohibition of the ac of Engineers areas, fc areas are both opera the Corps. If the area is operated by a no maintained by a Feds lion against fee collE 2. Section l(c)---co: Passport. The use purpos to allow the of port for the, Purpose a designated entran( is by some means oth of sub- would apply example, only .'d and maintain ,r a site within the L-Federal interest, b 'al agency, the prohib :tion would not cerns the Golden Eagle this amendment heof Golden ]_agle Pass- is gaining admission to fee area when entry than by private, non- AL RE CORD _ SEN ATE 3. Section ltl ) is a c, mforming amendment, consisten; with ch _nges made in thc Golden Eagle P ssport pr _vision. 4. Section 1(, ) concerrts the-Golden Age Passport. The _ _endment would change the Golden Age Pa.' _port to E_ lifetime passpor_ so that persons mtitled taa passport would not have to res )ply each year. This change should also res_ it in adn:inistrative savings for the issuing:3 ,_encies. It should be loted that, in the first sentence of subset ion 4(a)_4), the word "ehtrance" is chan_d to admission. This change is to make it clear that For t:he purpos e of gaining admissif_n to desi_'nate,d entrance fee areas, the Golc_n Eagle Passport and the Golden Age Pa_sport op,rate in the same manner. In addition, the Golden Age Pass_ port allows the._.ermittee to a 50 percent reduction in established ree:'eation use fees. To further insure -;_at both _assports operate In the same manne_, the committee has adopted the same languaSe with respect to which persons are entitle4_to entry en the Golden Age Passport as wa_ used in the Golden Eagle Passport provisi{n with one exception. That exception concerlas the pa:'ents of the Golden permlttee, The amendme would 'dso limit issuance the Golden A Passpo:'t to any citizen or the United States who is older, lYnder existing legqualifies, including forof age or older applyIn order for a person to e United States, fixed StatEs and or permanent resi_ its Territories oommercial vehicle, ; oh as by commercial vehicle, bicycle, horse or foot. This expansion of consistent the coverage withof th, th, .policy Golden ofEagle Passportthe is reducing he must in deuce number of, and relier _e on, the private autoInobilem in Z_ederal re _reation areas, In the vehicle past the s: xgle,considered private, noncommercial has ben to be an to which hE whenever he: 5. Section use1( recreation adequate device for: persons entering an With the recognition it is necessary to dei sons who can enter e ingly, when. entry is than by private, non permittee and his lm sidereal by an equlte of the cla_ of pers_ titled to entry. In ce spouse, children orth_p _,_ accompanying rotting the number of area on one passport, ,f Other modes of entry, ne the number of perx one passport. Accordby some means other ommercial vehicle, the xediate family are conale and Just definition as who should be enler for the permittee's ,rents to be they considered permittee, must enter at the same tlr *,ers, and in. a physic With the increasir; homes and campaign e as the permittee en.lly proximate maimer, popularity of motor rehicles, there has been This ul _es each Federal agency, which f E_t Federal expense, specialized sites, )ment or services, to collect ;er mtio:a use fees, in accordance set out in sec_ tion 4(da. The would allow such fees to be _lac:e of use or at any other reasonably convenient to the pt_b_ lic. In the case ,f national rec_ reation areas a:a( units el Park System,be the the pein rea_, mably nt the location may area ; of entrance in which such si es, faeiE ties, _ment o:t' services are fur:al hed. The committe, wishes to contin estrict the autho] ty to co.lct _LSe a trend for one fami motor vehicles to a the langauge of the permittee and the per in one vehicle would the permittee's passp _second _ehicle woulc persons would be re_ fees Just as would an ered by the passport, The word "permittt for the words "perso it clear that a passp a donee, if the pass[ In such instances, t_ the nontrartsferabilit [ or group to take two :ecreation area. Unde_ amendment, only the ons accompanying him be allowed to enter on ,rt. The persons in the not be covered. Such uired to pay entrance ' other person not coy_" has been substituted purchasing" to make ,rt may be utilized by orr is given as a gift. : ofprovision concerning the passport would not be considered ap] [icable until the donee has endorsed the pa sport. The Committee does not intend the ;ame approach for the Golden Age Passport Because the passport is issued without cha ge to q%mlifylng appllcants, to allow the p, ssport to be given as a .gift might invite ab_ ;e of the fee collection system. Accordingly, fte provision concerning the nontrs;nsferabili_ F of the Golden Age Passport should be egarded as applicable from the ir/itial isuar ;e. In axldition, sortie! l(c) would delete the requirement that the Golden _agle Passport be sold at post o_ces. Under the amenchnent, the Passport would 1_ available for purchase at any designated en_ 'ance fee area. 288 the intention changes to of the name recreation returning of special use fees.. use of specializes sites, facilities, equip or services. Thc criterte for determi whether sites, :fa ilitles, e _uipment, or ices qualify as s _cializec. shall be they involve st_b tantial investment, regu]: maintenance, ];,r, _ence of personnel, or per.sonal benefit to t _e user far a :axed period o:_ time. These crit_ 'la are d_liberately phrased in the disJuncti re 'because the Committee recognizes tha_; i _ch criterlor._ may not be applicable to earl use for which a fee would be warranted, t"{ r example, a service may merit a fee, even _hough .t cannot normal[Ii,, be said that ser_ ces involve regular maiu._ tenance. On the }ther hsnd, a facility may well involve a s bstantiai investment and regular malntens xee, but not 'the presence of personnel, However, the a aendment does attempt to define those sites facilities, equipment, and services which al _ not t¢ be considered as specialized, and f, r which therefore, no fees are authorized, w _ether o_' not they are used singly or in an_ e, mbinatian. _hus, tlbe com-mittee has de(id d that in no event shaY[ there be a charge or drinking water, wayside exhibits, roads, o erlook .,.ites, visitors' ce:n-. ters, scenic d_iv s, toile_; facilities, picnic tables or boat ra ups--pr)riding that a fee shall be charged for picnic areas or boat ramps with speci ized fa_filties or services, This prohibition _n fee collection applies March 29, 19 74 only 'to agencies furnishing such sites, facilities,, or services at Federal expense. LE the use fee provision gerterally: this does not apply to sites facilii;ies or services, including those speciflealll enumerated, furnished at non-Federal exp use, i.e., tlmse furnished by conce:;sioners cooperators or lessee:;, even they are furnished on Federal lands. In _ to define what use fees can be for, the committee has established specifying the level of camp _ground _lopment which must ba met before a fee be collected for use of a campsite and aeent, related facilities. In other words, the in which such site _s located r have, tent or trailer space:;, drinking _ an access road, refuse containers, toilet simple devices :[or cc.ntaining a (where campfires are permitted) in to qualify for fee collection. The requ of drinking water will b_, satisfied water or whether delivered by a by 1-made)otable,device natural mean_:, cans will suffice as refuse Toilet facilities may be portable or fixed, or flush. A simple de:vice for a campfire may be a simple rock or ncrete fire grill. Like the other such device may be tel individual group use. The requirement for a device shall not be deem_d applicable fires are rohiblted becau_;e of or se_monal c_onditions or ottmr safety Consistent with attempt to spell out what use fees may _ charged for, the Cornmitte,_'s further provides that a fee :_hall be eh for picnic areas or boat ramps with special_ facilities, equipment or seruices. For if a picnic area has a gas or electric 1, then those who use that site shall be a fee. In _;ummary, it the committee's intent ix) have a fixed of services provided _:he visiting fees will be charged. Absent level of instilties the public not be assessed a fee ][or u_e of Federal The last sentence subsection 4(b), as amend, ed by the e would entitle the ESolde_a Age Passp( se.rmittee to use s-peclalized at a rate of 50 per centum of established use fee. This entitlement only to the permittee. P_rsons ,Lng the permittee are not entitled to any where use fees are charged on an basis. This provision also not to group use fees. The word used here generally ix) refer to specialized facilities, equipment, and services, for fee Is charged. l:n ott_er words, the is entitled to 50 percent in daily fees for the _e oi specialized sites equipment an_[ serv_:_ well as for facilities: _iection l(g) subsection 4 and 4(c) to that fees may be for recreation _overing such i_tivi as group recreation event_:, totorized alien vehicles, and other sp( alized uses, though such activitie_; involve use of specialized sites, or services, whether by ividuals. The establishm(,nt and such fees are discretio:_:_ary, incl_ establishment on an inriividual ehicular basis. This clarifi_s the inte_ in enacting Public Law 92-347 not change the langu_tge of the act. 7. S_!,ction 1 (ha the redesignated subse{bion 4(da so ae notice provision also applies to fees for permits. The language "at appropr gives the collecting agencies ._nt flexibility so that notice may be than [;hose where the activities take place. Such locati, be, for example, the point of Federal SENATE FLOOR DEBATES ON 33044 APRIL 1, 1974 April 1, 1974 Workmen installing unit had cut out device unbeknownst CONGRESSIONAL a surveillance for a key safety the night shift, Unwittingly, rodwaswasalready pmled fully out, while the one anext withdrawn. An eritlcally"--an unwanted nuclear After about two seconds controls cut In with a "scram," thc auclear word for an emergency shutdown. The incident also somewhat of a chain reaction at the Energy Cornmission, resulting in Instant memorandura on the situation a 71-destinaticn routing slip, eventually a $15,000 fine, only second the agency has ever levied against _ ORDER FOR ATOR OF TOMORROW l_r. ROBERT C. I ask unanimous morrow, after the desi order, Mr. HATFIELI) to exceed 15 minutes. The ACTING pore. Without Mr. ROBERT C. Mr. President, that on toleaders or their recognized the quorum The 'ACTING pore. Without RECESS for not pro ternit is so ordered. Mr. President, I suggest the absence The ACTING pore. The clerk will The second proceeded to called Mr. ROBERT C. I ask unanimous for SEN- a pro ternthe roll. legislative clerk roll. Mr. President, that the order call rescinded, pro ternIt is so ordered, TO 1 TODAY Mr. ROBERT C. Mr. President, I ask unanimous that the senate stand in recess until hour of 1 p.m. today, There being no at 12:31 p.m. the Senate took a until 1 p.m.; whereupon, the Senate _ when called to order by the Officer '(Mr. HASKELL). OF MORNING The PRESIDING HASKELL). Morning concluded, FEDERAL ELECTION AMENDMENTS is CAMPAIGN OP 1974 (Mr. now ACT The PRESIDIN(_ OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will now resume the consideration of the unfinished business (S. 3044), which the clerk will state, The leglslative clerk read as S. 3044, to amend the Federal follows: Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing of primary and general election c_mpalgns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relatlng to the financing and conduct of such campaigns, The Senate the bill. resumed consideration of Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum with the time to be taken out of both sides, SENATE Without the clerk The legislative clerk pr0cet_led to call the roll. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, I ask uriahtmous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objcction, it is so orderecL Mr. COOK. Mr. President, what is the pending business? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The pending business is amendment No. 1070 to S. 3044. The amendment will be stated, The amendment No. 1070 is as follows: On page 2, line 1, strike all through page 86, line 17, and insert in lieu thereof the following: T_ME PERIOD FOR FEDERALELECTIONS SEC. 2. The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new title: "TITLE V--TIME PERIOD FOR FEDERAL ELECTIONS "FZLX_a _aTz "SEc. 501. (a) No later than the first _lklesday of September preceding a regularly scheduled election, or sixty days preceding a special election, each candidate must file a registration statement with the State 'Secretary of State or the equivalent State official, in order to be cligtble to appear on the primary or election ballot in such State or states. The registration statement shall lnclude-"(1) the identification of the candidate, and any individual, political committee, or other person authorized to receive contrlbulions or make expenditures on behalf of the candidate in connection wlth the campaign; '' (2) the identification of any campaign depositeries.to be used in connection with the campaign; "(3) an affidavit stating that no colleclions or expenditures have or will be undertaken in connection with the campaign prior to the filing deadline; "(4) the identification of the party whose nomination the candidate will seek, or a statement that the candidate will seek to appear on the primary and election ballot as a candidate independent of any party affillation. "PRI1VIARY CONCLUSION RECORD-- The PRESIDING OFFICER. objection, it is so ordered, and will call the roll. ELECTION S 4921 a candidate. Any independent candidate receiving at least lO percent of the total vote_ cast for the office for which he is a candidate at the pr{mary, or a vote equal to the lowesl_ vote received by a candidate seeking a party nomination who was nominated in the prl~ mary shal:l also be a candidate at the following election.". LIME_ATIONSON CONTRIBUTIONSAND EXPENDIT]YRES sec. 3. Section 608 of title 18. United States Code, is amended to real as follows: "§ 608. Limitations on contributions and expenditures "(a) No person who _ or becomes a can-. didate, or political committee for such can-. didate, in a campaign for nomination or in a campaign for election to Federal elective of-. rice may, directly or indirectly, in any way whatsoever_ "(1) accept or arrange for any contribu-. lion, or expend or contract for any obligation, prior to the filing deadline for the election; or "(2) accept any cash contribution tn extess of $50; or "(3) accept any contribution, contract for any obligation, or make expenditures not budgeted and reported at_ provided by section. 434 of title 2, United States Code, after a date two weeks prior _o the scheduled elec-. lion da_e; or "(4) make expenditures or contributions in excess of $10,000 from. his personal _unds, or the personal funds of his immediate faro-. fly, or from such funds being contributed or expended through the use of a third party. "(b) Any deficit incurred in connection with a campaign for nomination or election. to Federal elective office shall constitute a violation of this section, and such deficit shall be ];,aid only by means of contributions received under the supervision of and according to a procedure which shall have the prior approval of the Comptroller General. "(c) Violation Of the provisions of this. section is punishable by a fine not to exceed. $1,000, in:Lprisonment not to exceed one year,. or both.". SEC. 4. Title 18, United States Code, 15 amended by adding the following sections: "§ 614, Contributions by political committees "Political committees shall not make any' contribution to any candidate, political committee, or other campaign for Federal elective office: Provided_, That such com-. millets may. administer or solicit contributigriS, so long as such contributions are given. directly by the initial contributor to a candidate or political committee. "SEc. 502 (a) Ail candidates for Federal elective office shall be nominated by means of a primary election to be held on the first Tuesday of October preceding the election, or thirty days preceding a special election. There § 615. No :more than one political committee shall be only one primary ballot or list of "A candidate may establish no more than possible nominees for each party and one one political committee, which shall be in primary ballot or list for all nonpartisan such candidate's own name: Prov_fed, That; candidates, and no candidate may appear on the name of the committee, as well as the, more than one such ballot or list. Each voter name of its chairman and treasurer, shall be shall be entitled to vote for candidates from filed with the Comptroller General lmmedionly one ballot or list. ately upon its formation; and should such a. "(b) Qualification of voters, determination committee be established, all contributions of eligible parties, as well as rules and proce- ' received or expenditures made in connection dures for conducting the primary election with the campaign for nomination or elecshall be the responsibility of the States. lion to Federal elective office shall be received Presidential electors and alternates shall be or made by such committee and not by the nominated by State political parties, candidate.". "PRIMARY ELECTION RESULT REPORTS "SEC. 503. est number didate of a candidate The person receiving the greatof votes at the primary as a canparty for an office shall be the of the party at the fol- SEC. 5. _Section 434 of title 2, United States Code, is amended to read as follows: § 434. One report by political committees or candidates lowing election: Provided, That any candidate who. is the sole candidate for that office at the primary election, or who is only opposed by a candidate or candidates runrting on the same ballot or list of nominees and is nominated at the primary shall be deemed and declared to be duly and legally elected to the office for which such person is "(a) Each treasurer of a political committee supporting a candidate or candidates for Federal elective office--or each candidate, should such candidate not establish a politlcal committee---shall file a report with the Comptroller General two weeks prior to a scheduled election date for such candidate or candidates. 291 S 4922 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-- SE_'A, TE "Contents of Reports "(b) The report shall be cumulative, shall report with respect to any activity in connection with the candidacy, and shall disclose--"(1) the full name and social security number of each person who has contributed to the campaign, together with the amount _._c'r o_ s_a_, Law SEC_ 8. The prE_visim_s o,1 this Act, a_ld of lXlles or regulations promulgated under this Act, preempt any provision of State law w_th respect to campaigns for noralnation roi' election, or for oAection, to FedE_ral office (as ,_mch term is defined In sec;ion 30I (c)). of such contributions; "(2) the full name and mailing address each owed; person to whom a debt or obligation "(3) the full name and nlatllng address SEC. 9. If any provision ¢4 this Act, or the application thereof to any _erson or clrcum_ stance, is held invalid, the va:Lidtty of the of is of each person to whom expenditures have been made, together with the amount of such expenditures; "(4) the total sum of all contributions received; "(5) the total sum of all expenditures; and "(6) the total sum of ali debts and obligatlons.", PENALTIES SF_. 6. (a) Section 444 of title 2, United States Code, is amended to read as follows: "§ 441. Penalties for violations "Any person who violates any of the provlslons of this subchapter shall be fined in an amount at least equal to three times the _mount of any monetary violation, or, In the case of nonmonetary violations, such amount as will satisfy the provisions of this PAB;TIA r. INVALIDITY lengers. In other _mrdz, the Federal GQVeminent woul_l n_tch, orzty _ne-h_lf of the private contrltm_iens; private eligible C0ntlqbUt_01_ for incumbents but would match all cf the eligible, contributions received b_ challengers. Ill the second amendment, in general electiorLs, whereas the bill provides that the F(_deral Government would pay a stibsid.? _ of I5 cents per person of ¥0tirfg remainder' of tbs Act and :;he _ppltcation of such provision to other pelsons and circum_ stances aaall not be affected thereby. age in the congressional district or in the State, as the case might be, whether Congressman or Senator, the amend- Et_ZCTZW DA_ SEC. lO: Tho provisions of this Act shall become effective on December 3:[, 1975. merit would provid_that only one-half of that mnount would be paid to an lncumbent, whereas the full subsidy in the genoral election would be paid to a chaltenger. Under these provisions there would be no dot;lbt but what this would give the clmllenger a break and would offset some of the built-in advantages an incumbent would have. I bg_ieve it is necessary to make some distinction between a challenger and an incumbent as to the amount of the Fedoral subsidy that is given to the chal- Mr. WEICI_.R. Mr. President, a par. liamentary inquiry. Is ii necessary tha_ the amendment be teac.? Tho PRES;[DING OFFICER. The amendment has been ca:led up. It is not necessary that it be read. M_L WEICKF_. Mr. President, I ask llnanilnous consent tha'; Messrs. Field, l_halec, Dot_kdn, and B _ker of my staff be permitted imcess to the floor during debate on this .amendmer_t, The PRESIDING OFI'ICER. Without subsection. 'The moneys collected from the objection, it is so ordered, _tnepublicationShall be or-Spenttransmtssion,bY the violatorto thef°rgeneralwidest Mr. AI,L_.N, Mr. President, will the possible extent in the geographical area in Senator from Connecticut yield me 5 which the campaign or election was held, of minutes? at least the content of the Comptroller GenMr. WEICK[_.R. I am L_appy to yield 5 eral's findIngs. The means of such transmisminutes to the Senator frora Alabama. sion or publication shall be determined by The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senthe Comptroller General, and shall require ator from Alabama is leeognized for 5 the complete expenditure of the fine, unless lninutes. the Comptroller General determines that a lesser axnount, determined by him, will Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Presiaent, I thank the achieve complete publication and transmisdistinguished ,']enator from Connecticut sion of the nature of the violation. An addlJ!or yielding time to me. I shall support tional fine may be levied ff the Comptroller ]lis amendment, but the purpose of ask_ General sheJl determine 'that, due to the lng for the time now is to comment on r_ture of the violation, an additional tWO amendments that I will send to the amount publish the desk after I have concluded ray remarks, violation.". is _aeeded to properly (b) Title 18, United States Code, is that would change the matching formula amended by adding the following section: on primary r_:es and wmld change the "§ 616. Penalties for violations substantive provisions ¢n general elec_ tion races as to House a_d _%_nate races, '*Any of person who violates shall any be of fined, the proThere has been considerable conjecvi§ions tl_is subchapter in an amount at least equal to three times the ture and arguraent as to whether the bill amount of any monetary violation, or, In the is ali incumbent's bill or a challenger's case of nonmonetary violations, such amount bfil, that is, whether it is weighted in as will sati_y the provisions of this subsecfavor of the incumbent_, or weighted in tion. The moneys collected from the fine _!avor of the challengers, shall be spent by the violator for general The Senator' from Alabama feels that publication or transmission, to the widest i[f one side or tile other should be favored, possible in theor geographical area in J.t should be the challengers on account which theextent c_mpaign election was held, of at least the content of the Comptroller Gen0f certain buiJt-in advantages that the esal's findings. The means of such transmisincumbents do have. So in order to resion or publication shall be determined by ]21ove any doubt about waether the chalthe Comptroller Gener_l, and shall require lengers or the incumbe:_ts are favored, tho complete expenditure of the fine, unless [[ have prepared two amencknents, one the Comptroller General determines that a dealing with the primaries oil House and lesser by will _enate ]Y_eml_,rs and t_e other dealing achieve ammmt, complete determined publication and him, transmission of the nature of the violation. An addiwith general elections of House and Sentional fine _nsy be levied if the Comptroller :_te Members. General shall determIne that, due to the The first amendment would have to nature of the violation, an additional do with prinmries, and under the proamount la :needed to properly publish the ,_isions of the bill the Pederal Treasury violation.", would match .dollar for dollar the con_=OMPTROLLER GENERAL Uqbutions up to $100 ::eceived by the SEC. 7. The Federal Election Campaign Act 'various candidates for the House and of 1971 is amended by Inserting the words the Senate, and there wotfid be equal "Comptroller General" wherever-the words :matching. "supervisory officer" appear. The Comptroller The amendment I ar_ ol_'ering as to General shall make such rules or for regulations primaries, as to lncurf,bent_s it would aa may be necessary or advisable carryIng . out the provisions of this Act: Provident, :match only one-half of matchable con_ That any rules or regulations so promulgated '_ributions, whereas fol ct_llengers it shall be published in the Federal Register would match fully, that Is dollar for _01not later than December 31, 1975. '.[ar the contributions r(ceiw_'d by ehal- 292 April 1, 197,4 longer and an ffincumbent. I'would believe remove these amendments, adopted, some c,f the built-in advantages an incmnbent has in r_es, both in pr_m_.ries and and in the general election. Mr. President,. I sub, it these amendm,ents and I ask that they be printed and lie on the table, to be called up at a later date. The PP_SIDING OFFICER. The amendments will be re_ved and printed, and will lie on the table. Mr./_%x,_.lV. _fr. President, I yield back the re:_nainder of my time. I th_nk the distinguished Senator from Connecticut. Mr. "_?_EICKER. Mr. President, it is my intention to ask for the yeas and nays on the amendment. I will not do so at this time ]_ut certainly as we draw closer to hour of 3 o'clock I would appreciate it if we mi_:ht get a sufficient number of Senators in the Chamber to assure the yeas and n_ys. Mr. President, the amendment before the Se:_'mte is in the nature of a substitute to the bill. Some of the features of the bill ar_ Incorporated. so far as tightenlng up finance procedures during a campaign, yet the principal thrust of the bill as it relates to our election procedures is not only different from any proposed in the bill but compieteIy different from our co:mmo_ praet_ces so far as the selection and elegtion o£ candidates within our present political system. Fir_i;, I wish to try to set a tone for what I advocate l_y saying I do not doubt in any way the desire to reform our campaign l;_ractices so far as the proponents of S. 3044 are concerned by the membel_ of tl_, c_m_mi_tee, the ,_enator from Nevada (Mr. Camsm_) and _thers who havela_thewa_,theSe_q_or fromMass_ch_ett_ (Mr. ]g_Y), and 0rganizatior_, such as e_m_en cause. I believe w_ry much in _he_r desire, for reform and their desire to set straight that which appears to have been done wrong, as brought forth hy _rious bodies during the past year. Yet it seems to me the. problem is far bigger than ann lndJ_vl_ml, abase of campaign :ananeea and it just e_t be resolved in the normal way. Rather we have April 1, 197_ CONGRESSIONAL RECORD:---SENATE to take a careful look at our political procedures and relate back to the abuses that have taken place. So ! intend to argue vigor0usly for my way to achieve reform, and it in nowise is meant to discredit those who have another way of golng about the same business. First let us relate to the bill, if we might, and go over the various aspects of that bill and what they intend to accomplish. Then, I would like to spend most of my time discussing the principles involved, SECTION I Page 1 of S. 3044 is retained, thereby keeping the title of the act as the "Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974". Everything else in the original bill is deleted, SECTION2 This section it titled "Time Period for Federal Elections," which indicates the main purpose of the section--to cut down the length of campaigns. This has two objectives: First, to save money; and second, to make campaigns more palatable and reasonable, This is done by adding a new title-title V--to the "Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971." The first section of the new title sets up a filing date: On the first Tuesdgy of September, or 60 days before a special election, all candidates must file a registration statemerit, containing: Name of the candidate. Names of any person or committee authorized to accept or spend money, Names of any campaign depositories, An affidavit swearing that no money has been collected or spent prior to the first Tuesday in September. Name of the party of the candidate, or that the candidate will run as an independent, The second section of the new title V sets up a procedure for one, and only one, primary to select nominees for the election itself, First. All nominees would be selected through this direct primary, including Presidential, senatorial, and congressionai nominees, Second. The primary date would be the first Tuesday in October. Third. A candidate could only run for one party's nomination, Fourth. Voters could only vote for one party's slate of possible nominees. The qualification of voters, parties, and the procedures for conducting the primary would be handled by the States, which is the same as it is handled presently. No primary runoff. In summary, the second section means that the people, not some circus-like convention, would select Candidates. It would prevent the so-called cross-over vote, which often distorts primaries-voters have to choose one party primary to vote in. It also allows independents to participate in determining who the final candidates shall be. The third section of the new title V says simply that the nominee selected by the primary shall be the candidate rerelying the greatest number of votes from his party's voters. No runoffs, with their attendent expenses and added campaigning, The incentive is clearly for the parties to bring their support behind a reason, able number of possible nominees, to avoid excessive fragmentation of the party's vote. This should, as an offshoot, enhance the role of the party, This is the essence, and I will get into other aspects of the bill, of change that is considerably different from anything that has been discussed in tackling the financial aspects of the problem that confronts our country today. There really are two problems that relate to the difficulties we have encountered in our campaigns. One, we all would agree, is the cost of those campaigns; and two, is the failure to utilize the entire electorate in the selection and election processes. We aH concede that the cost of campaigning in this country has gotten beyond all reasonable bounds, When President Eisenhower was reelected in 1956 the campaign cost was roughly $8 million. To the best of our knowledge President Nixon's 1972 campaign cost $72 million. So clearly the cost of campaigns has soared and given irapetus to the type legislation presented on the floor of the Senate..I wish to just ,ask a simple question, or set forth a hypothetical example in the extreme. If the costs of the Presidential campaign were $100,000 would we be turning to the Fedoral Government to resolve the problem? The answer is "no." So it is not the question of money; it is the amount of money. We use the $72 million almost as a floor rather than trying to tackle it and cut it down. We concede the expense. And we turn it over to the Government. We do not do anything to reduce the amount. We merely shift it from the private sector to the governmental sector. We shift it from an area of choosing to an area of law, and I do not know of anything that relates to amounts of money spent by the Federal Government that ever went down, It is going' to go up. No politician now has to earn his votes or his contributions, he is guaranteed the contributions, and it seems to me all we are leading to t_here is the subsidization of mediocrity. The additional fact is that what you have done is shift the burden to all the taxpayers, whether they like it or do not like ii. Probably the most unfortunate of all is that it is an open-ended type of operation. There is no ceiling on it, either insolar as the number of dollars or the number of candidates is concerned. I grant you that the abuses presented during the past year are considerable and we do need reformation of our spending practices in the political sense, but I do not concede to you that a presidential campaign has to cost $72 million. 'I do not concede to you that a senatorial campaign in my o_m State of Connecticut hp_ to cost $1 million. I do not concede to you that a congressional campaign, in my State of Connecticut, ihas to cost $1 million. I do not concede to you that a congressional campaign, in my State of Connecticut, has to cost $100,000 or $200,000. I would rather go ahead and see whether we can cut down that cost so it S 4923 can be appropriately and properly han-died as a matter of choice among thc public as a whole, rather than become a governmental obligation. Ail the bills to date have had some sort of ceiling. They havE; implied Govern-merit financing. What about changing the basic structure of the campaign itself? There is not a man in this Chamber who. does not; understand that for 2 years---I speak as a Senator--he makes prepara.tion roi' his election or reelection--2 years. So the process in effect is a 2-year process I_ those of you in the business, in the know. But certainly insofar as the public is concerned, they kngw it takes al, least I year. What is there in the nature of a man or' woman and their ideas that requires 1 year of hammering away on the ears oi! the electorate in this country? Cannot the job be done in a lesser period of time, and thus cut down the cost of campaign-. ing? The answer is "Yes." This inevitably brings me to another phenomenon which is occurring at th(: some tirae we increase our consciousness of our political spending abuses, and thai; · is the way the electorate itself is chang-. lng. In my State of Connecticfit in the last reporting period, 13,000 persons were registered as Republicans, 14,000 wer(: registered as Democrats, and 45,000 were: registered as independents. So clearly the role of both major parties is declining in-. stead of continuing, and that is not a phenomenon restricted to my State.'The latest Gallup poll has shown again a link-. lng up of the voters between each major party is diminishing month by month and year by year. What are we going to do with people who call themselves Independents? Dc, they have to choose either the Republican or the Democratic Party? If so, can anyone on the floor tell them why they should choose one ortho other? I recently received what I considered to be a rather insulting letter from one of the organizational leaders of my party which asked, "Will you please give three reasons why you are a Republican?" 2[ find it a little difficult as a Senator, and I think Democrats would find it sim-ilarly difficult, to answer and give three reasons why one is either a Republican or a Democrat. I think more and more it is the Senators and Congressmen who are giving the image to the party rather than the party which is giving it to Sen-ators and Congressmen and those who serve in an elected capacity. That is nothing to be afraid of. It indicares a maturity on the part of the American voting public, that the man or woman, their idess, their principles, are far more important than a label. What does it mean if somebody comes to you and says, "Vote for me. I am a Demo-crat," or, "Vote for me. I am a Republi.. can"? It means very little. People want logic. They want reasons. They do not want labels. And yet, in a technical sense, I suppose each one is ,saying, "Well, what we do not want to do is abandon the two.. party system, llt has served us so well[ in an administrative sense'" What I have tried to do in the course of this amendment is to provide a machin-. cry which will not do away with the two.. 293 S 4924 CONGRESSIONAL party system but which permits this huge number of voters to come into the system and to participate in the seleetion process, which is fully as important as the election process. Fifty percent is selection and 50 percent is election, What is going to happen if the trends that have taken place continue? As the parties get smaller and smaller, fewer and fewer' will dictate who the candidates are going to be. Yet I do not accept as a remedy for that the fact that one has to join the Republican Party or the I)emocratic Party. Rather, I want to give to the voters of the country the opportunity to join in the election process even if they themselves wish to remain aloof from a particular political label, So on both counts, in view of the abuses that have occurred in the political systern, when we shorten the campaign and when we use the primary process, inevitably the cost comes down. By using that primary to allow the independent to vote, the maximum number of people participate in this political process, I will tell you, Mr. President, we can write every law on the books 'from this Chamber ..and across the way, with the signature of the President, and nothing ls so effective in a democracy as the humbets of people participating in the election process, insofar as to safeguard everything we hold dear. Remember this: When this country was founded, a few men of knowledge, a few men of wealth, wrote down the great concepts that we have in our Constitution and our Bill of Rights. America as a whole did :not participate in this country. They could not. Either they were ignorant, had no property, or were in peonage--you :name it. Just a few men ran the Nation, and they set down those words, those ideals, from which our present democracy has sprung, I do not think any one of us would refute the fact that even 20 or 25 years ago, if you got a group of people on the sidewalk, perhaps 5 or 10 were in a posttion to make decisions and know what was going on. Yet today, out of that same group, perhaps everyone except two or three are in a position to make decislons and know what is going on. That is the result of our investment in education, It is the result of our investment in technology. It is a result of the news media having gone ahead and expanded their own capabilities, their own coverage. So that today we truly have a democracy-not just a few of the leaders, not just the news media, not just those in education, who tell the rest of America what is good for the rest of America, but, rather, Americans themselves standing on their own feet, making their decisions, Unless you understand that--and I now refer to my colleagues in politics, Dem_)crats and Republicans--you are in danger of not being in politics very long', That is the change that has come over America, :an America which is not led just by a few, but, rather, one which is a democracy led by all of its people partaking in the decisionmaking process, That is why the necessity for refoiun. That is why the primary route rather than the convention. That is why the convention looks sillier and sillier, as a 294 RECORD -- SEN'ATE few of the party faithful gather and the rest of Amerq.ca watches that spectacle for that one moment ia tirae when the. rollcall takes place, and the platform and all the hullab:aloo along with that. Whoever reads it or sees it, except as it comes over television during lie convention? This Nation and its voters are inter'-, ested in what the individual stands for, his ideas, his :principles, what he is goil_! to do, not some great generality buried in a pamphlet, which comes to life durhlg a convention and is then promptly for-. gotten in the usual tradition, I have said many times during the recent troubles tlhat in th_ plurality of our institutions lies the strength of this Nation, and anyone that lc oks to any one oil the institutio:as as being the answer to its problems wiU fail. All tmmt and faith in the judicia:cy, if nothing else, will be a mistake. All trust and faith in the ex.-: ecutive will be a mistak e--ar in the legislative branch, or in the news media, Rather, it will be in t?.e plurality of our institutions, because our greatest strengths are in those institutions and in the principles of the _ountry. The same holds true as far as candidates in the election process are con-. cerned. The more people who are in there doing the job, the better the can-. didates we will have. People have made comments such as, What will 1974 mean to the various parties? ]n the light of the facts of the past year, ray answer is thai; it is not going to be a great boon to the Democratic Party and .t is not going to be a great disaster to the Republicaxts. The American people are going to look carefully at tlae candid:{tcs of both par-. ties, something we have neglected to do. What has lxappened, thai; has caused Watergate is that people l_ve failed to pay attention to the politics:[ process a_ld have failed to ]pay after.itoh to the exer.. rise of their r:ight to vote. That has come home to them this year. So I think it is the American people who are going to look at the candidates, from whom wilt come the largest and bs-st group of new officeholders _n the Nation's _istory. In the plurality and the number of people participating in elections in our Nation's great,st strength. That is a far greater safeguard against fraudulence or corrupt practices than _,ny law which we can write. That is why, to me, the provi-, sion of the 60--day direct; prhnary and in-. dependent participation in the election process goes to the he _xt of reform of both axeas--the quality of the candidates and the lessening of the role of money in American pol:itical campaigns, I should like now to mow; over to the section that deals with f nancing. But one point just be:fore I leave the time el e-. ment_ The point I shoull like to reiterate is the period of 60 da_s for filing by a candidate. What politician will tell us that he is eng_tged in a:l extensive campaign prior to that date I will tell you: Mr. President, that in my own political style it is better for m.· to have a long campaign rat]aer than a short one. God has given me physical ;;tamina to do it. But 90 percent of the campaigns do not; get rewed up until after Labor Day. _e, in a practical way this does not change ans'thhlg a gr,_at deal. April 1, 19 7'4 Pili:ig would be on the fixst Tuesday in September; the primary on the first Tuesday in October. This includes the nation,al Presidential primary. Then the g'ener_l election, as has always been the case, would take place on the first Tuesday o:':'November. Sixty days is certainly a lonti: enough time for people to understand the candidates and to evaluate what it is they stand for and what it is they ]}romise. I might add that from a financial point of view--and this will lead me into :ny next area of discussion--there woulci be no collecting of money and no expenditures of money except within those 60 days. Let me antieivate one of the argument.'.; that may be presented that this is goi:txg to help the incumbents. ! canriot devise--and I do not think any other Senator can devise--a system which wfil have _Ldegree of unfairness in challenglng s::l incumbent. _.ctually, we all know that an incumbent has many things goink f?_r him, even now. Yet incumbents are tltrned out rather reg_alarly from all office.,_ throughout the country. In some ways, I think that in the election of 1974, it wili be the biggest drawback anybody has _) be an incumbent. So incumbency is a I,roblem we have to live with. Am I willing to see to it, for instance, that everybody who is an incumbent has to declare as a candidate on January 1 of an election year? Am ii willing to say that lie cannot use hls franking privilege in a newsletter after February 1 of the election year? Anything to try to make it fat::'. Anything to put It on an equal footir g. Anyway, insofar as financing is concerned, we are talking about 60 days, not a Fear or 2 years. Mr COOK. l_r, President, will the Senator yield? Mr WNIICKER. Z am happy to yield to th_ Senator from Kentucky. Mr COOK. I thank the Senator from Conn_mticut. As he is aware, the Senate, on June 27, 1973, passed S. 343, a bill intrc_:[uced by the distinguished Senator from West Virginia (Mr. ROSE_T C. BYRDi and myself. The bfil passed the Senale by a vote of 71 to 25. It provided that no primary in the United States for a Federal office could occur before the first Tuesday in August. The Senafor calls for the first Tuesday in October. We further provided that no national convention--I notice that the Senator has eliminated national conventions, and that could be a blessing to the American television viewer--could occur before the first Tuesday in August. The general election day would remain the same. I n:ay say to the Senator from Connecticut, I have no great problem with his Cctober date. I have always contended that one of the ways really to cut clown on the demand for tremendous sums of money is to shorten the period in which one could campaign. If we estaMish a Federal primary date for congressional elections, as we certainly have the right to do, we could then bring the dates of this period: closer together. We will fi:ad ourselves in the position we find ourselves in today. It 1;;rather strange to me that a Senate seit in the State of California should April 1, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL cost $7 million or $8 million, or more than that, let us say, in the State of New York. It would seem to me that if we bring the dates closer together, we would eUminate the necessity for the expenditure of such tremendous sums of money, That bill passed by a vote of 71 to 25 and is now in the House. I must say that I do not know whether the 4-week or 5week campaign could resolve the probleto. I am not saying that it could not. As the Senator well knows, we do put an expensive burden on the Federal Government in regard to taxpayer expense, unless we have some really strong restrictions on the use of the frank--which I have no objection to doing. I think the Senator knows that. We in tile Rules Committee really did not tackle this matter from that point of view. But I must say that the Senator's arguments are very valid in regard to bringing the dates closer together, shortening the period tremendously. We then find ourselves in a position that we cannot, under any circumstances, call for or justify a tremendous expenditure of funds that we now find candidates feel is necessary to continue a year-long or longer campaign for election to Congress--the Senate or the House. I commend the Senator from Connecticut for his remarks, because I hope that his argument will dissuade States from making determinations as to who may find himself in a position of filing for a primary--and most of them are Presidential primaries--and finaliy making a determination as to whether he can make an expenditure in January, or who can establish a basis by which our remarkable friends in the press can start to get the bandwagon rolling, and put things together. I hope that they would be able to dissuade the States from dolng that, because we do ourselves tremehdous harm in regard to our ability to finance campaigns and raise that kind of money from the public, One other point, which realiy does bother us in the biU before us, S. 3044. Although I voted to bring the bill before the Senate, I thought that maybe we had time for an opportunity to fin_ee the campaign. We speak of the large numbet of independent voters which we now have--and I think that is tremendously helpful--what we do in a way by this bill, and I think the people of the courttry should understand it and become very aware of it--I have not read it in anything that has come out of C_)mmon Cause or any editorials that have said that this is what we must do, and that is that the Constitution does riot name any parties, The Constitution does not say there shall be two parties in the United States. But I am afraid we are looking at a bill that will absolutely build in no more than two parties. I am afraid we are looking at a system whereby we build in, in perpetuity, two major parties in the United States. Let me give the Senator an example, If, under the election we had the last time, there were two major parties, the Republicans and the Democrats, I give one, for the sake of argument, §0 per- RECORD m SENATE cent and the other 40 percent. That is, 45 percent of the voters in the country were for one of the two major parties, Therefore, we split the difference, and we allocate to them based on 45 percent, There is a third party which has a candidate, and that third party candidate had 5 percent. Take the fraction 5 over 45, and it comes out one-ninth. That means we give the Republican Party, in the next Presidential election, $9 million out of the funds, we give the Democratic Party $9 million out of the Federal funds, and we give to the third party $1 million. How can a third party ever become a first or second party in the United States? Are we not building in permanently and forever the two major political parties and saying to the American people "Take your choice"? I have serious misgivings about this, because nowhere in the Constitution did we say how many parties there shall be in this Nation. Yet, I am afraid that by this bill we may well be doing that. I think we should understand it, and I think the American people should understand it; and I think the American peopie should also understand--! am not sure they want it this way; if they do, then this is the way we should do it--as we go forward in this effort, and apparentiy a majority of those on this floor think we should, the consequences of saying, "Here are the two giants, and the third shall always be last." Because, based on the votes in 1976, the distribution shall be made in 1980, and that means that the two major parties, whatever their percentages are--and a candidate becomes a major if he reaches 25 percent or more, and ff he is below he shall always be a minor unless he does not take under this bill, and then he subjects himself to the criticism of the two majors, because he has gone out to try to raise money to make himself equal, in the eyes of the American people, to the candidates of the two major parties, I think this is something we have got to understand. I thank the Senator for this dialog. Mr. WEICKER. I thank the Senator from Kentucky. I think it is especiaUy useful to listen to the words of the Senator from Kentucky and understand that simply because he has some reservations about the bill, as indeed I do, it does not mean we are against reform. We just have to start to do our homework in this country, and start facing the fact that we are not about to demagogue this issue, We all understand the need for reform, but what I am trying to do is come out with something inteliigent, that is worthy of the greatest political process ever known to man, rather than just slap a band-aid on to try to make everyone feel good, and then find out we have created something far worse than that which we already have, which is bad enough, and no one is defending it in any way. I think, as we have listened to the Senator from Kentucky, we have realized that he has pointed out the pitfalls, not because he has anything to gain from private contributors, but because he understands that if indeed there is going S 4925 to be a cleaning p_x)cess, and ff indeed the voters are to be given a choice, the type of reform we are discussing has t_3 come to pass; otherwise the American people will believe the situation is reform when in fact it will be havoc. So I commend the Senator for his comments, because I know of his dedication to getting this mess cleaned up. It does not make any difference whether it is his head or my head, we think that we are going to do things right. I think that is basically what the Senator from Kentucky h_ saying. It is not a question that either of us are going to rely on campaign funds from our own States. That has nothing to do with the debate on this floor. As I said before; it is not simply a case that those, who are fur the bill as written are for reform, and those who are not; are against it. That is not the case at all. it has got to be clear, from every poll that has been taken, whether in my State or across the Nation, that the American people ,do not necessarily want to be restricted to the choice of Democrats or Republ![cans. Otherwise, if the Republicans are doing so badly and the Democrats so well right now, why not just join the Democratic Party? The fact is that we have gone through two administrations, one of each party, where clearly an excess of power has been turned against the best interests of the people of this Nation, and they have every reason to have a distrust of both parties. Why should we be subsidized, Mr. President? Why should we not be out there on our own merits, facing the American people, rather than have Federai campaign financing and have our mediocrity and our inattention to detail subsidized by the people of this country? When we get to the financing area.'_, the Senator from Kentucky and I can be very much in agreement when it comes to full disclosure, limited contribution:_, no cash, and all the rest. But there is no point in saying we want the present systern. We do not. We want change, but as I say, we want change that is worthy of the institution of Congress, rather than something that is based on temporary emotion. There are two points I would make in relation to one of the comments that. the Senator made. My bill does not eliminate the convention. It does not say a thing about it. Obviously, though, there will be serious debate among the 'politica1 parties when it comes to the fact that they are just going to meet for the purpose of stating ideas, and so forth. I would imagine that it will have as great an appeal; I imagine that ought to attract the viewing, listening, and reading public ',as much as anything, but these people will feel, "You are going to take aU the appeal away when you eliminate the candidate selection process." But under my amendinent, the selection is not going to be done in a convention hall or a smoke-filied room; it will be done across this Nation, with the people of this democracy being the delegates. We talk about one man, one vote. We have achieved that. Why should it be any the less so when it comes to choosing the 29:5 S 4926 CONGRESSIONAL candidates'.,' Why should it be any the less so when it comes to choosing a candidate, so far as one man, one vote Is con¢erned? It should not be. And choosing a platform lin October should be the same as going ahead and choosing a candidate. Just so that no one will come back at me, my State of Connecticut is far in _rrears on this whole business. We are one of the few States still operating on the basis of a convention rather than a primary. I have already advocated that we change our laws in our State, and that we eliminate the convention by golng to the direct primary, Now we move into the financing ares. As I say, I think it is naturally limited by the 60 days. People can say, "Well, you know, you can go ahead and solicit, and throw an awful lot of money in." The fact is that under my amendment 2 weeks before the election a full report is published, so ii' somebody has gone in there and thrown a great wad of money in, everybody is going to know about it before the election takes place, But we are talking about gearing ourselves to the exception. The fact is that 60 days of a political campaign, from the choosing right to the election process, will be one heck of a lot cheaper than what is now roughly a year and a half, really, extending out to two years. It has to be. I cannot give any definite figure, that it will cut it in half or cut it by a quarter; it i_ just going to cut it substantially, and I think bring it within manageable bounds, The other aspect of the bitl relates to the collection of money. As I have stated, no one can collect money and no one can spend money except within that 60day period. They have to report their expenditures and their collections 2 weeks before the election. Now, someone is going to step up and say, "How ,can we possibly do that?" What it means is that every candidate has to start right from the first day and keep the books. And why should he not? If he cannot keep his own books, he should not be sent to keep the books of the people of this country, either in the capacity of President or Senator or Representative. Two weeks before the election, everything should be right in place, and then people will know exactly the role the money plays. It will be a self:policing measure, which should do a great favor to all of us in politics, and should go a long way toward eliminating the horrendous deficits which occurinthe course of campaigns, and which, again, too many of us spend too much time on, after we are elected, Point No. 2: it calls for one committee, and. eliminates the laundering of funds. In other words, in the case of a personal contribution to one committee, the candidate's name sticks to that contribution, even though the contribution goes from one pot to another. We will not get any laundering of funds. It allows a eandidate---I am doing this from memory now--S10,000 in personal money, which brings me to the business of defieits. According to the bfil as I have written it, you are not allowed to run on a deficit, or to put it this way, ff you have $10,000, use it any way you want to. You 296 RECORD--. SENAT_ can have the deficit any way ff you want to, but if there are pro_lems, they will be known, and your breaking of the law _O.11be. known to the v,)t_rs before the election, I would doubt that anj'one would want to find themselves in viol ation of the law which would be known to the public :2 weeks before the election. Again there is another practical reason for setting this deadline at 2 weeks before election. I wD._ _;Peak for myself so that no one else wtl3 "sit on. my head," but I know that a good portion of the money I received for my successful campaign in 1970 came to me _dter I was elected. That I do not eon_ sider to be much of a testimony to Low_ rLL WEXCKEmIL is a testimony to the seat which he has won, to the power which he lms achieved tlhrough ar. election win. Mr. COOK. Mr. Pr_;ldent, will the Senator yield at that pohit? Mr. WEICKER. BettEr let me finish what I am going to say first. What ! am talking about is a le4:ai contribution, that comes to all who _re elected, but which comes after the election is over and is then pu_ into our campaign. That is wrong. We know it is wrong. To believe in a man or woman and wllat they stand for is r,ne thing, but to _ye money after_ ward, that is merely going ahead and playing the seat. That is not right. IY_ does not lead to health} pol:Ltics. But in my case one-fifth, or fully one-. sixth, I believe, of the fimds were raised after ][ was elected. I do not think I am too far off the mark ir that situation. That is why tlle cutoff date in this legislation is 2 _eeks befo :e election. You can spend money on tho_e things already committed, but you cannot go ahead and make any new commitments. You cannot go ahead and collect any money, except (luring those 60 days, which is what we are talking about--46 d:_ys of fundraislng--the full 60 days being that which applies to campaign spending, Let me con_ment on another point brought out by the distirguisi_ed Senator from Kentucky. He remarked on the campaign bill we passed last year which now sits over in the Hot,se. Many ideas have come to pass since then. As a mat_ ter of fact, my bfil presented _o the Rules Committee then did not include the 60_day provision which I present to the Sen.ate today. What I am saying here is that we need time to generate the best ¢,_ everyone's thinking and not just to grab the first solution that comes along. Let me review if I can, in case I have left anything out, that section 3 of the substitute amendments amends the "lim_ itations on contributiors and expendi_ tures' that are presently in existencm The proposed ]aw would be as follows: First. No contribution, t or even an arrangement for contributions prior to the first Tuesday :_ September. Second. No expendituces on contracts before the first Tuesday in Septembe:r. No cash over $50. Third. A cutoff on money 2 weeks be_ fore the November electi _n--A candidate can, however, "budget for" his anticipated expenses for the last 2 weeks of _he campaign, Fourth. No raore than $10,000 from the candidate's personal fm_ds. April 1, 19 73 Fifth. No deficits. A deficit would be a criminal violation, and would be known, by the opponent as well as the voters, 2 weeks i)efore election day. To incur a deficit w,:mld be to be on public record as in violation of the law, and having to explain t his to voters you are asking to give you hiTh public trust---for the protection of cre(:itors, the deficit COllld be paid off in. a _roceeding similar to bankruptcy, under t:he supervision of the Comptroller Gener:d. SEC_ON 4 Sect::on 4 of the amendments would stop cz:ntributious between political committee_ in a "laundering" sense. Committees could contribute money. But, it would have to be given in the name of the original donor. This means that tl_e candidates final r,eport will contain tl_e names of people, not organizations, there will be no hiding the true identity of a donor. Cormnittecs, such as COPE, couldstill perform avaiidfunction: !_oliciting or administering contributi:ms in the name of an individual donor. SECTION5 One political committee. A long overdue, a:_td essential step if the public is to be abl,:_ to keep track in a practical way, o:[ the candidate's financial activities. SE_XON 5: REPORTS Vastly simplified over existing law. Firsi;. Only one report, 2 weeks before electio txday. Sec(nd. Report everything. All money brougLt in. Ail money spent, just as any normal, business organization is required to do. Thi_ d. The timing of this report will be the gr_atest deterrent of all against one or a f,_w large contributors from giving such a large amount of money to a candidate. '.['his would happen because such contributions would be known by all voters, before they vote. The candidate is in the position of losing 'votes, by being clearl_ obligated to a small special interest--e:i_her an individual or a group. There can be no more practical deterrent to exc_:_ssivecontributions than the sanetion ol losing votes. SECTmN 6 .The last section of the amendments I am offering would reform the penalties for ca:npaign financing violations. Thh section proposes meaningful penalt ies. If a candidate violated financing laws, a fine equal to three times the amount of the violation would have to be paid. This money would then, under the Comptroller General's supervision, be used t:> publicize the facts of that violation. It would be exposed in the geographical area in which the election is held. Wh_t greater sanction, than to let those ;vho control the fate of an elected official know about his wrongdoing. No_ Mr. President, that, in essence, is the sum of the amendment and the reforn.s it proposes. No_ _ we get to some of the difficulties I hav_ with the present legislation. I cannoi; think of anything more dangerom than deeply involving the Federal Goven'Ament in our political elections. Apl'il 1, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL Good heavens, what is it that we have seen that appalls us the most from the revelations of Watergate? It is not the individual guilt or innocence of the various people. It is in the abuse of the tremendous power that the Government has. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. DOMENXCX).Ail time of the Senator from Connecticut has expired. Mr. WEICKER. That included the colloquy with the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. CooK) and myself? The PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes. Mr. WEICKER. That came from my time? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut is correct, Mr. WEICKER. Could I ask the Senator from Kentucky to give me a few more minutes? Mr. COOK. I yield 5 additional rainutes to the Senator from Connecticut. The PRESIDING .OFFICER_ The Senator from Connecticut is recognized for 5 additional minutes, Mr. WEICKER. Mr. ' President, we have seen the abuse ot governmental power in the FBI, the CiA, the nfilltary intelligence, and the various law-ehforcement agencies--the internal security of the Justice Department. The integrity of these agencies was totally believed. They had a magic name. We did not have to supervise them. They were good enough. They had the right names, They were in the right business--forget it, no accountability was necessary, But, what did we learn? We learned that there always has to be accountability, no matter whether it is an individual or an agency, Today, we are being asked to do the exact samething, that because it is the Federal Government it is ail right. For heaven's sake, the Watergate investigation did not for the mos_ part, investigate the private portion of our populous. What has gone wrong has gone wrong in the Federal Government. But we stfil want to go ahead and give the Federal Government the power to finance, the power to be responsible for the admin~ istraf_ion of the financing of our political campaigns. As I said, I am going to go up or down. I hope that the amendment passes. If it does not, it will stand within the next few years, I can assure you, Mr. President, But I am not going to be party to giving the Government with all of its power ,additional power in this area, until the Government can prove itself, I feel much safer with the American people than I do with the Government on any aspect of it. I stated at the outset of my talk that in the participation of the American people in the democratic process lies our greatest safeguard against the abuses which occur within the poaitical process. Mr. President, I would yield _qow, if I could, to the Senator from Kentucky and I hope that I might be able to get a few minutes time before the vote to summarize my argument, I should also ask agaln--I am trying to accommo, date myself to the convenlence of everyone--but I should like to ask for the yeas and nays and would RECORD-- SENATE appreciate it ff we could possibly do something along that line as we get closer to the time of the vote. But I want to indicate my feelings now. Mr. COOK. May I say to the Senator from Connecticut that there will be time remaining I an/ sure. There wiU be no problem in yielding him further time, At this time, I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from Iowa (Mr. CLaaX), and ff he cares for more time, he may ask for more. The PRI_SIDING OI_ICER. The Senator from Iowa is recognized, Mr. CLAi_K. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Kentucky. Certainly, the distinguished Senator from Connecticut speaks with great information and authority. His record in the Senate on the Watergate Committee, the courage he has shown on that cornmittee; and the fairness and nonpartisan attitude he has had: makes.him one of the most informed Senators on this issue. I would like to talk just briefly about his amendment. It seems to me that it is weighted too much in favor of the incumbent. Presently, 95 percent of all incumbents in Congress are reelected to office, That was true in the last election, and it has been true for decades. We should be very cautious before passing legislation that will make it even more difficult for challengers to be elected by limiting their camaplgn time so strictly that, in effect, we limit the challenger's opportunity, By limiting expenditures in campaigns to 30 days in the case of a primary election and 60 days in the case of a general election, an unknown candidate may not become well enough known to be a serlous challenger, I dislike using myself as an example, but many other Senators could use their experience to make the same point. I remember that about 9 months before my campaign, the political polls showed that I was known by less than one-half of 1 percent of the voters. That may or may not have been the situation with the Presiding Officer, the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. DOMEN_CI), or the Senator who preceded him as Presiding Officer, the Senator from Colorado (Mr. HasXELL). But none of us had held a Federal office before, and it is inconceivable that we could have become well enough known in 30 days to have won a ptimary, or in 60 days to have won a general election, or even to be serious candidates. And the same is true of many Members of this body--the campaign of the Senator from Delaware (Mr. BIDEN) is probably another example, One could go on. With 15 million eligible voters in California, how could a relatively unknown person who wants to run for Congress, become known in 30 days? That is probably not true in Connecticut, which is very much the size of Iowa with about 2 million eligible voters, But we are not.legislating for Connecticut or Iowa; we are speaking on behalf of the entire country. I think that even in some of the smaller States a severe time reduction would give a natural advantage that would be difficult ff not impossible to overcome, Some people have made tim argument that the campaigns are very short in S 4927' England. A group 0f high school stu-. dents just asked me today why we can-. not limit the campaign, as England does, The Senator from Connecticut (Mr, WEXCK_._Odid not raise the point, but it is worth discussing. The simple fact is that we do not have their system. They have no na-tional election in the sense that we do, nor do they helve candidates who run nationwide. They have nothing com-. parable to a Senate race. The House of Commons constituencies are no more than 10_,000, so they can' become known more rapidly than in California, for ex-. ample, where there are 15 million vot.. ers, or even in Iowa where there are l! million voters. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. CLARK. I yield. Mr. COOK. Is it not true that the area covered by a candidate is in the vicinity 8f 1-mi]e square? Mr. CLARK. That is correct. Mr. COOK. One has to Understand that the State of AlaSka has one Representative and that State is twice the si_ of Alaska. We have other States with one Representative and it is the responsibility of that Representative to cover that entire territory. That is a pretty big job. Mr. CLARK. That is correct. One other point te be made is that, in England!, candidates run on a party label, and they follow party lines almost exclusively, se the vote is for the party rather than for the individual. Here, we run much more as individuals, and we have to become lmown in _erms of personality anti issues. 'to try to do so in 30 days, or in 60 days in a general election, is virtuaIly impossible. So there are really only two effective ways. a candidate can become known: one is through the media, and the other is person-to-person contact. If this amendment were passed, it would cut down o_._any extensive person-to-pers_ campail_xing. If a candidate had only 35 or 60 days to become known, he would have to do it through the media. There is no State in the United States where ,_ person could come in contact with one one-hundredth percent of the people because there are too many people to contact. So campaigns will become entirely media campaigns. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator has expired. Mr. C%ARK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield to me for 2 addition_,l minutes? _/fr. COOK. I yield 2 additional minutes to the Senator. Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, in conclusion, attractive as the amendment would seem, in the sense_that it would limit the time and the expenditures, it would have the effect of virtually assurlng the reelection of incumbents, giving them yet another advantage. I know that is not the intent of the amendment, but I think it would be the effect. As we look at the bill now, it does two or three very significant things. It limits the amount that can be accepted to $3,000, and the amount that can be spent to 10 cents in primaries and 15 cents _a 29'7 S 4928 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD _ SENAY.['E general elections. It does away with the corrupting influence of unlimited fundlng and, at the same time, limits expendltures, giving equality of opportunity to challengers and incumbents so that in general elections they can spend the-same amount. That is important, But if'we limit the campaigning time, we wlM have a bill which insures that 98 or 99 percent of the incumbents ax'e returned to ofi_tce, Mr. President, I yield the floor, Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield myself such time as I may need. The PRESIDING OFFICF, R. The Senator from Nevada is recognized, Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I agree with the Senator from Connecticut on the philosophical ideas he is trying to get across in this amendment. First, with re,pert to the limiting of campalgns, I think that the period for campaigning should be shortened. It goes on far too long now. We tried to address omqselvesto this in previous legislation, On June 27:, 1973, we passed S. 343 by a vote of _:1 to 25, which would have limited the period of time campaigns can be conducted, so I am completely in acc:oral on that facet, Second, with regard to contributions by political committees I see no basic harm in contributions by political cornmittees provided that they are properly reg_lated. It was not the fact it was a political committee, per se, that engaged in wrongdoing in the so-called Watergate campaign that concerns everyone now. That was not the basic problem, The committees, if they are properly regulated, can contribute, should be able to contribute, and can properly con- charges that may be made daring that period. Charges frequently are made in that period and if he has spent his money and cannotrespondbyradio, television, or newspaper ads he is deprived of the opportunity to participate fully in that camtraign, This would be a very bad mistake. On the point of whether anational primary election sh >uld be held on 'Lktefirst Tuesday of Novembe:r, ldo not have any particular feeling one way or the other on that issue. On the matter of no n--,tional conven.tions, ! think if we are going l_J do away with national convention,'t we are doing away with the two-party ,;ystem. We are almost doing away with the two-party system in this bill, if it is .ma(ted, by the restrictions thai; are pres(ribed, because, a.'; the distinguished Senator pointed out earlier, a person who is an unkown would find it almost impossible to campaign and to try to win in eitht r a primary or general election under the terms of this bill. I know the D_nator from Connecticut did not intend i'b, but I ca:zmot think of a bill wtfich would be more of an in(urnbeat's bill than this bill, were it put into effect, because it just virttmlly precludes a person who is a noninctmabent, unless he has been a I.governor .)f the State or some other verg high pl:blic official. It virtually precludes everyo ae except 'those i_,Lthat category from having an opport_mity to run successfully. 1VIx. :President, I oppc_;e the amendmeat even though it has some features that I do not disagree with completely, but the basic parts of this amendment would destroy the political sy,stem as we lmow it. tribute, under such regulations as we prescribe, to assure there are no abuses, just as we propose there not be abuses in contributions of' individuals, by full disclosure of those contributions and limAting the amounts, and by providing penalties for contributions in excess of those that could be made. The abuses that were pointed out in the recent elections were for violations of law or taking advantages of loopholes in laws that we propose to correct in the legislation we now have before us and in other legislatlon that we have heretofore passed. I might say that S. 372 that is now in the House would have correct ed and closed a number of loopholes that did occur and of which advantage was taken, Withrespect to the provision of no contributions before the final date and none from 'the time beginning 2 weeks before the election, I might say that an unknown cmndidate would have noway to find out if he had a possibility of getting contributions sufficient that he could carry on a campaign unless he were able to get the facts prior to the filing date. So ff he had to file first and then go out to see ff hE'. could get contributions to support his candidacy he might have invested his filing fee unwisely, With resl_ct to the time beginning 2 weeks before election, everyone knows there are many last-minute occurrences that take place in an election campaign that occur in the last 2 weeks. In many instances it is the responsibility of the candidate to be able to respond to I yield 5 minutes to th,., Senator from New Hampshire,. Mr. C;OTTON. I thank the Senator. Mr. President, I, too, am sympathetic with the objectives that the Senator from Connecticut obviously had in mind irt drafting his amendmeat, and I think we all agree that the h,ng, drawn-out p_mcess we go through now--from the time of the party conventions, which has more or less been in effett from the day when we had to travel by train, and I dc not know whether it would be in the day of the stagecoaclh--could be speeded up, But, among other gen,.,ral objections,, I ttfink It is inconceivable and entirel_ unwise to try to nominat_ aH our officers: facluding the candidates for President: 0n the same day, and ovJy a matter of 5 weeks before the electior, I would have: to put in a word for my own State. It is known around 'the United States tha_; New Hampshire has_an;_ thins is true--, the first Presidential pref._rence primary, Vermont has one a week later. We have it; way back in. March. 'the reason fo_t tlxis is that the second Tuesday in March is the date of all the town meetings--. many of you _mow wha; the old-fash., ioned New England town meeting is--. and our municipal electio:2s are held then in most of our cities. Tlx_,,refore, by hav.lng the Presidential preierence primary on that date, we are assured of getting out a good, representative vote, because people pour ow; to take care of their lo.. cal business in towns an_l they ttu_ out_ for contested municipal elections, 298 Apri, l 1, 1:,; ' A large percentage of the voters are out, an(. when they are there, they register their preference as to who shall be their p::Lrty's nominee for President of the Unii;ed States. I am sure that there are, many other l!!,_ates timt may have Presidential preferget out a good, representative .'ot_. The siLddest thing in this country is the :fact th_t.t such a smaM percentage of our ::,eople _ote. Furtk ermore, the fact that Presidential ;>refere_me primaries are spread over a ;:,eriod of various times in various States ::neans _:ihat the various candidates get a char(ce to go into the smaller States. If :t were xll on the same day, why, outside ,ff television appearances, nobody would ;_.eethe leading candidates of either party ::or the Presidency of the United States except in the big metropolitan areas of :',_ew Ycrk, Chicago, San Francisco, and :'.i_5An[.=eles. They would not have the op:;)o:ctunisy to present themselves and mingle _,ith the people and go from State I;oState _ l._-_arttermore, and this is most pratAcal, flequently it has been our experi!race--ii; must be true in many other !3tates-..that we have legal contests as to who has been nominated for Congress:nan m for Senator in the State, and ',;here l.,: provided an appeal directly to !:he sup ceme court of our State. If there is :any clharge that the law has been riolated b:_ a candidate in some grave way, ,;_-kdchmight even cause his name to be remove !t from the ballot, there is an apo i:>eal of t;hat contested election directly to !;he supreme court of the 8tare. How in I:&he world would we be able to go through bhat so:ct of process under this proposal? We wot:id not know who was the nominee in time even to print the ballots, where I_allots _rre used. Agaix:,, there are many other objections. This substitute has, as I said, a good in':;ent, btit it is too much of a good thing. ]:t shortens things up so that it would be extremE.qy difficult to have an orderly process in the nomination of Federal candida.res within States, and it would ce:ctain:y disrupt the Presidential preference plimarles. I think many of us hope ::nany (lore States will nominate in that :ma_me:t'. But the States should still have l;he right, within reasonable limlts--I do :not object to shortening the time for the campaign--to provide their own procedure and the right to appeal to the :;ourts :if there is a contest on the ground of alle_:'ed fraud or anything else con_erning the primary election. I most make it very definite that we in New England, following New Hamp_;hlre's example, like to have, every 4 !_ears, our Presidential preference ptima(les on a day when the people of a l_tate l,re turning out to perform their I,ocal business and thus be sure that we kaave a large turnout and a large vote, Landno; have just a small number of people exl: cessing their preference as to who shall b_ their party's nominee for Prest,:lent oJ the United States. I aaq'ee with the Senator from Nevada that ccnventt°ns are not always a pleas- April 1, 197_ CONGRESSIONAL lng spectacle to people watcl__ng televtsion, but if we destroy the conventions, we destroy the two-party system. This would result in all kinds of splinter parties, many having candidates elected by only a minority vote because of the large number of people running in a large number of small party organizations, There are some other objections. I repeat, I commend the purpose of the amendment, but it goes much too far, and I cannot support it. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time? Mr. WEICKER. Mr. President, will the Senator yield me 5 minutes? Mr. CANNON. I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from Connecticut. Mr. WEICKER. I wish my good fi5end fi'om Iowa were here, so I might cornment on, not debate, his statement, because he has the same intensity and feellng about this matter as I do, even though there are some specific points on which we disagree, But to show what happens under this bill, my campaign ran roughly $625,000 in 1970. Under S. 3044 1 could get $767,000 for my campaign, That is the problem we are confronted with. This is not going to reduce in any way the cost of campaigns. It will go up and up and up. I am sure that my experience will not be dissimilar to that of any other Senator. So if the American people feel that this will cut' down the cost of campaigning, they should be told that it will not. The burden will be shifted from those who voluntarily participate in a campaign to every taxpayer in the United States; and when they realize that they will all participate in the cost, It will be "Katy bar the door." Other factors may be involved. However, cutting down the costs of the campaign will not be the result af this legislation, Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a clarification of what will happen to the cost of the campaign if the bill goes into effect? Mr. WEICKER. Mr. President, will the Senator from Nevada yie/d me additional time? Mr. CANNON. _.r. President, I yield additional time to the Senator from Connecticut. Mr. GRIFI_N. Mr. President, did the Senator say anything about the increases in the levels of spending that would occur with respect to races for the House of Representatives under the committee bill? Mr. WEICKER. No. Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, I have some figures which I should like to cite for the RECORD.In 1972, according to the statistics available from the Clerk of the House of Representatives 1,010 candidates ran in the primary and general elections for the House of Representatives. They spent a total of $39,959,356. Against that total of actual expenditures in 1972 in all races for the House of Representatives the Government Accounting Office estimates that the cost of Government financing in House races, if this bill were to pass---would be, not $39 million, but $103,307,988. Furthermore, it might be of some in- RECORD-- SENATE terest to know that in 1972, 52 percent of the House candidates spent less than $15,000 in their campaign, Under the committee bill, once the candidate is nominated, he will be entitled to $90,000 for his campaign. Each and every candidate would be entitled to up to $90,000 out of the public treasury, of course, if one candidate is going to spend $90,000, it would be very difficult for his opponent not to spend that much, especially when it is available out of the treasury, Mr. WEICKER. In addressing cornments to my good friend, the distingulshed Senator from Iowa----Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. _rEICKER. I yield, Mr. CANNON. The Senator from Michigan did not give a correct figure. He made it appear that a person can get that amount whether he spends it or not. That is not the case_'If he does not spend it, he has an obligation to turn that money back into the treasm?. He get it only ff he elects to go the public fmanclng route. He does not have to go that route, He has to have made his threshold figure to get any matching at all in the primary race. In that connection, the distinguished Senator from Connecticut mentioned that he got or spent $850,000; but that under the bill he could get $876,000. That is not the case. According to my figures, the Senator from Connecticut would be able to get the maximum of $525,250, because the maximum he could spend is in the primary, and that would be divided by one half the primary figure. So he would really get $105,000 less than that. That would be the maximum he could get with the matchLug of the figure in the primary and the public financing in the general would be a total of $525,250. Mr. WEICKER. I have other elements, In a runoff primary the State central committee has the right to spend. Those are my figures, and I think they are correct, based on consultation with various staff members, Let me get back for a minute to the statement made by the Senator from Iowa, who raised a valid point that is of concern to me. There is no doubt that the factor of incumbency is important. It is an important matter. First of ali, the statement was made that the candidate could not become known in 30 day_ or 60 days. It is true that the political systern as we know it, could destroy our systern as we know it. The people would not listen to DICK CT.ARK,for example, until he got within 30 or 60 days of the election. Then they w_)uld begin to pay attention, It is no different when I campaign. I have but a handful of people listening at the beginning, but it is just before the election that large numbers start to listen. We are asking for a major shift among the people themselves. In the last 30 or 60 days, after we have campaigned for a year and a half, do they begin to take notice. Maybe the campaigns of some Senators will be a little better than mine. But the question is whether the people are going to pay attention in the S 4929 last, 30 or 60 days, or whether there will be a gTadual buildup in that course of time. I think that proves the point I am trying to make. It is not untfi a period of 60 days before the general election that people begin to take notice. The distin-. guished Senator from Iowa said that, just before he left the Chamber. Let _ consider how last-minute oc-currences could still be handJed_ It i,,_ possible fro' a candidate, recognizing hl,'_ expense,s, to plan his campaign to pre.pare for unfair charges which might be brought against him as he goes into the, last weeks of his election campaign. I make no point about the fact that tht_; legislati,an would overturn the system as we know it. I am afraid nobody listens to us for a whole year. I do not blame them. 7_ey figure that maybe 30 or 60 days is enough. So maybe this is an un-. usual system which makes the time shorter than a year. It relates to what we have got as we go along. It will shorten the campaign to the time from just before L.abor Day. Under this system, the focus of the entire Nation will be on the Federal elec-tion. In the finaI analysis, this system would reduce the amount of campaign-lng and expense. The Senator from New Hampshh-e (Mr. COTTON) has lc,rig ago recognized the faults of a convention. His State has a State primary. The candidates go dj.rectly to the People. New HamPshire h_ the wisdom to see that a convention does not take the place of having evenly man and woman express himself or herself. Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. ¥/rEICKER. I yield. Mr. COTTON. That is certahfiy true. I want to make it plain that my objection was not intended to shorten cam_ paigns to an almost impossible date. I agree with the Senator that under the bill we are piling corruption upon corruption and money upon money. My chief objection to the Senator's amendmerit is the vice it puts us in by shortenlng the campaign and making everybody vote on the same day, with only a matter of 4 weeks of campaigning. But I did want to make it plain that I am in accord with him in opposing the bill. Mr. 'WEICKER. I thank the Senator from New Hampshire. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient secured? The :yeas and nays were not ordered. Mr. WEICKER. In conclusion, I wis;_ to say that I hope th_; Senate would lead, not lnl_ some esotvric theory, but to changes in the facts of life politically in this country. We as politicians, in the election process, need to communicate with the people who prefer independence to slavish adherence to the present sys-. tern. Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's 2 minutes have expired. Mt-. V_EICKI_. I yield myself 2 additional minutes. Anyone who has achieved political ma- 2c,9 $ 4930 CONGRF.SSION&L RECORD_ turity knows that campaigns must guarantee against corruption and against abuses in the financial area or in the areas of Dower. People wfil judge us not by how OILYpo]Stlcal parties, Republican or Democratic, are subsidized, but rather by what we say and how we campaign under the _,gstem we tolerate and by our own respect for the American people, I do not far I minute mean to impute to the backers of this bill that they axe not as anxious for reform as I am. They are. They have so attested in their words and their actions. But no small measure will m_mce in these times. Rather, if this democracy is to survive, and it will as long as the people are allowed to go ahead and :run it, then artificiality will have to be done away with. Today we owe our presence here, to too great an extent, not to the Constitution, not to the Bill of Rights, not to the validity of our political system, but rather to artificiality, I yield bru_ the remainder of my time. Mr. CANNON. I yield 3 minutes to the Senator from Massachusetts. Mr. KENI_Y. Mr. President, I hope that the Senate will reject the amendmerit of the distinguished Senator from Connecticut.. I want to say at the outset that there are parts of the amendment of the Senatc_ from C(mnecticut, which I think are desirable. CE,_f_inly, the overall thrust is desirable, in terms of the shortening of political campaigns. There have been a number of proposals advaaced in the Congress to consider the shortening of political campaigns, and to deal with the problem of proliferating primaries. At the national level a proposal has been made by the distinguished Senator from Oregon (Mr. PACXWOOr) for a system of regional primaries. In the House of Represemtatives by Representative UDALL Of Arizona to fix the dates on which ppimaples may be held. I think it deserves very seriotm_ study. The disting_aished majesty letter has proposed a single nattonal primary. And, in the ease of congressional elections, the Senate has alrea_ly passed a bill, S. 343, that is now before the House, and whichls not nearly as drastic as the present amendment, So I am in sympathy with the direction of the amendment of the distillguished Senator from Connecticut, but I feel that it; goes too far in condensing the election. Defied. The amendment would have long-range implications in terms of our election system, and would in many ways go much farther than the proposals in the bill reported out by the Cmmmittee on Rules and Administration and managed by the distinguished Senatop from N_._/ada. First, ff the amendment is accepted, we would stltl be relying upon private financing of campaigns. We would still have that campaign evil, of which all of us have become crucially aware in the course of the Watergate hearings, as well as the revelations from Common Cause about the vast amount of special interest giving that exists today, Second, this proposal, in spite of the assurances given by the distinguished Senator from Connecticut, would be basically an incumbents' bill. The chal- 300 SENATE longer would have to win a primary in October and then try to familiarize him.., self to the electorate in tirae for the November elec'tion. That is simply not enough time to do the job. For these two principal reasons, first: because the _mendment r_;tains pri., vote financing, and secord because it is,_ basically, an incumbents' bill: I believe the amendment should bE rejected, Also, Mr. President, there are two ad-. ditional points which I think are importaut. The month of October bas a series of Jewish holidays, and the amendment would have an adverse impact on the Jewish participatior, and involvement of those of the Jewish faith, not only for candidates, but also for others participating in the election system. This issue was debated quite completely in connection with S[ 343 last year. Origlholly, that bill sought to set the general election in October, but because of the impact on the, Jewish faith, the bill modified and the November date was re-. tained, Second, we have the aroblem where millions (_f young Americans turning 18 years of age e_:h year l_zight be effectively disfranchised from participating in the primaries. The _qenai:e led the c(nmtry in enacting the l_-year-old vote proposed, because we tho _gh it was iral_rtant that the young people partici-. pate in the election system. The practical impact of the amendment of tlae Senator from Connecticut is tha_ many young Ira'.opic, arriving in college tow:as in early September, might have dil[icull_ In meetlng the residence requirements in time to vote in the primary. We have taken steps aa the past to re.cognize and eliminate some of the hazards and some of th_,' obstacles for young people h) participate In election campaigns. I think this meemure would provide an unfortunate _dditional hinderence to that participation, So, Mr. Presidcmt, although the thrust of the amendment has value--I think all of us and the American people would like a shorter period of time for campaigns--the ina:pact of the e_endment would _ave too many undesirable effects fc_r the Senate to accept. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield I minute to the Senator fr_n Connecticut. Mr. WEICKEI_. Mr. President, I do not 'w_sh to be corr_idered anti-Jewish and axttt-young people in :_rop,vsing my amendment. I o)ncede theft if the period fram the first Tuesday in Octc_ber to the fi_t _lesday in November interferes, that is something that car be wm'ked out as a tech_dcal matter, Second, how many yotrlg l_ple participah_ in the selection of the Demoerotic or the Republican candidate for l=_sident? Very few. They do not have the privilege of sitting l_ the convertti(ms. So let us make it ,:lear that this amendment gives them a fe_ greater voice in the elc_:tion p_ccess than the present system. They not only have the opportunity to vote, but they have a voice in, the selection of the candidate without tying the_nselves :.nto either the Democratic or the Republican party. So as fax as young people are concerned, this amendment extends the franchise April 1, 1974 to a fa::' greater extent thm_ they ah'eady have. Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, contrary t_:_the Senator's re_iiarks, the Demacratlc Party has opened 'up the po]itlca1 system for 'much greater paxticipa[;ion by youth. Under the amendment in: question, the residence laws for voting in most States w(mld severely restrict voting by 18-yearolds ff the election is held in October. Congress should not take such a step withoui; adequate information. Certainly, 'we ought to shorten campaigns, but thi; is the wrong way to go about it. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield i minute to the Senator from Iowa. M.r. CLARX. Mr. President, I would Hke to address just one point raised by ]:)oth the Senator from Michigan and _:,heSenator from Connecticut: namely, what tll'ley consider to be the excessive _:;_;t to the Federal Govermnent of this measure. According to the bill, it would cost about $90 million if all candidates took 100 per,_nt public financing in the gen_ral election. I do not consider that ex_essive. Last Year, we voted to build a l]eet of 'trident submarines. One Trident _;ubmarine, at $1.3 billion, would run t;h_me ellections for more than a decade. That is a cheap price to pay for a bett_r ,;!:overmnent. Mr. CANNOI_. Mr. President, I hope my coIleagues wiIl defeat this amend::neut. fks the Senator from Massachu,_:etts has said, the proposals in the _,nendment ought to be the subject of hearings by an appropriate committee. ]_:is proposal, when we were considering :m election campaign reform bill this '.?ear, w_s not presented to us. There was ao testimony offered on most of the paxi;icular 0oints raised in this amendment, and I think it ought to be given due con:_;iderat_on, rather than legislating on the i_enate floor. With respect to the Point made by the ,:.fisting_ished Senator from I_Ilchig_n _iq.en h,_ said that we have a much greater amotmt provided for House campaigns th'-m the average cost of House cam:_aigns, we did not fix this $90,000 figure _ss any magic figure. We selected it because t'.i'm Senate had already acted on _!!I.372 last year, and it has the $90,000 f_gure ia it for House campaigns as a _:aaxtmtm figure. That Is why we carried _:he figure over. If it was good last yeea-_ :_.,ndI would venture to say that the Senator from Connecticut and the Senator :_rom Mi:ehigan, perhaps not both but one of the t,_o of them, voted for it last year, because it went over to the House of ]stepresentatlves with an overwhelming vote---we felt it should still be valid. I woutd simply say we do not have any preference for that particular figure. We 'ielt, re:,_lly, that the HoUse Members themselves ought to decide on what was _,,fair _:nount to reduce the cost of campatgning. If they see fit to come up with ::_.figure of $60,000 or $50,000 as the limit, :t_ne; that would be perfectly all right v,qth um and I would have no objection 'i,,_ lowering some of the other limits in '{,[_ebilI or the figures in this chart we arrived at. This was the best consensus _:i!_atwe could arrive at between the mem- April 1, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE S 493:1[ hers of the Rules Committee, after the straightforward laws. To do otherwise, hearings that were held on the subject as S. 3044 proposes, is to insult the inmatter, in order to report back a bill, as telltgence of the American pubUc, we were committed to do. If the checkoff plan is a worthy TXTL_-V mechanism for providing funds for PoMr. FANNIN. Mr. President, I want litical campaigns, then let those who te indicate my support of the motion to support that approach, like the Delstrike title V of S. 3044, the Federal Camlar-Check-Off Committee, promote it paign Act Amendments of 1974. among our citizens. If it is worthy, then Title V of S. 3044 proposed to inlet our citizens choose as a free people crease the amount a taxpayer could whether to support it or not. That is claim as a tax deduction or tax credit the way, the only way, to conduct this as a result of making a political eonprogram. To do otherwise would be detribution. In addition, title V proposed to struetive of the very ethic which underincrease the $1 tax check-off to $2, or lies our political system: The ireedom in the case of a joint return $4. to choose, These provisions of title V, however, Mr. President, I hope that the Senate pale to insignificance compared to the Finance Committee, to whom title V proposal to reverse the procedure governwill be referred as a separate bill, will lng the checkoff plan. Under existing law, take the position that the automatic if a taxpayer wishes to participate he designation approach as contained in title V is wrong and contrary to corndoes so by "checking off." In doing so, monsense and will move to strike that the taxpayer is electing, through a positive commitment, to support the checkparticular part of title V altogether, off plan. Under S. 3044, however, the Mr. President, in addition to considerspirit of volunteerism which is the founlng the proposed change in the checkoff plan I intend to urge the Senate Fidation of the plan, is to be replaced by a nance Committee to review the right of procedure which can only erode that the individual taxpayer to designate spirit. In its place, S. 3044 proposes to She party of his choice for receiving his amend existing law to provide for the tax dollar under the check-off plan. automatic of $2 of income As originally established, the tax tax liability designation of every individual whose of the amendment is that by striking the opportu_aity to designate a political party was that it would help to simplify the placement of the checkoff provision on an individual's tax return. So, Mr. President, for the sake of administratire simplicity, we deprive the American taxpayer, should he care to participatE;, of the light to designate the party of his choice i_ receive his tax dollars. If we must sacrifice the value of free choice to gain simplicity in our tax returns, then I am afraid we have failed our responsibilities. If we shall succumb to the kind of reasoning which was the foundation for modifying the checkoff plan, then we might as well turn over ou,' authority to the Federal administration and go home. Mr. ]?resident, I am sure that the Internal t{evenue Service could find prove-. a way to accommodate the dual choice sions of the original[ checkoff plan. In income tax liability is $2 or more for the taxable year to the Federal election campaign fund, unless the individual elects not to make such a designation, It is interesting to note that the report accompanying S. 3044 did not even hint at a justification for reversing the checkoff procedure thus suggesting the absence of any sound position to justify the change, In my 10 years in the Senate I have never seen anything so cynical or callous as this approach to legislation. This cynicism is clearly evident when one reviews the background and operation of the checkoff plan. With total disregard for the underlying participating spirit of the checkoff plan, the authors of S. 3044 must have calculated that if only 3.1 percent of our citizens were participating in the checkoff plan as was reported in November 1973, then :it would surely follow that if the checkoff do1lars were taken automatically, only a few citizens would "check-off" against the automatic designation as provided for in S. 3044, thus insuring that the checkoff fund would have sufficient funds to meet the required amounts to Underwrite the public financing of political campaigns, Apparently, the authors of S. 3044 believe that any method which will guarantee the success of the checkoff plan is justifiable even if it involves the kind of cynical calculations that are implied in this particular provision of S. 3044. Such cynicism is a sad enough trait, but it is a disaster in legislation_especially in campaign financing, Mr. President, I cannot accept, and I hope my colleagues agree, the kind of thinking which has promoted this appreach to the checkoff plan. If we are to have honest eleetions, as the proponents .of public campaign financing advocate, then let us have honest whether Congressunder will the recognize the right of free choice checkoff plan. That i,; the issue and that is what con-cerns rae. Mr. President, nmnerons groups con.cerned with campaign financing have authored statements of principles with respect to laws and :programs governing campaiign financing. These principles al-most always reconmlend the reform of campaign financing practices and in particular that the Federal Government use public fUnds to support campaigns. Yet, in respect to the use of Federal fun(is none of these so-called statement of principles deal with the question of how to guarantee that a taxpayer's dollar will not be used to support a party or a candidate with whom he disagrees. Those who advocate public campaign financing through: the checkoff plan cannot ignore the reality that the taxpayer :is deprived of the right to designate the party he wishes to support. Instead, if he chooses to participate, his dollars will be divided not only among the major parties but, perhaps, minor parties as well. This is not fair to those who want to support one party over the others. It is not fair lor the simple reason that the taxpayer, ff he desires to participate, has no choice. I hope, Mr. President, that a way can be devised to accommodate freedom of choice under the checkoff plan. If we fail to accommodate that political freedom then any public campaign financing program will be seriously deficient Jin preserving the right of our c£tizens to choose whom they wish to support. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I am prepared to yield back the remainder of my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. DOME_rCI). The hour of 3 o'clock having arriveq, under the previous order, _he yeas and nays having been ordered, the Senate will now vote; on the amendment check-off plan allowed theshall taxpayer to either designate that $1 be paid over to the Presidential election campaign found for the account of the candidates of any specified political party for President and Vice President of the United States, or if no specific account is designated by such individual for a general account for all candidates for election to the offices of President and Vice President according to a nonpartisan entitlement formula, Whether we agree or disagree with financing political campaigns through a tax-check-off system, nothing is more fundamental to that system than allowing a taxpayer the right to choose how his tax dollar is to be used, if he cares to participate, In my opinion, the original concepteen of the tax check-off plan was cosrect, and in keeping with our traditional belief that in matters of political choice our citizens should have the right of free choice. By providing the taxpayer with a choice under the tax check-off plan that basic freedom was preserved, In 1973, however, an amendment to the Public Debt Limit Act, Public Law 93-53, was adopted eliminating the opportunity for a taxpayer to designate'the political party to whom his dollar checkoff could be sent. The result is a checkoff plan in which all check-off dollars are collected in a nonpartisan Presidential election campaign fund to be disbursed under an established formula, Mr. President, it is of course regrettable, that the Senate saw fit to modify the check-off plan by not allowing the taxpayer the right to designate the political party of his choice as a recipient of his tax dollar. But what is even more distressing is the complete lack of concern by the proponents of the amendment as to the effect of the amendment on the value of free choice, The reason given by the proponents this regard, it is interesting to note that the IRS is able to accommodate two checkoff on this year's tax form. It opportunities would seem possible, therefore, that they could accommodate an oppor-. tunity to designate party choice. But, Mr. President, the real issue here is not the design of tax return forms nor the administrative problems of IRS, but 301 S 4932 CONGRESSIONAL of the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. WElChES) /NO. 1070. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that the Senator from Texas (Mr. BENTSEN), the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. EASTLAND), the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. FULBRIgHT), the Senator from Alaska (Mr. GRAVEL), the Senator from Iowa (Mr. HUOHES), the Senator from I_)uisiana (Mr. LONg), the Senator from Ohio (Mr. METZENBAUM), the Senator from lVIinnesota (Mr. MONDALE), the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. MONTOYA), the Senator from Maine (Mr. MUSKIE) the Senator from Connecticut ' (Mr. P_IBICOFF) the Senator from Illinois (Mr. STEVENSON), and the Senator from Missouri (Mr. SYMINGTON) are necessarily absent. I further announce that the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. I'IUDDLESTON) is abeentono:fficialbusiness, I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Illinois (Mr. SX'_VENSON) WOUld vote "nay." Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. BaocK), the Senat_)r from Maryland (Mr. MAXqm_AS), and the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. SCOTT) are necessarily absent. I also announce that the Senator So 1070) RE(20RD -- SENATE :Mr. WE::CKEa'S w_srejected, amendment (No. _'_ _'-MESSAGE Fl ',OM T[_IE ZEIOUSE A message fror the P.'Zouse of Repre-. sentatives by M2 Hack:tey, one of lt_; reading clerk_:, mnomtced that the House had passe(, withcut amendment. the following bilh of the Senate: ' S. 9(19. An act l'el_ ting to 1he constitutional rights of Indians; S. 1836. Ail act t , amonG, the act entitled "An Act Iz) incorpor te the Z:merlcan Hospital of Paris," appr_>vec Janm_ry 30, 191.3 (37 _;tat. 654); and s. 2441. An act. 'to _nxend the sci of Febru.dry 24, 1925, incc.rpc ating the _xlerican War ]_others, 'to perrait _ertain stepmothers and adoptive mothers be zaeml:,ers of that organization. The result was announced--yeas nays 68, as follows: [No. 100 Leg.] YEAS--10 m}en Grimn Roth Baker Hollings Weicker Bennett Mansfield Chiles Nunn Abourezk Bartlett Bayh Beall Bellmon Bible Blden Brooke Buckley Burdtck Byrd, Harry F., Jr. Byrd, Robert C. cannon case Church Clark Cook Cotton Cranston Curtis I)ole Domenicl Aiken Bentsen Brock F,astland Fulbrlght C;ravel Huddleston Hughes 302 I_AYS--68 Dominick Eagleton Ervin Fannin l_ong Goldwater Gurney Hansen Hart Hartke Haskell Hatfield Hathaway Helms Hruska Humphrey Inouye Jackson Javits Johnston Kennedy Magnuson McCleLlaxx NOT VOTING--22 Long Mathias Metzenbaum Mondale Montoya Muskle Rtbtcoff Scott, Hugh McClure McGee McGovern McIntyre Metcalf Moss Nelson Packwood Pastore Pearson Poll Percy Proxmlre Randolph Schwetker Sparkman Stafford Stennls Talmadge Thurmond Tower Tunney Williams Scott, William L. Stevens Stevenson Symington Taft Young 10, 1, 1974 The :PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a sufficient second The :.leas and nays were ordered. Mr. BELLMON. Mr. President, I ask 'that the amendment be stated. . The PRESIDING OI_.FICER. The araendment will be stated. The legislative clerk proceeded to read :the amendment. The amendment is as follows: On page 78, line 19, strike out "and 617" :_nd insert in tleu thereof "617, and 618". ,On p:Lge 78, below line 22, after the item :cei:atin_ to section 617, add the following new item: "618. E;_rly disclosure of election results in Presidential election yeaxs.". ,0_ p'._ge 86, below line 17, insert the roi[owing: "PART _I.--EARLY DISCLOSURE OF PRES~ The message al announced that the I])ENTIAL ELECTION RESULTS ]_[OUSe insisted up its amendments t(_ "SEC. _01. (a) Chapter 29 of title 28, United the bill (S. 39) t amead the Federal !_tates (_ode, is amended by adding at the Aviation Act of 1,c i8 to provide a more end the:eof the following new section: effective progr_in 1) pre_ent aircraft pi ...... § 618. Early disclosure of election results in racy, and for other purpo.;es, disagreed to Presidential electaon years. by the Senate; agi ._ed to the conference "'Whoever makes public any information asked 'by the S:ene ;e on the disagreeing with re_ect to the number o_ votes cast votes of the two He lses thereon, and that cor any candidate (or election to the office of Mr. STAGGERS, ]YJ[r. IARMK.g, Mr. DINGELL, I_esiderLtial and Vice-Presidential elector in i_[r. DEVINE, and r. KIrYKENDALL were ;he gen, ral election held for the appointment appoiilted managel; on _he part of the :_f Pres:idential electors, prior to midnight, ]_Iouse at the confe: ence. _asternelection _tandardIs held time,shall on be the, fined day on such not which more The meSSage ful ;her announced that thefrOmsenatorVirgirfiafrom(Mr'AlaskaWXLL_A_(Mr.R'STEVENS),SCOTT)' the House had agr_ -'d to _he amendment the Senator from Ohi ° (Mr. TAFT), and of the Senate _x> t]e ammdment of the the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. ]_[ouse to the bill (_ 1341) to provide for YOUNg) are absent on official business. E_nancing the ecoa )mic fievelopment of ]_adians and l_adim org_ulzations, and I further that istheabsent Senator from Vermont announce (Mr. A_E_) due to illness in the family. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. SCOTT)and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. TAFT) WOUld each vote "nay." April for other purposes_ ,' --' ' FEDE_AL ELECTION AMEI_)MENTS _han $_,000, imprisoned :me yea_:_or both.'.". for not more than Mr. B_,r,MON. Mr. President, I ask artanintous consent that during the debate on this amendment and any roll- The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill (S. 3044) to amend the ]_'ederal Election Campaign Act of 1971 t_ provide for public financing of prlmary aa_d general election campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend cerrain other prmqsions of law relating to the financing and condu(:t of such campaigns. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. i_..[ELMS). Under the previous order, the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. BELLMON) ia recognized to call up _nendment No. 1094, on which there shall be 30 minutes Of debate, calls occur Mr. Charles 'Waters _!:lat of my staff thereon, may be accorded the privile_:e of the floor. The :PRESIDING OFFICER. Without _)bject&)n, it is so ordered. Mr. BEXJ__ON. Mr. President, the objective of this amendment is easily understoed. As the chairman said, we have nad the matter before the Senate on other occasions and it has been voted ar,on before. 'The ]?RESIDING OFlWiCER. The Sen:_tor will suspend. 'The _i_enate will be in order. The ti;enator may proceed. .'Mr. BELI. aMON. Mr. President, quite _.irnply, this amendment would make it unlawful for local election officials to anl:lounce the election returns for President ired Vice President prior to midnight, ]_r. CANNON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield to me for 10 seconds so that I may make an announcer._ent ? Mr. BELLMON. I yield. Mr. CANNON. Mr President, for the benefit of colleagues we have a 30-minute time limit on t_is amendment. I do not expect to use more than :l minutes inasmuch as we ah'eady haw; voted on this identical issue. I ask for the yeas anti nays Oil the amendment, The PRESIDING O FFI£;ER. The amendment has not been .';toted. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I ask lInanJlTlOUS consent that i_ be in order to _sk for the yeas and nays. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered, Mr. C_INON. I ask for the yeas and nays. _astern standard time. In so doing, this arnendraent would prevent the public disclosure of Presidential election returns in I;he Eastern and Central States while 0oils are open and citizens are still v0ting in _;gestern States. This amendment previously has been _onside_.ed by the Senate on two occa_dons a,,; an amendment to other propos'_0s. It ';vas introduced on June 28, 1973, ?_sS. 2099 and referred to the Rules Committee where it is presently pending. On J_ane 27, I offere_ a similar _trnendment to Senator ROSEST C. BYRD'S _)ill to change the date of Federal eleci;ions. During debate on my amendment, the railking minority member of the i_ules Committee, the distinguished Senator from Kentucky (Mr. COOK) stated: I wool d vote for the amendroent, if in fact _:he Benator would limit it to Presidential _ C. MMPAIGN OF 1974 ACT April 1, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE &nd Vice Presidential elections. I think that it would resolve one of the great problems, and we would be on our way to what the Senator wants to accomplish. But I think the restriction as to all Federal elections is a serious hardship and I, therefore, will oppose his amendment on that basis. Senator CooK's objection has been removed from this amendment making the disclosure provision apply only to the eleetion returns in the Presidential and Vice-Presidential elections. Considering Senator CooK's objection, this amendment was withdrawn and then introduced as a bill, S. 2099, which referred to the Rules Committee. was On form July as 28,suggested 1973, this by proposal modtried Senator in COOK, again as an amendment to S. called 372, theupFederal elections bill. DuElng debate on this amendment Senator Cook stated: was We ali know the effect of television. We know that after % of the votes are counted and the results announced, the people in Alaska are just going to the polls. Something really ought to be done about. I think something oughtthe toopportunity be done ought to have ings to make a determination way to do it. butto Ihave think hearwe of the best Therefore, the ranking member of the Senate Rules Committee is on record on tWO different occasions supporting either this approach or Senate consideration of this proposal. There has been ample time fei" hearings. The problem of early Presideal(al election disclosures has been the subject of numerous hearings during the past 15 years. Now is the appropriate time and this is the appropriate bill for Congress to finally act in order to end a practice which has the potential of distorting the normal outcome of Presidential elections. The net effect of this proposal will be to prevent the public disclosure of Presidentia] election returns until midnight, eastern standard time; 11 p.m.. central standard time; 10 p.m., mountain standard time; 9 p.m. Pacific standard time; 8 p,m., time; tinles, Yukon time; _' p.m. Alaska-Hawaii and 6 p.m., Bering time. By these polls throughout the TJnited States will be closed. I ask unanimous consent that a table showing the voting hours of the 50 States, as well as the hour of public disclosure under the terms of my amendmeat be inserted in the RECORD at this point, There being no objection, the material Hours opened United States Local time of discl0aure under Bellmen amendment Hours closed Massachusetts ...... Michigan .......... 7 a.m...... Minnesota ......... Mississippi ......... Missouri........... Montana Nebraska........... .......... a.m ...... ...... 77 a.m 6 a.m ...... S a.m ...... 8a.m Nevada ............ New Hampshire .... New Jersey ........ New Mexico........ New York.......... Carolina..... North Dakota ....... Ohio.............. Oklahoma .......... 0rego .................... Pennsylvania Rhode Island....... South Dakota....... Carolina..... South Tennessee ......... 7 a.m ....... l0 a.m.8.... 7 a.m ...... 8 a.m ...... 6 a.m) ..... a.m_.. 96:30 a.m...... 6:30 a.m.__ 7 a.m.n .... _a.m ...... a.m...... 02)........ ...... 88a.m a.m ...... 9 a.mJ 2.... Texas ..... ........ Utah.............. Vermont ........... Virginia............ Washington ........ WestVirginia....... Wisconsin.......... wyoming .......... 77am. a m_.[--u .. 78 p.m p m...... ...... 911and p.m.10 p.m. 06 5).................... a.m...... 7 a.m...... 7 a.m ...... 8 p.m ...... 6:30 a m... 7:30 p_m__. (lO)........ 8 p.m ...... 9 a.m ...... 7 p.m ...... 12 12 p.m. p.m. 9 p.m. 12 p;m. ll p.m. lO p.m. Maine .............. Maryland.......... Hours opened Hours closed under Bellmen amendment 10 p.m. 12 p.m. 12 pm. p.m. ll 12 p.m. 11 p.m. _2Pp.mm 12 p.m. 12 and p.m. 11 p.m. l0 11 and 12 p.m. been public of the results announcement would be delayed until Presidential the appropriate hourofdisclosure. In every Presidential election year since 1960 citizens have been alarmed be6 p.m...... Zt and12p.m. cause of the likelihood that the present 88p.m ...... ll p.m. p.m. p.m....... Il practice of publicizing and predicting 7 p.m ....... ll p.m. election returns influences the way many _ p.m ....... l0 ...... 10 p.m. and ll p.m. VOteS are cast and discourages others 7 p.m....... _2pp.m_. from voting because of-the belief that p.m ....... 6 p.m ....... 12 p.m. the outcome of the election has already 7 p.m ....... p.m ....... 76:30 p.mp.mJO.. ....... 6:30 p.m_.7 p.m ....... ...... 88p.m p.m ....... 9 p.m ...... p.m ...... ....... 77 p.m 4 p.m ...... 6 e.m. Rhode s aud.--Hour poi s open varies from7 a.m.to 12m. t_Tennessee.--County commssioners of election may prescribe different hours, at least 15 days before election, but in no event and9 pm.may polls be open fewer than 7 hours between 8 a.m. ,, Texas--Election commisschefs may vary hour for opening polls. of less than 100,000 population polls may open atIa8 counties a.m. In counties of greaterthan 1,600,000population, poil_ mey open at 6 a m lsVermont.--Houm legislative branch in each municipality, but pollsprescribed must openbynot earlier than 6 a.m. and close not later than 7 p.m. _, wisconsin -in cities of 1st 2d, and 3d class peris open at 7 a m In cities of 4th c ass, and villages and towns, polls open at 9 a.m. but governing body of such municipalities may prescribethat polls open not earl er than7 a.m. after local Alabama ........... Alaska ............ Arizona............ Arkansas .......... California .......... Colorado........... 88a.m a.m ...... 6 a.m...... 8a.m ...... 7 a.m.... 7 a.m...... 68 p.m P.mJ...... ..... 7 p.m...... 7:30p.m_._ 8 p.m...... 7 p.m...... 11 p.m.8 p.m.2 7 and 10 p.m. 11 p.m. 7 p.m ...... 12 p.m. ,_ Connecticut ........ 6a.m.S..... 8p.m...... Delaware .......... 7 a.m...... 8 p.m...... District ofColumbia_ 87 a.m ...... 8 p.m...... Florida........... a.m...... 7 p.m...... Georgia.......... ;. 7 a,m ...... 9 p.m. 10 p.m. 12p.m. 12p.m. 12p.m. 12 p.m. the polls closed polls in Hawaii time, closed for in Alaska have those Presidential results would be afcounting of votes in all races, including the Presidential contest, could begin when the polls close and only the fected. The t Alabama.--In counties of over 400,000 population using veting machines, po s c ese at 7 p.m. 2 Approximatey 50percent of the population. 3 Connect cut.--In primar es, po s open at t2 noon, § 9-438. ,10wa.-In cities, where registrar on not required polls open at s Maine.--Where a.m. voting machinesused exclusively,polls open at 10 a.m. and close at 9 p.m. 6 Massachusetts.--P011s must be open at least 10 consecutive hours and must dose not of later than 8 p.m. Nevada.--In counties less than 25 000 population, polls open at 8 a.m. and c ese at 6 p.m. 8 New Hampshire--Hours according to size of town. lit primaries polls must be openvary 4 hours, opening not earlier than 6 a m and c os ng nol tater than 8 p.m. _ New York.--For special elections, p011sopen at 6 a.m. and close at 7 p.m. n primaries, everywhereexcept New York City, polls open at 12 m. and close at 9 p.m. la New York City polls open at 3 p.m and close at l0 p.m. _0N0rth voting machines are used polls close at 7:30Car01ina--Where. p.m. . Oklahoma.--Voters may file petition to have polls open at Because of 7 p.m. 9 and i0 p.m. 11 p.m. and 12 p.m. 11 p.m. 11 11 p.m. and 12p.m. il p.m. 12 p.m. 12 p.m. 12 p.m. Was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, Mr. BELLMEN. Mr. President, this ,as follows: amendment would prevent the nationSTATE STATUTES PRESCRmmG HOURS ATWHmSPOLLS wide publicizing of election results and OpFN ANOCLOSE predictions based on actual returns tabuluted in the Eastern States until after Localtime o f 9 p.m., Pacific standard time, or 1 hour disclosure United States One thing should be made absolutely clear--voting hours would still be reguluted by the States and only the hour of public disclosure by local election erinrials 7 a.m...... 6 p.m...... 8 a.m ...... S p.m ...... _ a.m....... 6 p.m...... a.m...... 7 a.m.4..... 8 p.m...... 76 a.m...... 76 p.m ...... a.m...... p.m...... 6a.m ...... 7 p.m ...... 67 a.m._..... 8 p.m...... a.m...... 8 p.m...... 6...................... Hawaii ............ Idaho ............. Illinois ............ Indiana............ Iowa.............. Kansas ............ Kentucky.......... Louisiana.......... S 4933 polls in California. p.m., have been (:lose at 6 will an hour. avoid Delayedserious broadcasting would problems in Alaska where one-half the voters Would still have 1 hour to vote. This amendment, in my view, represents a simple, direct approach to the correction O[ an election abuse whose time for solution is long overdue, Fewdecided. would contend that the publicizing of election returns while citizens are rotlng has anything but a negative impact. I believe the Senator problem HARTKE was summarized quite well by in a letter addressed of in the 1967 to Senator on PASTORE, chairman Subcommittee Cornmunieations of the Senate Commerce Committee. I ask unanimous consent that Senator HARTKE'Sletter be ]printed in the RrccmD at this point. There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the RECO_D, as follows: Senator HARTK!_'S letter-- "There is, addttioually, the question of whether listeners and viewers who have yet to vote are influenced by actual vote results elsewhere or by projections of results. _.ere have been election,'_ recently where the change of majority in one Western State could have that tippedsomea Presidential is posslble voter already election. cast haveIt decided important elections. turn, maythe have repercussions in This, e]tecin lOCal lions. "The late President John F. Kennedy the 1960 National election by a plurality won vote. IfprecinctsOne voterin thein Untl;edeach Ofstatesthe 173,000had switc:hedv°ting his vote from Mr. Kennedy to Richard M. lqixon lqtxon would have won the popular vote .... "Realistically, had there been a switch of one vote in Kennedy's of the 10,400, precincts in Illinoisfavor plusin each a switch of nine Texas, votes Mr. in each would of thehave 5,000tallied precincts Nlxon the in re; quired electoral votes and would have been our 270 President. "... A switch of 27 electoral votes by 1iiinols E_nd 24 votes by Texas, combined, would have resulted in a different choice of candidate _:or President of the United States. "I am not disputing the inherent right of the people to know the facts, and the rights of stations and networks to tell the facts along with interpretations .... "What primarily concerns me is protec_bing the rJght of the election process in the greatest"I democracy on earth. would recommend to you that your schedule inquire hearings into this of our matter Subcommittee and 1ts attendant to problems." Mr BELLMEN. In response to Senator HAa_K_.'S letter criticizing early disclosure of Presidential election results, public hearings were held before Senator PASTORE'Ssubcommittee which aptly re_tated the problem in its final report; by saying: :3O3 S 4934 CONGRESSIONAL Common sense seems to indicate that a man who sits down to dinner just before going ,rote, on tho television hears out that to so and switching so llas already been declared the winner, might not engage himself in an exercise in futUlty. It seems to me that this was a very practical and common sense way of looklng at the problem, and I think quite clearly points out the need for the 93d Congress to take action, It is in the interest of this Nation that the greatest number of citizens possible exercise their right to vote and that this fundamental right be carried out inde-' pendent of and unhampered by any prior knowledge of the significance their vote will play in the ultimate outcome of the election. S. _',044,dealing with the reform of our election process, provides Congress with the proper vehicle to finally resolve this long-standing abuse, It should be stressed that my amendment represents no suppression of the news. It provides a badly needed regulation of Presidential elections providing for orderly :returns and the orderly release of information concerning these returns. Quite clearly, congress has the constitutional authority and resporgsibility to so act. Article II, section 1 of the Constitution gives Congress the power to determine the time of choosing the elcotors for President and Vice President.. Article I, section 4 empowers Congress to :regulate the time, place, and manner for holding elections for Senators and Representatives. The Supreme Court has indicated that this proVision may also be applicable tx) Presidential elections, Thus, there appears to be ample constitutional authority to support the proposal that a Federal law be enacted as I have proposed which would prohibit election authorities from releasing Presidential election results until a time fixed by Federal law. Such a law I believe to be not only constitutional, but practical as well. Mr. President, I wish to refer to a study issued in 1965 by the Congressional Reference Service of the Library of Congress regarding the constitutionality of proposals prohibiting the publicizing of election returns prior to the polls closlng in all States. This report concludes as follows: There appears to be authoritative support of yet another proposal. Namely, the enactmerit Federal lawfrom which would prohibit electionof aauthorities releasing Federal election resull_ until a time fixed by a Federal law. Such a time could be set with re. gaxd to the differences in time zones across the country. If it were made a Federal crime for election oil_cials to release this informstton before the time designated, such a law could be practical and nxlght well be held to be Constitutional. It should be noted, that although elect;ion officials axe appointed by the State, the'_r also serve a Federal function when acting ir, Federal elections and are thus properly subject to Federal controls, Mr. President, this study, although not conclusive in nature, indicates quite clearly, that my proposal is constitutional. Certainly, its enactment would solve this serious problem, and, in nkV view, represents the best approach in achieving the national objective of maximmn voter participation. It is time for 304 RECORD _ SENATE tile Senate to act, I urge t,doption of this a:mendment, iVir. President, I reserve the remainder OJ_my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time? Mr. CANNON. I yield myself 2 minutes. The PRESIDI:NG OFFI[JER. The Sena_mr may proceed. Mr. CANNON. Mr. l'resident, this amendment is identical :_x principle as amendment No. 1094 that was previously ollered and defeated by a vote of 51 to 25, with 24 Senators not voting. The Senator said this wouJd not apply to congressional elections. Centressional elections certainly (ould not be affected. How is a congressi, lnal election in one State or dis_rict going to be afffected by premature disclosure iii California? It is absurd on its face. The only race it can apply to is for the Presi(ency and Vice Presidency. It would be almost impossible to administer and it would impose a criminal penalty, subject to a $5,(00 _Lne if I or ,_ome other NIeraber of Congress at the close of the polls in an eastern seaboard State called a fl_end in California and said, "We heard the resist" and that so and so was winning by so many votes. If we phoned a friend in California to convey that informataion, we would be subject to a $5,000 criminaZ penalty. The proposal is patently absurd o:a its face. We can cert;_inly reeeamize the unfortunate situat:ion we have where voters are influenced irt the Far,Test when they learn the results of an election in the East at a much earlier time, but I do not know how we ,:an possibly avoid that without making criminals of almost everyone in the Nation. Mr. President. I am prepared to yield back my time. Mr. BELLMEN. Mr. President, I yield myself 2 minute,;. I disagree with the posi;ion the cl_airman has taken about making criminals of everyone in the United States under this amendment_ All th_s amendment would do would be to req_ire local election officials not to make public the returns of elections until mi_niglat eastern standard time. !in this wsy there would be no way to know what tr.e returns were in the eastern States and people would net be tempted to call someone :in another time zone and let them kn_w. We merely say not to release the outcome until midnight. There is nothing :acre to tempt anyone to violate the law because except f'0:_'election officials no ore would know what happened. Mr. COOK. l_[r. President, will the Senator yield? [Mr. BELIAVIOIq. I yield, [Mr. COOK. I Shall not a::gue this mattel.' at great length. It is n)t just the result that is involved. What bothers many. Of us and it did m the pre-ious debate is that when a network pick._ up four precincts in an entire State, and the announcer goes on television and says, "By reason of our projection '_o and so will carry the State by a eertai:a vote." There is a problem there and it is a very serious problem. It is not only a raatter of projecting who will win, _hich has no effect on voters, but it doe_ on those who April 1, 1974 courthouses and whose responsibility it is to count votes, particularly where many States still have ballots and where _;he result is in question. We do have a prol_lem at 5 after 6 in the evening vchelx 15 States well know how they _,r_;going to vote based on two or three ::>recinc'i;s in 'a State. This causes a ;:>roblem and I think it is serious. We can ';?restle with this for a long, long time, but that causes more problems than anything else. Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, will ::he Senator yield? Mr. BELLMEN. I yield. Mr. I!IUMPHttEY. I agree with the _3enatoro I agree from experience and ::_o_ from theoretical, academic discus,,don. I did not like to heat on television in 1968 l_rom a few precincts telling me I ';ms goi_g to be slaughtered, and having all my people across the country so inJormed. I happen to believe it did have ,';orae effect in some parts of the country.' Mr. COOK. Mr. President, will the li._enator yield? Mr. _ffJMPHREY. I yield. Mr. COOK. That happened when people still had 4 or 5 hours to vote. Mr. EtUMPHREY. That is correct. Mr. COOK. Where they were watch'ing cn teleTision and the polls were still open. Mr. i!!tUMPHREY. I do not know v;rhether this is the right amendment, but something ought to be done so the ",Solomc,ns" cannot just sit around and t'_ll peol)le what is going to happen in I;he election, particularly when the elcotion, is close, and where a difference of :! percent in each precinct will make the difference of who is going to be Preslt_ent. I do not know how the rest of my colleagues are going to vote, but I am _oing t¢_catch up on this one. Mr. BELI__ON. Let me say that this :matter ires been before the Senate now ior mon_;hs and months. If there is a bet'_er approach, we ought to know what it i_:;,but, _.acking something better, I, like the Sen_,torfromMinnesota, think something ought to be done, and this is the best approach I have seen so far. I yield, now to the Senator from Arizeno. Mr. C_OLDWATER. Mr. President, I would like to join the senator from Min]:msota _Mr. HU_PHaEY). I remember in 1964, after the first precinct, we were told r was going to get skunked, and, you know, they were right (laughter) We PRESIDING O]_-_t_q[CER; Who '.!;[e]dstime? Mr. ]q;ELL1VION. Mr. President, I am r,!mdy to yield back my time. Nit. CANNON. Mr. President, I am preit]ared to yield back my time. Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, will the [_enator yield me 2 minutes? Mr. C,_kNNON. I yield 2 minutes to the l_enator from Massachusetts. Mr. K_CNNEDY. Mr. President, we have ]J_;tened to two of the experts, but if we can go back, past 1968 and 1964, to the restdts (:,f 1960, we find another view. l['residen_ Kennedy carried practically all el' the l_rge eastern States. Then, when the vote came in from the western States, ]:_,_was not doing as well even though'the results In the East had been, announced April 1, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL at a time when the polls in the west still had several hours to remain open. It is a very open question whether people are affected at all, or, if they are affooted, whether they may vote for the underdog or vote for whoever seeems to be ahead. Obviously, we do not know whether legislation is needed. I would certainly support a study to determine the answers, but I do not see how we can legislate until we know the magnitude of the problem. Mr. BELLMON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield a question? Mr. KENNEDY. I yield Mr. BELLMON. Does the Senator feel that it is healthy or bad if the voters on the W_st coast know how the voters on the east coast voted, so it may influence them as to how to vote when they go to the polls? Mr. KENNEDY. I say, with all respect, I have yet to see any convincing evidence that it has a real impact. In some instances people may want to vote for a winner, and there will be a bandwagon effect. In other instances, there may be an underdog effect. A voter may say, "I am going to vote for the other candidate, because he is the underdog, and because I am tired of being pushed around here by computers and being told that is the way I am going to vote. I am going to vote for A because they say I am going to vote for B." I have not seen convincing evidence presented to the committee or on the floor which would indicate what impact the earlier announcement will have on the other States. As a matter of fact, the evidence seems to be conflicting. We ought not to rush into legislation tha_ will have such a seriously restrictive effect on the media, until we determine how serious, ff at all, the problem really is. Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield. Mr. KENNEDY I yield. Mr. HUMPHREY. The Senator from M_ssachusetts may be right. Whether or not they are convincing results, I know there is something wrong in people turnlng on television and having someone in New York tell them what is going to happen across the country. Even if they are right, I think we are entitled to make our own mistakes. In Minnesota we are denied any right to campaign on eleclion day. No candidate can even be near the polling place. No advertisement can appear in a newspaper or anything else except the announcement that this is election day. The reason for that is that there may be last minute election pressures brought to bear. I think on election day people ought to be left alone to make up their own minds, instead of having the "wise one" tell us how it is going to come out. Just wait for the result. Get a good night's sleep. We can know the result the next day. If one is angry about it, he will not be quite SO angry. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, I agree with the Senator irom Massachusetts in many respects. What bothers me about prognostication Is that they ring a bell and put a big X there and say thls State is RECORD-- SENATE going in this column because of their projections. I would feel much better ff we Were talking about results, Under S. 343, which we have already passed, election day would be a national holiday, so we would not have their matter of whether people could 'vote or could not vote or have the opportunity to do so. Under S. 343 we already have resolved that issue and made it a national holiday. My main objection is to 'the prognostication based on one, two, or three districts. Mr. CANNON. The prognostication would not be prohibited under this amendment. One could make all the projections he wanted, but this amendment simply says that whoever makes public any information with respect to the number of votes cast for any candidate for election to the office of President and Vice President,----Mr. BELLMON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. CANNON. I yield. Mr. BELLMON. Those projections would be impossible if the outcome had not been announced. Those projections are based on certain preselected precincts. If those were not announced until midnight, the projection would be impossible. That is one of the purposes of my amendment. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield _back my time. Mr. BELLMON. Mr. President, I yield back my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Ail time having been yielded back, the question is on agreeing to the amendment of the Senator from Oklahoma. q_e yeas and nays have been ordered, and the clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. EASTLAND), the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. FULBRIGHT), the Senator from A,laska (Mr. GRAVEL), the Senator from Iowa (Mr. HUGHES), the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. LONG), the Senator from Ohio (Mr. METZENBAUM), the Senator from Maine (Mr. MUSKIE), the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. MONDALE), the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. RIBICOFF), and the Senator from Missouri (Mr. SYMINGTON) are necessarily absent. I further announce that the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. HUDDLESTON)is absent on official business, Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. BaocE), the Senator from Maryland (Mr. MATHIAS), and the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. HUGH SCOTT) are necessarily absent, I also announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. WILLIAM L. SCOTT), the Senator from Alaska (Mr. STEVENS), the Senator from Ohio (Mr. TAFT), and the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. YOUNG) are absent on official business. I further announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. AncK_) is absent due to illness in the family, I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Alaska (Mr. STEVENS) would vote "yea." S 4935 On this vote, the Senator from Ohio (Mr. TAFT) iS paired with the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. HVGH SCOTT). If present and voting, the Senator from Ohio would vote "yea" and the Senator from Pemmylvania wotgd vote ',nay." The result was announced--yeas 43, nays 38, as follows: [No. 101 Leg.] YEAS--43 Abourezl_ Domenlci McIntyre Allen Fannin Metcalf Baker Fong Montoya Bartlett Goldwater Moss Bellmon Griffin Nelson Bennett Gurney Packwood Biden Hansen Pearson Buckley Haskell Percy Burdick Proxmire Byrd, Robert C. Hatfield Hruska Roth case Humphrey Stevenson Church Mansfield Thurmond cook McClure Tunney Curtis McGee Dole McGovern NAYS----38 Bayh Eagleton McClellan Beall Ervin Nunn Bentsen Hart Pastore Bible Hartke Pell Brooke Byrd, Hathaway Helms Randolph Schwelker Harry F., Jr. Hollings Sparkman Cannon Inouye Stafford Chiles Clark Jackson Javlts Stennis Talmadge cotton Johnston Tower Cranston Kennedy Welcker Domintck Magnuson Williams NOT VOTINCr--19 Atken Long Scott, Brock Mathias William L. Eastland Metzenbaum Symington Stevens Fulbrlght Mondale Gravel Muskle Taft Huddleston Rlbleoff Young Hughes Scott, Hugh So Mr. BELLMON'S amendment (No. 1094) was agreed to. Mr. BELLMON. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to. Mr. McCLURE. Mr. President, I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table ws_ agreed to. The PRESIDING O_'_'zCER. (Mr. DOMENICI). Under the previous order, the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. BE,.Z,-. MON) iS recognized to call up amend.-. merit No. 1095 on which there is a 30-. minute limitation: Mr. BELLMON. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 1095. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated. The legislative clerk proceeded to read the amendment. Mr. BELLMON. Mr. President, I ask that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with and that the amendment be printed in the RECORD. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. ]BELLMON'Samendment (No. 1095) is as follows: On page 27, line 12. strike out "years." and insert in lieu thereof "years and shall file a copy of such record Commission the first day of each with month the except that dur-c.n lng the perlod beginning one month before thc date of an election, such records shall be filed on the first day of each week until the date of the election. Each such report filed 305 S 4936 CONGRESSIONAIL with the Contmisston shall be complete as of two days _ffore the date on which it must be filed. received Such report shalladvertising, contain the amount from such the name and address of the person from whom payment was received, the candidate whose name appeared in such advertising, and a facsimile or other copy of such advertising.", On page 40, line 2, insert after the pcriod the following: "Each published shall file a copy the Commission on the of firstsuc:h day record of eachwith month except that during the period beginning one month before the date of an election such records shall be filed on the first day of each week until the date of the election. Each such report filed with the Commission shall be complete as of two days before the date on which itthemust contain a:mount be filed. received Suchfrom reportsuch shall advertising, the name and address of the person from whom payment was received, the candidate whose name appeared in such advertising, and a facsimile or other copy of RECORD-- SENA'¥'E far easier for the Federal Election Corn]Tiissi0n to enforce the law without creating an undue burden on tE.e communications media which are al ready required under the term,'_ of this Kill to keep reports. It will simplify the process by not making it necessary, for example, for a member of the Federal _lections Cornmission to send a representative to the candidate's stat_ and che_k the records of many sources in ordez to determine whether a cand:iciate has fully complied with the law. This amendment would provide a twopronged approach, involvillg not only the candidate and his campaign committee, b_.t the commm_ications :nedia as well. By requiring the media to actively participate in the reporting system, we can obtain a true picture of h0'v much money is spent by each candidate for advertissuch advetrising.", int. By comparing reports from. advertisMr.'BELLIYIO_. Mr. President, the ob- lng media with the report,.; of the candijective of this amendment is easily undate, we can provide a ch_'.k and balance derstood. The present provisions of S. system that sho_i[d deter ,my tendencies 3044 provide in section 201 that any toward manipulation. broadcast media which engages in politI urge the adoption of this amendment. iCal broadca.,;ting must "maintain arecThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Who ord of any political advertisement broadyields time? cast, together with the identification of :Mr. PEIJ_. Mi'. Presidert, I yield mythe person who caused it to be broadcast se:Lfsuch time as I may req_rire. for a period of 2 years." This record This amendm..ent would change the would be available for public inspection bill before us. Ils would, I believe, eomat reasonable hours. A comparable proviplicate it even further, Eecanse we all sion applies to published political adverknow how complicated the bill is now and tising in section 205 of the bill. ho,w, with the best of intentions';, it would My amendment would greatly tm very hard for individuals to carry out strengthen these reporting provisions of all. its provisions. the bill, by placing an affirmative obligaWhat the amendment dces is add 'to all tion on all communications media to file the reports that have to b(, filed, the vtrperiodic reP<_rts with the Federal Elcotual mountain of them, an additional tions Commission which would contain report, on the first day of each month, as the following information: to the advertising that is feint placed in First, the amount received for political the media. And I think ,ge would find advertising; that it would apply not only t_) that reSecond, the name and address of the pert, but also to the financ!al side as well, person from whom payment was reb_ause the important th:ng is not the ceived; advertising, but where the money for the Third, the candidate whose name apadvertising is co]x_ng from. peared in the advertising; :in addition to that, it pries a burden Fourth, and a facsimile or other copy on the people who receive the money and of such advertising, who are responsible for tile a_[vertlslng, By adopting this amendment the Sent_ it a publisher or his representative; he ate will further guarantee full cornhas to file a copy of such ::ecord as well, pliance with 'the law by all candidates for which is a duplication, Federal office. So, while the objective cf the proposal In my judgment, adequate reporting is good, it would seem to me to further procedures are absolutely essential and complicate the bill, and I would be eomrepresent a major method of eliminating _lled to oppose it. the campaign abuses we have witnessed :YIr. BELLMON. Mr. President, if the in recent years. In enacting campaign Senator will yield, in my iud_ment this reform legislation, at least two basic ob- d_es not in any way complical_ the rejectives must be accomplished: First, we porting procedmx, s provided in the bill. must insure that the law cannot be If the Senator w:ill check oa page 27, line evaded by either winners or losers, re9--and the same language :_ppeaxs in angardless of their ethical standards. Sec- other place in the bill a_ it applies to ond, we must give voters complete and newspapers--in line 9 on p_ge 27 it says: accurate facts on campaign expenditures Each s_tton llce_mee shall maintain arecby candidates before, not after, the votes ord of any political advertisement broadcast, are cast and counted, together with the identification ofthe person By adopting this amendment, the Senwho ca _used it to be broadcast, fc,r a period ate would guarantee that these two basic of two years. objectives become a reality. Let me exAll my amendment would do is require plain. Enactment of this amendment re- that a copy of that record be furnished qulring the communications media to to the Federal Elections Cc_nmission. make periodic reports to the Federal There is no further reco]xlkeeping. All Elections Commission will provide a new the amendment does is require that the and simplified reporting mechanism records be accumulated in one place, so which will act as a double check on a there would be a way to _heck against candidate's _wn reports. It will make it the records of the media and the records 3O6 Aprii! 1, 197.4 :tLlc_ by the candidate, to be sure the candidate is telling the truth, and so the beople uill know before the election. It wo_ld do no good to find out 6 :months later that the candidate is not telling the truth, because by that time the election will be over and the people will have made their decisions. We are trying l;_::, get the facts out ahead of time, so that people _ill know who is backing the cand[date, and be able to take that into consideraticn in casting their votes. It does ]::ot. in rily judgment, complicate the re,_:_)rting procedures. It only makes the rel_rts _vailalmle ahead of time, so that :l;_ople c:tn make that decision as to those ti'my ws.nt to have represent them in Oongress. Mr. PELL. The Senator is correct as to tim recoJ:ds maintained by radio and TV sl:ations, but it does not apply as to the i[_ablishe:_s. Mr. BELL1VION. If the Senator will :yileld_on page 40, the same provision ap]_lies to newspapers. It begin,,_ on page 39, ]me21, as follows: _xy publisher who publishes any political s,lw_rtisel:r_ent shall malr_taln such records as ,l;}LeComx_xissionn_ay prescribe for a perio_l of t,;;,oyears and so no. The a_nendment covers both the elcoi::conic media and the publishers. 1V[r. PiIELL. The Senator is correct in 'l;;!mt regard, but it does ncVc cover the :_v'ztual p:ablication of it. There is a good deal of difference between keeping it on :[ile and :i_ling the report. /al addition, the Presidential candidate 'who has to file now. I think four times in aa election year, would haw; to do it on the first day of each month. The question :1,.,whether there should be more report_ filed or '_hether the bill at present pro't,ides an adequate number. The S_mator from Oklahoma does not ]b_._lieveii_ is adequate, and we believe it _L,_That i_sthe issue. iV[r. BlaZON. Mr. President, the _J_l:_gpro¥isions under the law are, I be]lieve, ad,_uate and highly desirable. But Z.'le problem is the difficulty of checking '_;_dthhal!I' a dozen television stations and 'perhaps a hundred newspapers to get _he lrLfol:'mation together in time for the election. We are simply requiring that :_he information be fried In a central ]place before the election, so that the _;;:,ter w[il have an opportunity to know ,p_'hois supporting each candidate and to what extent. This does not complicate the matter, !(1_simplifies it by having one central ]:,]ace to get the information, and not having to scatter all over 'the country to, find out what is going on. M:r. PL_%L. Am I not correct in saying t:.]l, at the information is required to be :.q[ied by any candidate, and therefore t.h ere would be a duplication ff not a triplication? This would be, at least a _!_lplication, because the candidate files the information now. IV[r. BmLLiVION. The Senator is corr_ct; this is a duplication, for the very I_:_odrea_n that it is my feeling that we need to [have the information from the ]media to be sure that the ea_didates are telling ti:lc truth, and so that we will kr_ow beffore the election whether they April 1, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL they have been reporting the true extent of their financing, If a candidate is running badly behind in a campaign, he may decide to spend a large amount of money just before the election in violation of the law, and it would not be known until after the election. Mr. PELL. Then his election would be invalidated, and he would be subject to criminal penalties, Mr. BELLMON. That would be true, except that it would happen many months after the election, and, if carried out, would cause his district to be without representation. It seems to me it would be better to have an inducement for the candidate not to file a false report in the first instance, Mr. PELL. I agree with the Senator's viewpoint; I disagree with the necessity for it, and that is the reason for my disagreement. Mr. WEICKER. Mr. President, I think this really illustrates that the probleto The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who RECORD -- SENATE S 4937 The PRESIDIN G OFFICER (Mr. DOMENICI). All time on this amendment has now been yielded back. The question is on agreeing to the amendment (No. 1095) of the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. BELLMON). Mr. BUCKLEY. Mr. President, I ask that the amendment be stated. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to read the amendment. Mr. BUCKLEY. Mr. President, I send to the desk an amendment by way of _ubstitution to correct certain technical defects that were brought to my attention. :it does not in any way affect t]ae substance of the bill. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator ask unanimous consent that that be done? Mr. BUCKLEY. I ask unanimous co:nsent to modify the amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is so modified. The. amendment, as modified, is as follows: On ipage 13, line 17, strike out "(f) (2)" and insert in lieu thereof "(h) (2) ". On page 13, line 17, after "no" insert "incumbent". On r_ge 13, line 24, strike "(g)" and insert "(i)". On ])age 14, tine 9, after "No" insert "inare absent on official business, cumbent". I further announce that the Senator on :page 15, line 5, strike "(f)(2)" a.l:_d from Vermont (Mr. ArKEN) is absent due insert in lieu thereof "(h) (2)". to illness in the family, on page 15, line 5, after "no" insert "inOn this vote, the Senator from Penncumbent". sylvania (Mr. HUGH SCOTT) is paired On page 15, line 10, strike "(g)" and :inwith the Senator from Alaska (Mr. sert"(i)". In page 15, between lines 17 and 1, insert STEVENS). the following: If present and voting, theSenator from "(c) No candidate veho is not an incumPennsylvania would vote "nay" and the bent may make expenditures in connection Senator from Alaska would vote "yea." with his campaign for nomination for elecThe result was announced--yeas 29, tion, or for election, to any Federal office in nays 52, as follows: excess of 130 percent of the amount of expenditures which an incumbent candidate [No. 102 Leg.] may make under subsection (a) or (b) in YEAS--29 connection with his campaign for nominaAllen Dole MeGovern tion for election, or for election, to the sa:me Bartlett Dominick Nelson office. Bayh Fong Pearson "(d) For purposes of this section, tlhe Beall Goldwater Percy term 'incumbent candidate' means a canBellmon Griffin Proxmire didate who is seeking nomination for elecBuckley Hansen Roth Byrd, Helms Sparkman tion, cr election, to a Federal office who-Harry F., Jr. Javits Stratford "(1) holds that office; or cotton McClellan Stennis "(2) holds any public office to which he Curtis McOlure Thurmond was elected by the voters of an area which NAYS--52 is same or includes completely, tlae areathe 111 whichas, the voters reside who may Abourezk Ervin Metcalf vote i:a elections held to nominate lndiBaker Fannin Mondale Bennett Gurney Montoya viduals as candidates for election to that Bentsen Hart Moss Federal office, and to elect a candidate to Bible Hartke Nunn that office. Biden Haskell Packwood On page 15, line 18. strike out "(c)" and Brooke Hatfield Pastore Burdick Hathaway Pell insert :in lieu thereo_ "(e)". Byrd, Robert C. Hollqngs Randolph On page 15, line 21, strike out "limitation cannon Humphrey Schweiker in subsection (a)or (b)" and insert in lieu Case Inouye Stevenson thereof "applicable limitation under subseeChiles Jackson Talmadge tion (a), (b), or (c)". Church Johnston Tower On page 15, line 22, strike out "(d)" and Clark Kennedy Tunney insert _Lnlieu thereof "(f)". Cook Magnuson Weicker cranston Mansfield Williams On page 16, line 4, strike out "(e) (1)" and Domenlci McGee insert in lieu thereof "(g)(1)". Eagleton Mclntyre On page 17, line 4, strike out "(f) (1)" and NOT VOTING--19 insert :in lieu thereof "(h)(1)". On page 17, line 18, strike out "(a) and Aiken Hughes Scott, (b)" and insert in lieu thereof "(a), (b), and Brock Long William L. Eastland Mathias Stevens (e) ". Fulbright Metzenbaum Symington On page 17, llne 21. strike out "(g)" and Gravel Muskie Taft insert in lieu thereof "(i) ". Hruska Ribicoff Young On page 18, line 4, strike out "(h)" and Huddleston Scott, Hugh insert in lieu thereof "(i)". So Mr. BELLMON'S amendment (No. On page 18, line 10, strike out "(h)" and 1095) was rejected, insert in lieu thereof "(k)". On this question the yeas and nays have been ordered and the clerk will call the roll. The as_stant legislative clerk called the roll. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senator from New York (Mr. BUCKLEY) is recognized to call up his amendment No. 1081, on which there shall be 1 hour for debate, yields time? Mr. BELLMON. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and Days. The yeas and nays were ordered, Mr. BELLMON. I yield to the Senator from Connecticut. Mr. WEICKER. I thank the Senator from Oklahoma. Mr. President, the problem, here is with the whole bill. I know why the bill contains no such requirement: We did not want to tread on the toes of the press. But as soon as you get the Geveminent into the act of financing politica1 campaigns, then it is inevitable that yOU come to the point where you are asking the press to participate in an enforcement function. We can go ahead and control just about everything in this country, but there is a big difficulty when we get into the electoral process itself. I do not think there should be any obligation imposed on the press to be candid, and neither do I feel 'that the Federal Government should be into this area, but as long as we have put the Government into it, then so are the news media all of a sudden brought in, this time as an enforcement arm of the Federal Government. The problem highlighted by this amendment is the problem with the whole bill. A 10t can go wrong with Government, but as long as people are totally free in their elections there is a remedy we have. When the remedy is in the hands of the Government, that is when our troubles start. Mr. BELLMON. Mr. President, I yield back the remainder of my time. PELL the Mr.remainder Mr.of President, my time. I yield back Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that the Senator from Missouri (Mr. EASTLAND), the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. FULBRmHT), the Senator from Alaska (Mr. GRAVEL), the Senator from Iowa (Mr. HUOHES), the Senator from LoUisiana (Mr. LONG), the Senator from Ohio (Mr. METZENBAUM), the Senator from Maine (Mr. MUSKIE), the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. RXBICOFF), and the Senator from Missouri (Mr. SYMZN_TON) are necessarily absent, I further announce that the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. HUDDLESTON) is absent on official business, Mr. GRIFFIN. I annotmce that the Senator from-Maryland (Mr. MATHIAS), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. BROCK), the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. HUOH SCOTT), and the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. HRUSKA) are necessarily absent. I also announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. WILLIAM L. SCOTT), the Senator from Alaska (Mr. STEVENS), the Senator from Ohio (Mr. TAFT), and the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. YOUNG) Mr. BUCKLEY. Mir. President, the cf.fect of the amendment is very simple. It recognizes what has been pointed out clearly' from time to time during the course of the debate today, and that is 307 S 4938 CONGRESSIONAL that incumbents have a very significant advantage over challengers and especiatly those challengers who have never held office from the same basic constitueney. Therefore, I propose that challengers be granted 30 percent more money than the limits now stipulated in the pending legislation. During the course of the debate on S. 3044 that Ires occupied a major properlion of our time for more than a week now, several references have been made to the fact that this bfil may favor incumbent officeholders over those attempting to challenge them. The fear that S. 3044 will favor incumbents over challengers is, in my oplnion, a most realistic one. I am convinced that this legislation as presently drawn would make it even more difficult than it now is to unseat an incumbent Cong_essman, Senator, or President. Recent l_u)ll figures force one to the conclusion that the Congress is not exadtly held in the highest esteem by the Americaxx,people. In fact, as most of us are aware a number of pundits have observed that we are presently less popular even than the President with a collective approval rating of but 21 percent, One might conclude from figures like this that incumbents would be frequent victims of the oft-stated desire to "throw the rascals out." But, in fact, we rascals have always fared rather well in seeking reelection. I will grant that we are perhaps all good fellows and that it is'at least possible that we are so loved by our constituents as _o be personally unbeatable, but I suspect there are other, better reasons for our .remarkable success at the polls, It is well known, and, indeed, obvious to even the most casual observer, that as incumbents we have certain tangible and intangible advantage over almost any prospective challenger, As U.S. Senators we are more familiar with the issues than most for we are paid to be familiar with them. Our cornmeats and our feelings are news in our home States and occasionally nationwide. We have on our various payrolls peopl e whose job involve communicatlng our positions to our constituents, se_wicing the requests of constituents in trouble and portraying our views to the public in the most favorable light possible, We have access to the frank, to the Senate recording studio and to the profassional expertise of people who have worked dh:ectly or indirectly all their lives to keep people like us in office, During the course of a year we answer literally thousands or even millions of letters. We respond personally or through staff members to the requests of countless constituents who call us in Washington or at our State offices seeklng help with individual problems, All of this gives us a significant advantage come time for re-election. We are ordinarily far better known than those seeking to unseat us and after 6 years of experience in office we are usually far more likely to know how to win a campaign. These same kinds of advantages are available to our colleagues in the House 308 RECORD--SENA']TE and, in exaggerated form to any incumbent President. Thus, it is hardly surprising to discover that incumbents are more likely to be r,eelected than defeated i_r spite of popular feelings about Government in general or differences C,rl specific issues. Consider the figures. During the last half ce_,tury, U.S. Senators seeking reelection :xave won more than 80 percent of the _ime and Congressmen have done even better by beatlng back their challengers 90 percent of t:he time. A number of studies have indicated that incumbency alone is worth at least lq:ye points in a House race and six in a Senate race. Is it any wonder, in light of these figures, that Charles ClapI,-in his classic work on the House wac able to sum-. marize the attitudes of those he talked to thusly: There ia a tendency to b .qieve that, aside t':.'om isolated instances where an over-riding issue is present, there is little excuse for defeat. I am not clailning that Lhese rates pre-. vail only because of inc_lmbency and I am not about to clair:l--a.s common cause's spokesrrren seem to--that incumbents win bees,use only they can raise the money that has been described as "the mothers milk' of politics." But it is clear that incumbency itself _ives one an advantage that the average challenger must overcome if he is to prevail It is my firm belief that a certain amount of money must be _,;pent by a challenger just to offset lhe incumbent's advantage, unless he finds; himself in one of Mr. Clapp's "isolated instances where an overriding issue is present." If this assumption is c )rrect, the uniform spending limits incorporated into _;. 3044: can only aid incumbents because they make it impossible tot a challenger to spend the money necessary to overcome the incumbent's advantage. It is this feature of tS. 3044 th_,t makes it both fair and accurate to characterize the bill as the Incumbent Protection Act of 1974. It is difficult to place a dollar value on incumbency, especially in Senate races. _C_enator BROCK last week referred to one estimate that placed the value of House incumbency at some $60),000. I suspect tlhis figure is a bit high, however, because it includE_ money ,pent on things that have only marginal 'Talue at reeleclion time. The true value of incu:nbency is diffcult to determine primar.ly because it is only one of a number of :'actors that determine the ou5come of _[ny election. For example, a number of studies have shown that par_y is even more important as the vast majority of co:_gressionai distriers especially are dominated by a single party. Indeed, while 90 percent of those incumbents running are reelected i:n House races 75 percent or more of the candidates reprasenting a retiringincumkent's party are, also elect.'d. V/ith this in mind it is indeed difficult to separate out the dollar value of incumbency in a meaningful way so that qe can structure Calf laws to allow all candidates to start the race at the :starting line. Therefore, I must admit that my April 1, 1974 amendment to S. 3044 whicti allows non:ncuml_mts to spend 30 percent, more ':hah incumbents represents a somewhat arbitrary attempt to compensate for the :_dvantsges an-incumbent presently en:oys. _'_till, arbitrary as the 30 percent figure :tself may be, the available evidence in,[icates that it may well accomplish the ::mrpose. Prior to preparing this amend:neat, I reviewed various studies that c:onvinc,_ me that a 30 percent differen':ial would do much to overcome the advantage of incumbency without tipping :he scales too far the other way. ()ne of these studies was undertaken :,y common cause. I cited it at the time [ originally introduced this amendment and I ,_ould call your attention to it :_.gain today. I am referring, of course, :o the common cause study of 1972 con_i,Tessional campaign financing that was :_:eleaseCl last year. _. The authors of the study are num':>ered among the principal ,mpporters of public ::inancing and use its results to ]:_olster their case. But I am convinced ':hat they misread their own data; that :in fact it argues against public financing li:eneraE:y and the provisions of S. 3044 _:pE_ific:;dly. ]fa. 19'it2 more than three-q.uartersof all I!_ouse ::aces were decided by pluralities :ff 60 percent or more. In these races the _verage winning candidate :spent $55,000 :..r less and the average loser spent even ess. Thcs, races all took place in what political analysts like to call "safe". districts. The disLricts involved were either so to;ally dominated by one party that a seri,:,m; fight for the seat impressed almost everyone as futile, or the ,seat was cccupied by a personally popular ineumi:)ent wLJo just was not about to be beaten. The authors of the study apparently ;:)elieve that real races might be run in t.hese districts ff enough dollars are pour_d into the campaigns of those challenglng now firmly entrenched incumbents. Il am not persuaded that this would hap!)ea. For reasons outlined above the lncum!:_nts holding these seats are probably mpervious to real challenge;. Those rrm::ting against them have not failed, be_t.ause they have lacked funds; they have lacked funds because their campmgns ,_'eredoomed to failure. Common Cause has simply confused ::ause _ith effect in a way that has led Ivh'. Gardner and his friends to precisely I:he wrong conclusions. Supp:)rters of incumbents and chal[engers alike in these districts were api:_arentl:7 reluctant to give to campaigns :mlikely to be affected one way or the other by their contributions. Thus, as we _;hall see in a moment the spending on !)o_;h sides in these districts was slgnifi:::antly below the spending levels that ;)revail{_d in hotly contested races. This _hree-quarter figure cited in the .'nommo:_ Cause study helps verify an.::,ther l%_ure I. cited a few :minutes ago. ?is you will recall, I mentioned earlier i;hat another study found that in 75 percent o:f those congressional districts v;here a_:xincumbent retires, the next race .,;as we:ct by a member of his party. April 1, 19 7_ CONGRESSIONAL The authors of the other study used this figure to demonstrate the importance of party. They found, in effect, that because of party three-fourths of all congressional races are won by the dominant party's nominee regardless of incumbency and other factors, I must conclude, therefore, that in such districts the $90,000 per candidate allowed under S. 3044 will merely increase the level of spending without having any real impact on the final outcome, The races in which the Federal subsidy and the limits associated with it will have an impact take place in the 60-.odd districts that might be considered marginal. According _o the same Common Cause study, only 66 House races were decided by less than 55 percent of the vote in 1972. These districts could be considered marginal by most standards and the victor in each of them had to fend off an extremely tough challenger. Winners and losers alike spent more money in these races than was spent in the districts I have described as "safe." The cost to winners and losers alike in these districts averaged somewhat more than $100,000 each. As both the winners and losers spent about the same amount in these races, it suggests that the raislng of funds needed for such campaigns is not too different. I will also admit that the limits imposed by S. 3044 might not have much of an effect in the average close race. The real impact of the limits imposed by this legislation will occur in those races in which an incumbent finds himself in trouble and stands a chance of being defeated. Only 10 House incumbents were defeated in 1972 and in all but 2 cases the challenger had to spend significantly more than his opponent to overcome advantages of incumbency, The average spent by candidates who unseated incumbentsin 1972 was $125,000 as opposed to the average of $86,000 those incumbents spent. Thus, it can be argued on the basis of these figures that a challenger must be able to outspend an incumbent opponent by a significant max'gin if he expects to beat him and that he will have to spend in excess of $100,000 to stand a realistic chance, But what effect will the $90,000 limit imposed by S. 3044 have in these races? It is not at all unrealistic to assume that it will prevent challengers in marginal districts from overcoming the advantages inherent in incumbency. It is not at all unreasonable, in other words, to assume that those limits, had they been in effect in 1972, might have saved most, if not all of those 10incumbents, I have referred to the figures involving House races because the figures :for these races are more easily quantified and cornpared. But the same principles apply to Senate and Presidential races--under ordinary circumstances it costs money to overcome the advantages of incumbency and a uniform spending limit might well make it impossible for the average ehallenger to accomplish this. Mr. President, I think my amendment will encourage real competition in those districts where competition is possible, It will also dispell any public idea that RECORD-- SENATE what the Congress is really engaged in the protection of incumbents, The people of this country are growing more cynical by the day. They are convinced that we care only about ourselves--not about their problems or the system we profess to serve, I am not at all convinced that public financing will dispell this cynicism, but I do think that if we are going to move in this direction the people are going to demand that we do more than enact reforms that have the practical effect of protecting ourselves from those who would seek to unseat us. Therefore, I urge the adoption of this amendment, I reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. DOLE. Mr. President will the Senator yield? Mr. BUCKLEY. I am glad to yield to the Senator frorrr Kansas. Mr. DOLE. I have an interest in this amendment and its application where an incumbent Congressman is lxmning against an incumbent Senator. Mr. BUCKLEY. My amendment speci 7 ties that the definition of incumbency includes anyone who holds office or has held office within 5 years, which office has the same general electorate as the person in office. In other words, if a governor should challenge a Senator, he would not receive more money, or in any State where there is one Member of the House, like Delaware or Alaska, Members of the House would not be granted a larger sum of money, Mr. DOLE. Take Kansas as an example, where there are five congressional districts. Even though tLe incumbent Member of Congress and the incumbent Senator have one common area, under your amendment the Congressman would still get the total bonus. Is that correct? Mr. BUCKLEY. He will, because he must also compete in areas where he has not had the advantage of being able to send out literature to constituents. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for one correction in the colloquy? I think the amendment the Senator sent to the desk eliminates the 5year Period, if I understand it correctly, It reads: "holds any public office to which he was elected by the voters in an area which is the same as,' or includes completely, the area in which the voters reside . . ." Mr. BUCKLEY. That is correct. That was one of the technical corrections, Mr. COOK. So there is no 5-year pcriod provided for. Mr. BUCKLEY. I thank the Senator from Kentucky for that correction, Mr. DOLE. I think basically I agree with the statement of the Senator from New York. There are some who would suggest that this year the incumbents should have the bonus because many problems, not of their own making, are faced by incumbents. But is seems to me that where there is a partial incumbency on behalf of the challenger and the incumbent, it might be advisable to provide some sliding scale or some sliding formula. As the amendment stands now it provides, in effect, more of an advantage to an incumbent Congressman who is S 4939 running against an. incumbent Senator, as compared to someone who is not hold-Lng omce and running against an incum-bent _nator. Mr. BUCKLEY. I believe the point made by my friend from Kansas is well taken. Mr. DOLE. In other words, both the incumbent Senator and incumbent Con,-. gressman haw: the same advantage in one of their State's congressional districts. That question is of peculiar in.. terest to me, because my opponents is an incumbent Congressman. Mr. BUCKLEY. The Senator has raised a good point. I think, also, it illustrates some of the difficulties we are apt to run into when we set arbitrary limits and ceilings on expenditures, and so on, none of which I support. Nevertheless, we do recognize the basic problem of th.e advantage of an incumbent in normal election years, and accordingly, an amendment such as raine is, I think, bad.-. ly needed. I think it injects equity. It prc,-. tects the Congress from the charge of self-service. I am sure that if the Senate will adopt this amendment, in the conference proc:-. ess we may see some kind of sliding scale or other approach taken that would co._:e adequately with the kind of fact situa.. tion suggested by the Senator from Kansas. Mr. DOLE. If the Senator will yield further, it seems to me it could _e re-. duced proportionately. In the case of the State of Kansas, there are five dis-tricts which are approximately equal in population. The Senator from New York's formula could be reduced one.fifth, so the challenger would have 124 percent of the Senator's share instead of 130 percent. Mr. BUCKLEY. I wish the Senator from Kansas had collaborated with mc before I offered the amendment, but I do offer it as a significant improvement over what we now have. Mr. President, I _sk unanimous con-. sent to include the ,'Senator from North Carolina (Mr. HELMS) as a cosp0rl$or o[ the amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BUCKLEY. Mr. President, I re-serve the remainder of my time. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, may I ask the Senator a question on the time of the manager of the bill, so it will not he taken from his time? Mr. BUCKLEY. I yield. Mr. COOK. I think we fight this question of how one handles a nonincumbent, and I think the Senator faces up to the issue very well. My probleto is one which I will state for the RECORI_,and for no other purpose, so we can get some legislative history. How did the Senator from New York come to the conclusion that 30 percent was the equitable fig_tre? Mr. BUCKLEY. The Senator from New York had to close his eyes and think and reach up into the .air, which I think, incidentally, is as fine a basis for legislatlng as the basis for much of the legislation we enact in this Chamber. Actually, it was not entirely that 309 S 4940 CONGRESSIONAL arbitrary. I (lid look at the races included in the 1972 Common Cause, study, which seemed to indicate that there was a disparity of between 20 and 40 percent in what was spent by the successful challenger as compared to the challengee. Mr. COOK. I must say that is our problem when we amend a bill so freely on the floor. I will say to the Senator from New York, in all honesty, I think we have to resolve this problem and I thinkit should be resolved. I have serious misgiving about pulling figures out of the air. We are pulling substantial financial figures out of the air--30 percent to nonincumbents in 50 States for 435 House seats, Could the Senator tell me, based on the charts produced for the Rules Committee, the additional sums this would cost in the overall picture, so the taxpayers, who are obviously footing the bill, will have some idea of what the 30 percent really constitutes for 435 House and 33 Senate seats? Mr. BUCKLEY. Mr. President, I have not done that, but it is a simple matter of arithmetic. One would take one-half of the cost ,%nd add a certain amount to it. Mr. COOK. I do not disagree with the Senator. I think we ought to know what we are doing. We ought to know what we are doing for the budget. I think the taxpayers ought to know. Whether the amount be 10 percent or 20 percent, there ought to be some basis by which we could evaluate this proposal and know the amount we are talking about. I know the situation is very serious, The facts prove that incumbency has a value. But 'when we move in the bther direction and take a figure out of the air, we should know what it represents in dollar bills, Mr[ BUCKLEY. If the Senator will yield, this information was not taken out of the air: ii; is based on such conclusions as could be gleaned from an analysis of the Common Cause study, Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield on my time? Mr. BUCKLEY. I yield, Mr. CANNON. ' Mr. President, I think the Senator has raised a good point as to whether :an incumbency actually does have a value. We have seen polls which show in what low esteem the incumbent is held, plus the fact that he has to be in attendance here and vote on issues that are very unpopular at home. He has to be here to answer quorum calls, and so on. There is a real question as to whether he does have an advantage, let alone whether one can evaluate whether the amount ought to be 20 percent, 30 percent, or perhaps 2 percent or 1 percent, One Senator suggested a few moments ago that the incumbent is the one who has the disadvantages, because the incumbent is held in such low esteem by the public, Mr. BUCKLEY. It is not only since 1972 that Congress has been held in such low esteem. It is an unfortunate fact that has existed for many years. Nonetheless, election after election demonstrates that 90 percent of the membership of the ttouse is ret;urned to Congress, and more 310 RECC}RD-- SENATE than 80 percent of the i;ena'_e is also returned, Carefal studies have been cited by the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. BROCK) which place a monetary value on it. _ye have seen other studies which place a 5 or 6 percent advantage o:_ incumbency, May I 'ask the distingtished sponsor of the bill whether, durin8 the consideration of the bill, any hear:ngs were held to determine this? Mr. CANNON'. There (:ertainly were hearings, and the hearing_', went into almost every question that I oould conceive of. Mr. BUCKLE¥. Was this question raised? Mr. CA}_NON. ][ do not believe the precise question w_s raised _s to whether the incumbent 6ught to get less than the person who k,; the chi lenger. But in simple frankness, if we wrcte into the bill a different figure, we would kilt1 the bill. :If the distingui:shed Senator from New York is desirous; of killint, _ the bill, this amendment is a means oJ doing it. But if he is honestly trying to save the bill and arrive at a different formula, it is mLfortunate thgg he did not propose that formula at the time of the hearings, because we tried '_o make the formula as fair as we could. Despite t:tat fact, every member of the committee worked together to try to devise the I airest formula we could come u!o with, ard that is what we did. Mr. BUCKLEY'. I appreciate the sincerity of tlhe efforts that h_Lve been made. However, as is so often the case, many of us do not have an opportunity to study the legislation until it is r_porl;ed by the committee. We have had our own work to do. I have alsohad an opportunity to Study a careful analysis by Prof. Ralph Winter of the Yale Law i-3chool, among others, that highlights and demonstrates a significant advantage, I would like 'bo refer to the very excellent point raised by the Senator from Kentucky that my amendment has the effect of increasing the cost of $3,044. I ask unanimous consent that I may amend my amendment t,) provide that we reduce by 30 percent what is allowed the incumbent, instead oi allowing it to the challenger, The PttESID':NG oFFICER. Is' there objection to the Senator from New York further modifying his amendment? Mr. CAi_NON Mr. Presi_ent, what was the modification? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada asks for a clarification. Mr. BI. ICKLEY. In response to the excellent point raised by th_, Senator from Kentucky for modification of my amendment, if adopte_ as orginally submitted it would increase the amotnt allocated to the challengers. I merel,, provide now that we reduce by 30 percent the amount allocated to the incumbent rather than increasing the challenger's allotment by that amount. The effect would be unchanged. Mr. COOK. I:a the form in which the amendment is now. the _mount is put irt terms of $90 million s year. Half of $90 million is $i5 million 30 :percent of $45 million is $13,500,000.15o w]aat we are April 1, 1974 ir. fact, is increasing the cost of tt:_ebill by $13,500,000 a year. Mir. BUCtCI,P.Y. If my amendment i_ ;_.dopted, we reduce the cost by ,$13,500,000. Mr. CC,OK. Is the Senator's proposal in the form of a substitute? 1Mir.BUCKLEY. No. Tihe PRESIDING OFFICEI_t. The Sen;_i.or has proposed a modification or a substitut,_. He seeks unanimous consent t(l modify his amendment. Mir. COOK. This is similar to the amendment submitted by the disting_:tished Senator from Alabama (Mr. ,_ILLEN) this morning. The one the Senat(',r from Alabama proposed provided 50 percentior the incumbent. Tihe PR,ESIDING OFFICER. Is there {:',;bjectior_? The Chair hears none, and tile amendment will be so modified. The Senator from New York will please send his modification to the desk. IM[r. B1ZCKLEY. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The P]!_ESIDING OFFICER. On whose time? iV[r. BUCKLEY. Mr. President, how n:uch time have I remaining? The P]_ESIDING OFFICER. The Sena'.:;or from New York has 8 :minutes re:_'raining 1V[r. DOLE. Mr. President, 'will the dis'l::inguished Senator from Kentucky yield :n::e some time. The Senator from New York CmLthen draft his proposal. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, I yield 3 n:inutes to the distinguished Senator :Ir'om Kansas. The Pi]:_ESIDING OFFICER. The Sen,_l;or from Kansas is recognizecL Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, while the distingu:ished Senator from New York is drafting his modification, I think it r(_.ight b,-_well to point out that it is a matter of concern to this Senator, who ii',_running as an' incumbent candidate and who has a vital interest in the proposedlegislation. I would point out to the Senator from l'l'ew Yo_'k and other Senators the great c_[fficult we face in trying to make everyI;hh_g uniform and give everyone equal advantage in a political race. I would c:ite my own efforts to play it straight and I;o disclose properly my contributions and exoenditures; to open political offices and pay those who work in them ,;;ith political contributions rather than ,;,'itlh ofEcial staff salary allowances and to lease planes, automobiles, and other ti:lings as the campaign approaches. I just do not see how it is possible in ;-:_' bill to make certain by legislation I;hat everybody will have an arithmetitally eq_al shake. I agree with the distinguished Senator ih:om Nevada. I would say certainly that the incumbent always has disadvantages. Further, in the case of the junior Sen_ttor from Kansas, because of early ef:iorts to mount a campaign and because r_f striet compliance with the law,s passed l:_eretofcre, the junior Senator from :t_ansas had spent in excess ol $100,O0O _efore any opponent decided to make an ,renouncement. So here is a case where ,:_ae incumbent has already been pcr,alized. Now we come along with this ;-,,mendment that says, if one is chald,13ing, April 1, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL lenging an incumbent, he is disadvanraged and ought to have 30 percent more. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, is there not a serious constitutional question as to whether Congress .can say that a person who is an incumbent can spend only so much money, but that a person who is a nonincumbent can spend 30 percent more? Would that not be a constitutional question that might jeopardize the incumbent? Mr. DOLE. I think a serious question is involved. Once we start tinkering in this area, we invite real trouble. I believe, in ali seriousness, that there are some disadvantages in incumbency in normal times. But I suggest that these are not normal times, and I am not certain there are any advantages to incumbency this year. Mr. President, I yield back the remainder of my time. Mr. BUC_r_L_Y'. Mr. President, I send to the desk a substitute amendment with the modifications we have been discussing. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is so modified, Mr. BUCKLEY'S amendment, as modifled, is as follows: On page 13, line 17, strike out "(f) (2)" and insert in lieu thereof "(h) (2)% On page 13, line 17, after "no" insert "incumbent", On"(i) page sent ". 13, line 24, strike "(g)" and inOn page 14, line 9, after "No" insert "incumbent". On page 15, line 5, strike "(f)_2)" and insert in lie u thereof "(h) (2) '. On page 15, line 5, after "no" insert "inCumbent". page 15, line 10, strike "(g)" and insertOn"(i)". On page 15, between lines 17_ and 18, insent the following: "(c) No candidate who is an incumbent may make expenditures in connection with his campaign for nomination for election, or for election, to any Federal 'I0 percent of the amount which a non-incumbent office in excess of of expenditures candidate may On insert On insert On insert RECORD u SENATE page 17, line 21, strike in lieu thereof "(1)". page 18, line 4, strike in lieu thereof "(j)% page 18, line 10, strike in lieu thereof "(k)". out "(g)" and out "(h)" and out "(h)" and Mr. BUCKLEY. Mr. President, I think we have exhausted the arguments, at least on my side, and I am happy to yield back the remainder of my time, if' the manager is prepared to yield back his. Before doing so, I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield myself 2 minutes, One of the basic purposes that we were trying to achieve in this bill for public financing was to make it so that people who were not incumbents would have an equal access to funds to be able to carry on a campaign. The distinguished Senator from New'York referred to Common Cause a few minutes ago as one of his authorities. I would like to read from the testimony of the head of Common Cause before the committee: Congressional incumbents averaged a 2 to 1 financial advantage over their opponents in the 1972 elections, That was where they did not have any public financing, they had a 2-to-1 financial advantage over their opponents, Our most recent finding furthermore shows that of the money given to 1972 congressional candidates by special interest groups, $2 out of every $3 went to incumbents. So they got 2-to-1 in private financlng, and they got $2 out of $3 from the special interest groups, The study also shows that, while spendlng substantial sums does not guarantee victory, itrace. is essential to running a closely contested . We also found that less than $I out of every $3 made available to congressional candidates came from small givers---S100 or less. it obvious that they rely ' This makes on the big givers---that is, when I say "big givers," I mean if you want to call the giver of $100 or more a big giver.- make under subsection (a) or (b) in connecThere is really only one solution to this tion with orhisforcampaign nomination for we are to return govto election, election, for to the same office, afundamental competitive problem. system ofIf representative "(d) For purposes of this section, the term eminent, then we must have public financing 'incumbent candidate' means a candidate of elections, who is seeking nomination for election, or election, to a Federal office who--Mr. President, that is exactly what we ,(1) holds that office; or tried to do. We tried to devise a fair "(2) holds any public omCe to which he formula. In my opinion, if we try to write was elected by the Voters of an area which ill an inequality for either side by simis the same as. or includes completely, the ply saying that because a man is or is vote to nominate individarea in in elections which theheldvoters reside who may not an incumbent he gets a lesser uals as candidates for election to that Fedamount, that is something that could eral office, and to elect a candidate to that not be upheld in the courts. Furthermore, office. I do not think it could be made fair either on page 15, line 18, strike out "(c)" and way you attempt to set it. insert in lieu thereof "(e)". Mr. BUCKLEY. Mr. President, before in On subsection (a) or (b)" and insert in lieu page 15, line 21, strike out "limitation I yield back the remainder of my time, thereof "applicable limitation under subsetI would like to address myself to two tion (a), (b), (c)". points raised by the sponsor of the bill. On page 15, line 22, strike out "(d)" and He cited two conclusions reached by insert in lieu thereof "(f)". Common Cause from data compiled by On page 16, thereof line 4, strike out "(e) (1)" and Common Cause with respect to the 1972 insert in lieu "(g)(1)". elections. on page 17, line 4, strike out "(f) (1)" and insert ia lieu thereof "(h) (1)". Ill the case of House seats where, by On page 1_, line 18, strike out "(a) and ' virtue of incumbency or by virtue of the (b)" and insert in lieu thereof "(a), (b), fact that the district is overwhelmingly au_! (c)". of one party or another, you have a situa- tion where tO challenge tial donors S '4941 there is no point in trying the incumbent, and poten-. understand this. The result; is that the average incumbent spends 50 some odd thousand dollars and the average challenger spends less in these races. _2his is because everyone under-. stands the futility of the race. The in-. cumbents are not reelected because the challenger could not get money; rather the challenger could not get money be-cause i't was understood that he could not Win. However, the same figures assembled by CorrLmon Cause i]J.ustrate that where you have close races; races in which, election year in and election year out, the outcome has hinged on about 5 percent of the votes; in each of those races we see quite a different situation. We see both the incumbent and the chal.]enger able to mobilize and spend sig.nificanl; sums of money. The averages are a little more than $100,000 per raz'_ whether the candidate happens to b the inc_nbent or the challenger. This demonstrates to my mind that where 'bher_ is a clo_;e race, neither in.cumbent nor challenger has difficulty in raising the necessary funds. Therefore. the entire premise oJ[ Common Cause :is falsely placed. I just want the RECO'R_ to incl_Lde this rebuttal. Mr. President, I. yield back the remainder of my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER _ML'. I)OMEN:[CI) ' All rems, ining time barfing been yielded back, the question is on agreeing to the amendment of the Senator from New York (Mr. BUCKLE¥). Stq modified. On this question, the yeas _nd nays have been ordered, and the clerk will call the roll. The second ascistant legi_l._ti--e _, _.'called the roll. .. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I annou?_rm that the Senator from Mississippi (5_. EASTLAI_D), the Senator (Mr. ]_ULBRIOHT), the from SenatorArkan_s fl'or' _, Alaska (Mr. GRAVEL), the Senator fror_ Iowa (Mr. HUGHES) the Senator fl'ol_ Louisiana (Mr. LONG) the Senator from Ohio (Mr. METZENBAUM), the Senate? from 1_faine (Mr. MUSKIE), the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. RIBICOFF). and the Senator from Missouri (Mr. SYM_TcTON) are necessarily absent. I fulther announce that the Senal cc' from Kentucky (Mr. HUDDLESTON) is absent on omcial business. iVfr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the Senator from Tenn_msee (Mr, B_ocK_, the Senator from Maryland (Mr. I_ATHIAS), and the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. HUGH SCOTT) are necchisarily absent. · I als() announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. WILLIAM L. SCOTT), thq Senator from Alaska (Mr. STEVENS), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. TAFT) are absent on official business I further announce that the Senatc, r from Vermont (Mr. ,_KrN) is absent due to illness in the family. I fm, ther armounce that, ff present and voting, the Senator from Pennsyl,vania (Mr. HU(;H SCOT_) and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. T_F:r) would each vote "nay." 3ll $ 4942 CONGRESSIONAL The result nays 66, as was follows: announced--yeas [No. 103 Leg.] YEAS--17 Cranston Dole Helms Mansfield McClure Nelson Allen Bayh Bea]l Biden Buckle¥ Chiles NAYs%--66 Abourezk Fannin Baker Fong Bartlett Goldwater Bellmon Griffin Bennett Gurney Bentsen Hansen Bible Hart Brooke Hartke Burdlck Haskell Byrd, Hatfield Harry F., Jr. Hathaway Byrd, Robert C. Holllngs Cannon Hruska Case Humphrey Church Inouye Clark Jackson Cook Javlts Cotton Johnston Curtis Kennedy Domenlcl Magnuson Dominlck McClellan Eagleton McGee Ervin MoGove:rn NOT VOTING--17 Hughes Long Mathias Metzenbaum Muskie Ribicoff Alken Brock Eastland Fu]bright Gravel Huddleston So Mr. 1q;UCKLE¥'S 17, Packwood Percy Proxmlre Thurmond Weicker carefully I mn .it will be just as used President, I well gone letter L up and objection, Mr. r it C. 1= cc order at trds time tc nays Oil anlendment ator from Oklahoma of amendment _om Oklahoma Mr. I ask The it is so ord_ PRESIDENCY PEACHMENT Mr. MAGNUSON. March 20 the IN cal, and ethical matter must per-. ulti- was o :_s are his own. conclusions But none who to his Statement of (;are 'with which SO obviously will by I tnanimous c f Mr. casually :_ull prirzted thc re- con- No. (Mr. the in (Mr. is so No. (Mr. Without Without ced. AND THE CESTIGATION Mr. President, Honor ,ble Slade conGorton's RECORD. the address in the RECORD. _LSf0I_0ws: ROBERT C. B' RD. Mr. President, for the yeas ail . nays. yeas and nays were ordered, _TE snalysis he has ,con_inesOfblack_ the much broader There being no was ordered to be Pri: ._RD. Mr. President, lsent that it be in order the yeas and qo. 1120 of the Sen[Mr. BARTLETT) and forThethe PRESIDING vote to occtu tomorrow, )FFICER. objection, to _xities and define wil:. the address it is so ord ;red. ROI=_ERT He has skills be Mr. President, sent that the Mr.. President, OFFICER. I ask unanimous spoken "s technical time with the same take I ask unanimous cc _sent at the hour of 12 o'clock tomorro_ the Senate proceed to the consideratio 1120 of the Senator: BARTLETT). The PRESIDINO on both ends of :has to smd others made to be equally divid ,'d and controlled accordance, with t_ _ usual form. The PRESIDI]N _ OFFICER ABOUREZK). withol: objection, it C. ] gRD. a reso].ved. 1VIr. Gorton's con( Some wfil agree business before the Senate, a time lin tation of 30 minutes ROl=;ERT of the aisle, and on both "REFLECTIOlq'S I_TOPERATIVE ON Attorney S ado sober Today consideral;ion ][ shou:.d like :Etichard Nixon, :his 1120 of the Senato_ ordered, Mr. with the taw mately was BARTLETT) pending there be :progress I reread--his it, in its enthe hope that read--and re- c_ historical, sPeetive in which Scott, Hugh Scott, WUliamL. Stevens Symington Taft amendment calle in lay it aside. ask unanimous ne as amendment from Oklahoma is the sort through the the issues. Yet in ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, informatio3 of the Senate, there be no more ro lcall votes today, Mr. now soberly of a most so erin_ matter. _lIS-CONSENT EiVIENTS sent that at such ti 312 investil have read--on both sides of the Pexmsylvania Mr. Gorton, for the will Wash-. Club an, 1 the impeach- ment (By UN ANIM'g AGRI_ )f the Stat_ of Seattle Rotary the statement. tirety, in McIntyre Metcalf Mondale Montoya Moss Nunn Pastore Pearson Pell Randolph Roth Schwelker Sparkman Stafford Stennis Stevenson Talmadge Tower Tunney Williams Young REC DRD -- SENA'FE General spoke to about jeered. Mr. Attorney ington, IM- peachment lnvesM 'the Congq'ess. This is _sue of the day; it is press, in classro(nns, in just pie gaCher. termlnJng )lace lZL which peo.. attention on de-. for our _.lmes may best nabe assured. To most of us, word "Watergat_," and has become a profoundly When one adds to that of the continuing peace, ener_ increasing the influence the very that it entails, subject, problem all crisis, of ,Yf war i:lJ_atlnn and and the e_ery aspect of Ls easy to become discouraged. xA certain comfort can be gleaned from our own history. _ra in the story of our natio:p, ia w:alch, this ,distance, we .Americans seem to have _ )ne from triumph to trinmph in'a time of , :nstant challenge _orldroda_:_ ng' was certainly he twoof decades the opening of Wax the Revo-or lution to the close of 'ge Washington's second term as '_resident. :et, in the midst of those exciting' :gears, Ws hington wrote to s, friend: "We have ) good an opinion of human nature in g ou:_ eonfederalion. E:fperience bas taught us tl_at men will not adnpt or cm_ry into measures best calculated for their good, without the intervention of a coerci power." * * * :_ "From the high ground we upon, l%om the plain path w:hieh invit d our footsteps, to be so fallen ! so lost [" _ one year after that last d eommentary, Washington and compatriots the Constltutioz cproduced ,;tates. That triumph is p: significant when. we reflect on Gorton, for about your the tm- now in progress in _ rincipai political debated in the dinner tables and Let us focus how a r'oo_notes at e.nd of article. of the in United the more it was ac-. 1, 197/, natio_ with a population to that of the State tVashington [:_o]itics _as An wE need _;trengtbening _rnment is a _;'eranoe. Nor can !:,erform_mce as of But ia that new business. nation, X belleve, to cause the the renewal of free govdedication and persebe content with our if we offer our coun- ',;ry any .ess. I)urin_ the ::.f the /_resident since first an impeachment mentioned as a _;:,ossible of thepersons Watergate rev_dations, the of most who have ::,eon willing to themselves have i!allen ixqto one of categon[es. :_he fi::'st _of a colle_Cion of radical :!lemand_, for the and removal ::,f the Most of these demands :_ome from have consistently opposed both Nixon and his policies lor year_. Ralph organization, for ex_cmple, _:harges President _ith twenty_igh_ vi)lations the criminal code. 3 This ::ategory is also w illustrated in a recent _;yndicated by Garry Wills 4 asserting as offenses both the ini:,oundment of appropriated by Coni,::ress and the tment of Howard Phillips _,z direct:or of the ( llice of Economic OpporI:unity ,;vithout consent. Now I am among gen_,ral who. have successfully for the re!.,case of various appropriations, but seriously to that declsicns on pol:cy questions such as these, however con[;roversf_ l, amount t , impeachable offenses is, _:a my opinion, the: of irresponsibility. '!.nd such an is all the less seemly .,zhen many of :'l_ost thoughtful .,/ho have _3orton) thoughts and April :_ompllSl_ed t.oughly its [tically, !:'residenl; almost Nixon, ;)olilical scene. The s_,cond out b, equ:dly andon an almost autocharges against from political equating his position Lincoln, or as being or Uential activities ,'s notice. Worst of all, reflecting an sJarmassert that the past year amount to "in polltics everybody these two extremes fall thoughtful t'rom elements ,;vhose allcc,ncerns of political on a fear !:::nown, on the effect :,n mid-i;erm, or an ;Thieh nLight be t:,eachm_nts or future · Some persons lberals who t?residen 1; and his _:hzt re, son give him :!Loubt t)eachm_ _d ut pothe opposite, For exam, all !'ax too _:ng we_:.iness and i,,'ravest ::haxges of notching unusual, does Betwe;n it" _;ponsesofa his personaUy appearance includes reaction. pie, man y' maticaily l?resident Nixon as i:_ersecutlon, ;,_it;h theft of Preside :)a_d o_ minor :_eneath the toare be perceived ind].vlduals by bitterly .opposed and changing possible for the recitizens, spectrum, of the_xnpresidents precedentlinfuture these views are disagree with the the but who for just benefit of every who becauseshrinkthe from a_lvocating im_ do not believe i_ fair I:ochall¢,nge the manda e of the 1972 election. ::onservatives:Par _ore Oftroubledthese,ltizens, y the effect however, of Preslaxe :!Lent NJ:con's preciplto' s loss of trust and i)restige on the fate of _is policies, many of _;_hich tLey so strongly _,_pport. Ail clMzens in this category dread the divisive effects of a Ion[ and bitter fight over _m:peachmen_. All of th m wonder at the ef_!ect of the resignation _ ' removal from or, ce ::,f Presl, lent Nlxon on he ability of future presidents to hold to ur )opulax positions, or _,wm to ])rovide strong p litical leadership for :.he, cotr_try ia times o deep differences of :_pinion on a proper co_ rse of action. These '.'ears ar_, not, of course groundless. on th,_ other hand, at ;he w;ry least, these ,_rgumeLts fail to recog_ ize that the future April 1, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL is always presidents important, that in we will change in any 1977. But, most they pre: decisively in the face of such may well turn out to than the precedent any form of positive action, later, Most of you in characterize yourselves, moderate or conservative in No doubt, most of you have, the course of the past five more than not agreed with foreign policies and with campaign excessive government and centralizatton. I am , that, for these reasons, are faced urgently than are the lcal opponents by the _stiOn of whether the President resign or be It is your toward which have been It is your pol: (les which are bein ' defeated. It is your voices ;ss who will be stilled in November's if events continue to drift as they have r the past year. It is, in fact, your which are being abandoned by the himself for reasons outlined in a cent front-page article in The Wall Street "President new budget . . . shoves that his double of Watergate and ecoheroic distress are him to reverse course drastically. "Now Mr. Nixon as a conciliatory, politically off some initiatives to try to appease his ·.." _ And it was Just a _eek ago Sunday that the chief of the Ch_ mber of Commerce of the United States n( ;ed that the administration.has: "Been pre-occupied with [Watergate] and [has] spent more tin _= trying to handle the technicalities and d tails of that subject than [it has] in ha idling important ecosemi( Issues in the C_ egress. ''_ It is, therefore, incu nbent upon each of us to examine the Cons ltution, to determine what impeachment m, ans, how it came to be a part of our Consti etlon in 1787, and to speak out, as citizen of a free nation, on what should be the solution of the crisis created by the acts d omissions of President Nlxon. The right of impeac: ment of executive ofricers was a vital ele sent in drafting the Constitution, and rest [ted in Article II, § 4, which reads: "The President * * * hall be removed from Office on Impeachmen for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, ¢ other High Crimes and Misdemeanors." The meaning of tha be derlved from the vi_ the convention. Geor that: "No point is of more: the right of lmpeachr tlnued. Shall any ma Above all shall that ma: commit the most exter James Madison addec "* * * indispensable should be made for de nity against the inca I perfidy of the Chief Ma Later, Alexander Ha eralist, stated that the ment: last phrase Can only ,s of the delegates to Mason pointed out "* * *' are tho_e off, from the misconduct other words, from the some public trust. They may with peculiar propr "political", as'they relal., done immediately to the tses Which proceed public men, or in )use or violation of :e of a nature which ety be denominated chiefly to injuries society itself." TM Footnotes at end of _portance than that ent should be conL be above Justice? be above it who can _ive injustice?" s that it was: ;hat some provision _ndlng the commu_ity, negligence, or [strate." _ dlton, in The Fedubjects of impeach- _lcle. Finally, States, James Congress of the United in advocating the to discharge his appointees, said: "It will responsible for him to them to crimes or States, or duct, so as to of "To take executed." _ We must as we can, not as it is as /_e against those fathers rec at three First, in his own "* * * * * RECORD -- SENATE first him, in a peculiar manner, conduct, and subject himself, if he suffers with impunity high against the United ts of superfntend their contheir excesses." _x states that it is the duty · 'that the Laws be faithfully ourselves, President as dispassionately Nlxon's record-by his enemies, but it _imsel/--measures up which our founding of the president. Let us look aspects of that record. of 1970, President Nlxon in veal resumption of certain [including] surreptiand entering, in *" lng was rescinded, accordonly because of the Hoover. No law of the such operations; they a number of statutes, both Edgar Unite( are A year own words "* * * June of 1971, again in his Nixon creation of a Special within the White became known as the the Unit House--which 'plumbers' The "* * * to importance assignment Daniel aside upon its leader; [him] the vital security of his [he]and couldhis about mo- tives-"a_ The legal authorization, unit. If the president caut not to violate constitutional legal prohibflions, we have record t. Rather, the urgent talk, the unit, because had not been able )erSuade the of the Federal , of Invest! to supervise such aeti flies, apparently that It was to violate the cl* fights of citizens of the States, and to do so. Second, on t 30, 1973, {ixon "Last June 1 from news re_ in. * * * [1972], * * * I of the Watergate "Until Marc mained convis: involvement bl stiff were false Here, I wan questioning el lions. I make break-in befor volvement of of 1973. But, of his stateme osition that power of the mand, passe( newspaper ch: wlthout bothe stance about t _e_f this year [1973] I * * that members of the White House ' _ to emphasize that I am not her of the President's asserto claim that he knew of the June 17, 1972, or of the inIs personal staff before March /en given the complete truth t, we are faced with the prop,e President, with all of the deral government at his cornthose nine months, through rge after charge, apparently ing to learn anythhxg of subxe cause of the break-in, justified resulted The events c a far greater i: President Nix( his administr_ gate. Moreover, h_ session the b extent to whi, their involver him, in the fc ' this past year, however, have _pact. First, in March of 1973, _ dig learn that members of ;ion were involved In Water- chain of not have been During his refererd to the "* * * it [is] leadership. * * resources is the It's time we used to defin_ those the cement of a knew that he had in his posst possible evidence of the h they had informed him of ent or had hidden it from 'm of conversations which he S 4943 had carried o 4 with each of them and l_i[ secretly taped_ evidence which also relatecL to their own ]_articlpation in the cover-up. NevertheJess, t_le President failed to disclose even the, existe_ce of that evidence either to the Departmenl of Justice or to the Congress. Then, in Jul ! of 1973, the Congress dis.covered the e: [stence of those tapes. The President ther, upon refused access to that evldenc'e eithex to the Department or to the Congress. Thez ,after, when those tapes be.came the focal point of a legal controversy of serious co: stltutional dimensions, the number and t .e very existence of some of the tapes were nisstated. Finally, after bind.lng court dech' Dns ordering their release to the Departme_ t of Justice and after the President assn: led wha_ he called "sole per.slonal control": of the tapes, a person or,per.sons unknown but presumably employed under 1,he ina aedlate supervision of the President, appa ently destroyed a slgnircan'L portion of One of the tapes in a fashion which has caus d almost everyone to believe was deliberate. Finallg, aZhi d subject. During the trial o:£ Daniel Ellsberg, who was the immediate cause cf the creation )f the "plumbers", the President directed, _ xd personally participated in, an Interview wll h the presiding Judge of the*. trial during the course of the trial itself on the subject of _ s possil)le selection as dire(tor of the FBI It is almost impossible to imagine a ruer, blatant intereference witt_ the adminJstrat >n of justice. None of thes_ three charges is based on the credibility c John Dean or of ajay other witness hostile t , the President. Each is based upon th_ Presld ,nt's own reports to the peo.pie in explanati, n of Watergate, or upon fac-tual proposltiom which are not seriously st%b.. Ject to dispute. The clharges v aich we have considered to this point, how, ver, dc, not stand alone _'a having created t e moral climate of cynicism and suspicion lr which the federal administratlon operates today. They exist within a broad pattern (: indifference to, and dis.respect for, the 1 ws of the United States and the expectation_ of its citizens. That pattern ] mludes widespread wiretapping of employe_ _ and critics alike, the prep.. aratlon of "energies lists" for harassment by the IRE; and et xer governmental agencies and the misuse o the office of the presidency in clair(ting dubJ ms---or downright illegal--income tax deduc ;ions. That patternir :ludes the systematic solicJtatlon of illegal , _rnpaign contributions, in.cluding contribl ;ions promised directly to the President by 'epresentatlves of milk pro.ducers, promise_, whici_ were immediately followed by an rder increasing milk price support,.;. This _ aedff_ing spectacle is now by the ] _esideat himself, as having from "t political consid.. _s That ]pattern i_ the criminal indict.rots of two of _is former cabinet omcers, of hds closest personal ad.who were by the Pres]at the of _helr forcedresigns.finest public servants Jt has know."_ It includes the as vice-president of a man out to have been a comnxon These _ are limited to those of his subordB ao were personally selected by him and to him, and not to the others farther down the whose activities he might to sup directly. Richard Nixes dency in this language: i a president's greatest ' of his office. to rally the people, which are 31:3 S 4944 CONGRESSIONAL This statement app] )prlately describes the posltion of the Pres dent. In the United States, the President the head of state as well as the head of th, government. He must be able to provide mc .,al leadership to the entire nation, to corn nand respect for his office even when he doe : not command agreement with his policies, How does President _ixon's conduct stand up against his own d finition of the office, against James Madiso] 's explanation of irapeachment as being ,signed to defend the nation "* * * against the mapacity, negligence, or perfidy of the Chic Magistrate * * .,,mx And against the Pres ient's own statement in his April 30, 1973 s] eech: "In any organizatior the man at the top must bear the responsJ )ility. That responsibility, therefore, belch; here, in this office, I accept it."22 Richard Nixon, out ( the evidence of his own moutih, has given ;he House of Representatives probable eau to vote Articles of Impeachment. Impeachment is, of , urse, a legal and a constitutie,nal proceedi_ g. It is my own eonsidered Judgment that _ _ch of the three setS pf incidentS which I discussed earlier at some length constitute fiear grounds, at the very least, for impeach* .ent by the House of Representatives and tri_ by the Senate. But impeachment also seems to me to constitute a judgment abc tt the moral status of the presidency. In th: t connection, in determining that the Presi lent has rightly and [rretrievab][y lost the confidence of the .American people, not the acts of the President himself, but he and his subordinates created, are relevant considerations, While I believe that sentatives is Justified in ment and will probably ·that process, for :months tx) go, to be months--or years---of The nation can ill '_aken from the gravest time which, in any store the people's 'who has now forfeited dilemma. There is, House of Repre'oting for impeachso it is clear that reason, still l_as followed by more Lal by the Senate. that time, time other problems, no longer rein a president beyond recovery, however, It is for President the nation does for not Mr. owe sideratiozz.., national interest, the in goverhment, above 'which relates to him sign. The situation in selves today is his appointees'; the solution :not agree, as some resignation, is :P_ather, 2[ believe it to way 'which Mr. Nixon can 'try, to enable it to start._ To speak of 'that Mr. Nlxon should er, it is to suggest squarely and take the 'take which will put the first . . . an act which demonstrate a high courage as well as person: Mr. Nlxon has stated resign, and so Congress explore impeachment, either impeachment or traordinary remedy with some con_;equences for t agree with Hamlet's dreac future, which "* * * makes us we have. Than fly to :not of. Thus conscience of us all;' 2a The difficulty of the 'we find ourselves today 314 out of the to realize that ixon unlimited to place conthe of confidence other interest and to rerich we find ourand that of his in his hands. I do assert, that in this case. the finest service for his coun- is not to suggest disgrace. Rathface his situation act which he can national interest reqtlire and of character and sacrifice, he will not continue to most citizens, is an exand fearof future. They an unknown bear those ills that we know make cowards that in which not only RECORD -- SENATE , action, but inaction, will have serious and inevitable consequen_ _s. We are all consci_ us cf the Iow esteem into which all gore: amc at and all public officials have fallen. ' _e a:'e bel:inning to be almost equally eonsc GUS of the low esteem into which the busin ss community, the free enterprise system, a .d almost every other institution in our s, clet_ is falling at the same time. When we examine _ith care our strangely quiet campuses, we ind that the reaction from the turmoil of _ few yes,rs ago is not due to a renewed ss isfa(tion with society, but to a passive c: nick, m about govern., ment and society eld a pervasive feeling; that they cannot and w,ll: not be reformee., Inaction by the nati)n il the face of the present crisis of con ader ce can only con.firm, and make more daILgerous, that cyn.. lcism. Equally close to o_ r own concerns must be this questien. If ' ae _.ctions of Richard Nixon are not propel y t:_e s_tbJect of ira.. peachment, what act: dent will be? What racy, what Viclation.' by a radical presid_ subject him to impea )ns of a future presl.. evasions of your prbof your civil right._;, It, for example, will :hm. mt in the future? What acts of the offic Richard Nixon to e: powers or to cause h; him to be called to a_ Certainly, no citize] rs of a president after ten([ or preserve his re,iectian will cause., _ount? may properly call for impeachment or ri grounds which he is presidents, and by _ both improper and d: tions on the part of we are not aisc willtn ;ign{tion except on villiag to apply to alii xe same token, it Ls ngerous 'bo defend acthi.; president which to defend in all fu- lure presidents We will create, I ubmit, a far worse precedent by f_iling I ) act than by acting. It is our freedom, our tigris against an eve_l . present and inereasir ;ly powerful govern.. rnent which are at sial e. One last poi:at. Qm ;lions of vital public policy affect all citize LS and s:aould not b_!_ delegated without th mg:_t or concern to congressmen, senators or 5o anyone else. In the most vital public ,oll,;y question of out' day, the views of all ( timms are importanL but perhaps the viev_s 0:_ these who were supporters of Presfde_t Nlxon in 1972 axe the most significant, _ince they clearly do not stem from any possible personal or po.. litical hostility. These_ are questions whic._. we must decide for _urs.;lves; our history and our children's hisltom, ride on our an.. swers today as surely ollrs d!Ld on the an.. swers of 1787. More than 2,,100 ye_ a{;o, the first of the free societies of whlc] _e are the lnheri_. tors, the city of Athe: fell upon dlfficu:H; times. In commemora' lng the dead of the opening year of a bio, citizen, Pericles, descri: in a democracy in the words which we taus Americans: "Our ordinary eitiz_ by the pursuits of ir Judges of public mat other nation, regardin part in these duties, n( as usele_m, we Athenis * * * all events * * *, _ on discussion as a six way of action, we thin: preliminary to any wis. s, though occupied[ lu.,try, are still fair ers: for, unlike any him who takes no a; unambitious but; are able to Judge ad instead of lookln_: tabling block in the 1_; an indispensable action at all * * * _. of hapl [ness is liberty, and. liberty is a brave heart." _ FOOTN,)TER _ George Washington, July 1, 1786. _ George Washington o John Jay, 1786. s Tile O_ense,,: o/Rielz rd M. iVixon, Williazn Dobrovir, et al., Quadra gD, 19T4. _ Seattle Post.-Intelli er esr, January 16 1974. the "The' secret secret of dy war, Athens' firs{; ed his fellow cltizen_; magnificent words, rmke our own as April 1, 19 7_ 5 Wall Street Jour] al, February 5, 1974. e Arci:_ Booth, as r ported in Seattle PostIntellit_encer, March L1, 1974. 7 Cor_stitution, Art cle II, Section 4. s The Records of · ae Constitutional Convention 65 (M. Fart: nd ed. 1911). 0 Farrand, 65-66. _0 Alexander Hami: ;on, The Federalist No. 65. _:' 1 Annals of Con :ress, 372-73. _ Co_stitution, Az .lcle II, Section 3. _ Pr_micleI{t Rlcha d NiXon, statement of May 22, 1973. Thos_ intelligence operations also ircluded wirets )ping under a claim of legal jLmtification p] .or to a decision of the Supreme Court. No such Justification has been advanced for _ 'eaking and entering. _*President Richa Nixon, statement of l_.[ay 22, 1973. x_ Ibid. i _ President Richa!d Nixon, statement of April _0, 1973. _ President Richaz Nixon to Senator Sam Ervin, July 23, 1973 _sPresident Richi d Nixon background paper, January 8, 1 ,74. _President Rich_ 'd Nixon, statement of April 80, 1974. _ Richard Nlxon, mBS radio speech, Septembe_ 19, 1968. __'Farrand, President _Wi_.liam 65-66. Richa Shakes Scene. _-_ThL_cydldes, d Nixon, April mare, Hamlet, T_ e 30, 1973. Act III, Pe_o_oT_esm_ War, Cowle_ translation, p. _:_ 105.Thucydides, op _[. Yu;tice Holme_ Modern Library (1934), cit., per Frances Riddle, Scribners (1943), title page. / % FEDE]i%AL ELECTION CAMPAIGN AMENDMENT OF The Senate continued with sidera_;ion of the bill (S. 3944) the F_deral Election Campaign 1971 to provide prima:Fy and for Federal certai]x other the to conamend Act of financing election of campaign6 elective amend provisionsoffice,of and law torelating ti) the financing campsdgns. Mr. DOLE. Mr. unpriz:ted for public general ACT 1974 and conduct President, amendment I call ap and ask for sideral;.ion. The PRESIDING of I such have an at the desk which its immediate OFFICER. eonThe amendment will be stated. The legislative clerk read as follows ] On p_ge 64 between lines 5 and 6, insert the followi:_g: t'PRO:?IIBITIO1M OF FRANKED SOLICITATIONS "SEC. 318. NO Senator, Representative, Resident Commissioner or Delegate shall make any solicitation of funds by a mailing under the fr_nk under section 3210 of title 39, United States Code." t_en_mber subsequent sections accordingly. Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, the amend- ment ,'tales: No S,:mator, Representative, Resident Chinmissioz_er or Delegate shall m_ke any solicltation of funds by a mailing under the frank u:ader ;;ection 3210 of title 39, United States Code. The franking privilege accorded to _[emb,_rs of Congress is just that, a privilege and guaralgteed an official everyone one. It elected is not a right to office. frank is intended[ simply and to enable a Member of Congress to corn municate with his constituents on cilicia] matters, and on this basis I beThe clearly April 1, 19 74 lieve it valuable There serves a highly public purpose, are, admittedly, CONGRESSIONAL important many gray and areas in the franking law. Many questions are raised over what is and what is not frankable matter, and these questions are being reviewed almost continuously by the proper authorities in Congress and elsewhere. In addition such a use of the franking privilege adds tremendously to the incumbent's advantage over anyone who might seek to challenge him in an oleotion. This is obviously unfair, and the franking law was obviously never intended to be put to such use. I note that the House Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards agrees with my view on this matter, and I ask unanimous consent that a letter fro m the Commission's chairman, the Honorable MORRIS UDALL, and a memorandum on the subject of franked solicitations be printed in the RECORD. There being no objection, the and the memorandum were ordered printed in the RECORD, as follows: COMmiSSION ON CONGRESSIONAL MAILXNG letter to be STANDARDS, Washington, D.C'., February 27, 1974. DEAR COLLEAGUE;In past years, many Merehers have printed, in connection with their newsletters and other mass mailings, a brief appeal for small donations to assist with printing and preparation costs. Recently your Commission was asked to render an opinion on the fr_nkablllty of newsletters or quostionnaires containing such appeals, Because of the widespread use of this device, and Its importance to the Members, the Commlsalon is not inclined to make any final determination without glying Members RECORD Newsletters are specifically treated under section 3210(a) (3) (B) and are permitted to be franked if of theylaws "deal such matters as the impact and with decisionson State and local governments and individual citizeus; reports on public and official actions taken by Members of COngresS; discussions of proposed or pending legislation or governmental actions and the pos£tlons of the Members of Congress on, and arguments for or against such matters." Inasmuch as the authority to frank newsletters clearly limits and controls the content of newsletters, the absence of authority to solicit funds for the preparation of these newsletters, would prohibit the franking of such solicitations, The solicitation of funds by a Member of Congress, for whatever purpose the funds are used, constitutes a personal effort on the part of that Member. The nature of this solicltation being personal, in that he elicits a monotary response to him, causes the solicitation robe non-frankable under 3210(a)(4), which prohibits the use of the frank for the transmission of matter "which in its nature is purely personal to the sender or to any other person and is unrelated to the official bustness, activities, and duties of the public officials" covered by the franking statutes, It can also be argued that while funds sollclted for the preparation of a newsletter which is a document in and of itself frankable, the solicitation is not official business nor related to official business, and is therefore not frankable, In an ethical sense the act of personally soliciting funds, for whatever purpose, under the frank was not intended by the Congress. It should be borne in mind that the cost of tranSmitted franked mall is paid for by appropriation from the general treasury and that it is an obligation of each Member to adhere to the letter and spirit of the franklng law, which confines the use of the frank to official business, activities, and duties, a full opportunity to be heard on the Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I believe the question, law is clear. The commission certainly Accordingly, the Commission at its last believes such solicitations are improper. ingmeetingthat adoptedsuch appealsa pr_poSedare notregutati°n"official hold-bust. But I believe it would be proper and apness" within the meaning of the statute, propriate to provide an absolute and unand should net be included in franked mailquestionable legislative answer to this ings. question. Since this matter is not explicitly covered Therefore, I offer this amendment to in the franking law, we are enclosing a mereS. 3044 to forbid any Senator, Congressorandnm of points on which the Commlsman, Resident Commissioner, or Delegate sion's interpretation is based. Your reactions from using the frank to make solicitaand comments are urgently solicited. To be tions. This should end any doubt or considered, they should be submitted to the confusion and provide the public with Commission on or before March 14th. With kind personal regards, firm assurance that we in Congress are Sincerely, vigilant in eliminating the opportunities MORRIS K_ UDALL, for abuse of the franking privilege, C'hairman. Mr. President, I wish to state briefly that there has been a practice in the i_r_ORANDU_ O_ THE FRA_KABXLXTYOF SOHouse of Representatives to solicit funds L_CXTATXO_ OF FUNOS TO PXNANCETHE PREP- for newsletters and other purposes under ARATIO_ OF NEWSLETTERS the use of the frank. This simply makes Mail matter which is authorized to be it clear there shall be no solicitation of mailed under the franking privilege is catefunds for any purpose under the frank, gorized under paragraphs through I am aware of the provisions of the of subsection (a)(3) of (A) section 3210 (J) of title 39. The purpose of the Congress in present law, Public Law 93-191, the rewriting these paragraphs was to be as spestrictious on mass mailing, and other ciflc as possible in listing the types and conprovisions of the law but I am not content of mail matter which is frankable in vinced that in effect they prohibit the order to eliminate the uncertainties which mailing under the frank of solicitations, had existed under thedeclaration prior law. of frankable This amendment would Clalqfy that matEven the broadest matter is carefully restricted to "official bustness, activities, and duties" of the public offi~ clals authorized to use the frank, Therefore, each item which is transmitted in the mail must meet the test of relating to official business, or it is not frankable, S 4945 -- SENATE ter and the amendment is in accord with the comments of Mr. UDALL. ][ have submitted a copy of his letter for the RECORD. Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. CANNON. Mr. discussed this matter In my judgment this President, I have with the Senator. amendment adds nothing to existing law. On December 18, 1973, Congress passed and there became law Public Law 93-191, which makes it absolutely clear, in my judgment, that a newsletter could not be accepted for the purpose of solicitation of funds for any purpose. I read from that public law, which states as follows: - (4) It is the intent of the Congress that the franking privilege under this section shall not permit, and may not be used for. the tr._nsmission through the mails s_ franked_ mail, of matter which in its nature is purely personal to the sender or to any other person and is unrelated to the official business, activities, and duties of the public officials covered by subsection (b) (1) ol this section. I think that section would preclude use of the franking privilege for solicitation of funds, even ff it were for publication of a newsletter. In addition, there is a later pr_/ision of the law, which describes the intent of the law as follows: Members of or Members-elect to Congre_,_ may not mail as franked mall-(c) mail matter which specifically solicits poltt_c_d support for the sender or any other person or any political party, or a vote or financial assistance for any candidate for any pul_ll_ offÉce. Therefore, in my judgment, the situation is covered, but if the Senator feels there may be some weakness in the law which was enacted on December llL 1973, SO that perhaps House Members were sending out such solicitations pric,r to that time, I would be wtnhug to accept the amendment, even though I do not think :it adds anything to the law. Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. CANNON. I yield. Mr. DOLE. As I said in my statement, I am aware of that law and its effect. The written memorandum from the Comn_ission on Mailing standards was written after this law was passed. The memorandum suggests the law is not being observed in that regard. But the gray area is that Members had classified such mailings as official business. They were raising funds for the purpose of newsletters or other business and, therefore, were not soliciting funds for a political candidate or for any other politicai Purpose. To me this is a gray area and it is another advantage that incumbents have over nonincumbents. The amendment would close a loophole that should be closed. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. ,CANNON. I yield. Mr. COOK. I agree wholeheartedly with the remarks of the chairman relatire to, its illegality. My personal and legal thought, in the framework of the language that the chairman and ! have gone over, is that even if he does solicit in his newsletter, it is a solitatlon of fund_ that he personally controls and, therefore, constitutes a violation of the law. 31 $ S 49_6 CONGRESSIONAL I must say that I hope in all fairness that by the adoption of this amendment, and I agree with the chairman we should accept it, this is a reaffirmation of what the law really is. It comes as quite a surprise to me that anyone would use the franking privilege, newsletter or anything of that nature,a to make a direct request for financial a_sistance for something that the Member of Congress himself controls as a result of solicitation of funds under the authority, Mr. DOLE. It isfranking another of those areas that brings Congressmen. cia1 ning attention several criticism upon Congress and This matter was given speby Jackago,Anderson evemonths where heone named Members of Congress in both parties who follow this practice in the House. It seems to me it is an area that, despite the law passed last December, should be clarified. I offer the amendment with that hope and motiw_. I thank the distinguished Senator from Nevada and the distinguished Senator from Kentucky ment. for accepting the amend- Mr. CANNON. back the re-mainder of my time.I yield The PP_l_[SIDING OFFICER. The quostion is on _greeing to the amendment, The amendment was agreed to. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum, Theclerk willThecallPI_;SIDINGOFFICER. the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING O_'_'ICER. objection, It is so ordered. Without RECORD-- SEN A"rE ORDER FORll: ! ask unanimous Senate completes BROOKE) Will 1_ ,seed lb minut_ be a period for :morning busin, m:inutes, with _ _;o 5 minutes e_ At the cohcl_ recognized for not to ex5, after which there will he 6ransaction of routine ss for not to exceed 15 _atements limited therein :h. ;lo n of the transaction of guished Senator from Oregon (Mr. HATFIELD), the dist i aguished Se:aator from Massachusetts &vIr. BROOKr) be recog.., ]xized for not t_ i_xceed 15 minutes, after which there will ' e a peri(_d for the trans-action o:f rout:in _ morni:ag business for not to exceed J 5 minutes, with statements limited _;t_.'rein to 5 minutes each. The PRESH)I qG OFf'ICE,S. Without ._outine. mornin :proceed to the, iett amendmen' CampaJign Fins limitation on ti 30 minutes. Th, :)rdered thereo 7ore will occu] Bartlett amenc business, the Senate will 0nsideration of the Bart--I_o. ll20---to the Public Icing bill. There is a time LeBartlett amendment of yeaa and nays .have been L. Consequently, a rollcall on the adoption of the ment at about 12:30 p.m. objection, tomorrow. it is ,,_ )rdered. ..... ORDER FOR Y.ESU1VIp_ION OF UNFINISH_._) B1 'SINESS TOMORROW AT THE COlq_ LUSIOI_[ OF ROUTIN_ MORNING BI SINESE Mr. ROBER_.F I ask unanimotLs clusion of row tomorrow, rathe' hour of 12 o'ck _.BYRD. Mr. President, _'onsent that at the con-. ine morning business than preci_3ely at the rk noon in accordance with the previotr order e]ltered, the Senate resume cot fideratk,n Of the un_ finished businak_ The PRESIDI [G OF'I_][CER. Without objection, it is so _rdered. Mr. ROBERT _ '. BYRD. Mr. President, ] ask unanimoU; consent that at the conclusion of ro_tine morning business tomorrow, when i he Senate resumes consideration of the refinished business, the Senate proceed 1o the c_nsideration of _he Bartlett ame]_dment, No. 1120. The PRESI]2qTfG O_IvICER. Without objection, it is so ,_rdered. 316 ADJOURN J_ENT TO 11:15 A.M. Mr. ti'_OBER _. ' C. BYRD. Mr. President, if there be no _urther business to come before the Sen: _te I move, in accordance with th e previ( :ns order, that the Senate _;tand in adjmrnment until 11:15 a.nL tomorrow. The motion ms agreedto; and at 5:21 i).m., the Sena _:'ow, Tuesday, e adjourned until tomor- _pril 2, 1974, at 11:15 a.m. BI( MINATIONS Executive nc ninations received by the !3enate April 1, [974: DEPAI rMENT OF JUSTICE Gerald J. Gal inghouse, of Louisiana, to _:_ u.s. attorne for the eastern district of :ii_ouisiana for _e term of 4 years. (Re_ppointraent) Jonathan L. _oldsteln, of New Jersey, to i::,e U.S. attorn_ y for the district of New Jersey for the of 4 year.,_ vice Herbert .;..stern_ resign ' _rm a. otis I.. Pack_ _)d, of Montana, to be U.S. ,.ttorney for t]e district of Montana for i)JOIYRNMENTA.M. TO C !BYRD. Mr. Presldent, w_en the today, it 11:15 a.m. After :;he two [ea;dcrs or their designees have be m recogaized under the ';heF,ugen,_; term ofE. 4_I _ars. ._r, Jr.,(Reappointment4 of Kentucky, to be 'cr.s. attorney ar the / eastern district of ;i!_entucky for he term of 4 years. (Re,.p!oointraent) I_ THE NAVY ent until the hour of q. _ OFFICER. Without lered. standing order, tl.e Senat _r from Oregon (Mr. HATFIELD) W ill be recognized for not _ exceed 15 rxi_mtes, after which the Senator from. _lVIassa_:hlL_fl;ts (Mr. Adm. Zames _. Honoway III, U.S. Navy, _:or appc,intmen as Chief of Naval Opera':ions for a terrr of 4 years pursuant to title 'lo 10, TJnited ates Code, section 5081. ( )nseni that [ts business stand in mljournn 11:15 a.m. l_morrc The PRESIDIN_ objection, it is so ol 1, 1974 ORDER FOR fti _COGNITION OF SEN., ATOR BROO]f.E TO_t[ORROW AND FOR PERIOE FOR TRA2qSACTION OF ROUTIB_2 MORN2NG BUSINESS Mr. ROBERT _. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimo -as consent tho:; tomorrows following the r _marks of the distin_ _ Mr. ROBERT April Mr. ROBERT I']._ ('.OGRAI_[ BYRD. Mr, President, tomorrow the S;nate _ill convene at SENATE FLOOR DEBATES ON 5.3044 APRIL 2, 1974 April 2, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL answered. _Al_r morning for four we met lng 8ta_ lng re_tionsh_p, K_singer career to the and that's what NATO. · · .' almost every House morn- We have a good workI'm comfortable it. devoted much ofm his of security problems, dealing with here at When _ arrived the Avenue des wife, Joyce, left us alone (the oat) and the next hour or Valerie, 17, who the Marc and is stud _nd l_emish, and e/sowed me his lng on his head. $ohool and is doing Rumsfeld is the Rumsfeld home in Ohaeseure here, his me graciously and then Otto (the dog), Sam politics. During we had visits from homecoming queen at School last fall; Belgian school French--I_tin, math Nicholas, who mastery at standis also in a Belgian studies in French. glad to be away from There have rumor-flurries several times here that he headed back to D.C. For example, a of Brussels Journalists quickly assembled his front lawn one night a few ago when reports circulated that he be named Mr Nlxon's vice president Nothing came of rumors of Course, and the amlmssadcr "I like it here, and I plan to stay for s _ertod .... This is an important time for U.S. in NATO." Observers here believe felt that the present period is a bad season for aspiring Republicans back in United States. Rumsfeld and his shun much of the _cial side of ,: Unlike most Europeans he likes meals, and he also prefers direct contact with other delegatibns. He at home in the evening, bringing with him from NATO. The U_. smilingly endures "the yellow perll"---_ questions, re_ minders and that emerges on special yellow paper the envoy's o_ce. NATO ts an institution-little understood but representing "the cornerstone of '.S. foreign policy," as Mr. Nixon and have often said. Because NATO's task is collective delense, the U.S. job Involves more military and issues than any post. _However, NATO is a Peacemaker. It is the diplomatic wlth which the 15 allied nations their policies of detente with bloc. CURRENT U.S POPULATION Mr. Mr. President, I would like to that, according to U.S. Census Bureau the total population of United States. as of April 1, 1974, is 2: 1,906,243. In spite of widely publicized tfiity levels, 1,397,476 since April represents an m our feran increase of of last year. It also of 97,078 since month, March 1, Over the year, added enough land, Ohio, and San is, in Just just one short enough a'dditional Ann A_bor, MiCh. the last we have to fill a new CleveCalif. And In we have added for another THE Mr. THURMOND. emily we are in g tions with the the oil situation plied in future years, S 5061. rial warring our Crov'eference these nego-J FEDERAL tiations appeared issue of the Alk_. in Aiken, S.C. _ Cothran, pointed lllllst not yield to m the March 25, 19'/4 Standard newspaper he editor, Samuel A. out that this Nation blackmail and should The PRESIDING OFFICE R. Under the previous order, the Senate will resume: the consideration of the unnn_._,ed push forward in _ sveloping our own resources so that in future generations we might be self-sul icient in regards t_his vital resource, Mr. President, ask unanimous consent tt_t this edt ariaf be printed in the RECORD at the co_ fiusion of my remarks, There being no >bjection, the editorial was ordered to be _rinted in the RECORD, as follows: PLAYING 'C T-AND-MOUSE'? _ON AMENDMENTS CAMPAIGN OF 19'/4 business, S, 3044, which state. The assistant legislative follows: the ACT clerk clerk wil]L read a_ s. 3044, to amend the Federal Electric Campaign Act of 1971 to provide fo_ publh: financing of primary and general electlou campalgns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of le,w relat.ing to the financing and conduct of suoh campal_:ns. The Senate resumed the corL_dera-. tion of the bill. One of the meet: _markable statistics exThe PRF__IDITqG O:_CrER. The pelld.tarot today is a pall _hlch indicates tha/c the lng question is on agreeing to the amend.. anger over the eneri _ crisis of one-fourth of me. ut of the Senator from Oklahoma the Americans ig d rected toward the U.S. (Mr. BARTLETT) N0. 1120, which the clerk, government while - _nly 3 per cent of the willstate. citizens blame the arabs who precipitated the problem by h_ ,osing an oil embargo The assistant legislative clerk read aJ_ follows: some five months ag_ Our eagerness to blame Washington for On page 71, strike out lines I throne, Ii our problems tells, l s a slot about our cur12, and insert in lieu thereof the followr_nt national state of mind, although we lng: would not dispute _ lth any conviction the CONTRIBUTIONSBY GOVEI/_ME/'IT argument that sever .1 generations of WashCOBITRACTORS lfigton policy helped bo incubate our present predicament. SEC. 303. Section 611 of title 15, Un/ted Without confusin_ the issue with too many States Code, ls amended by-statistics, it is acc_ _te to say that Saudi (1) by striking out "Whoever" and inset% Arabia with its 164 lllion barrels of proven lng in lieu thereof "(a) Whoever'f; reserves is the only. xab nation that can do (2) striking out "(a) entering" at_t t_much to return us l _ the highway lifestyle serting in lieu thereof "(l) enter/axg'_ that we had come to mJoy until last October. (3) s_,Tiklng out "(1)" and "(2)" am/ lnUntil the United St_ _s of America develops setting in lieu thereof "(A)" and "iD) ', x_self-sUfficiency we ill need a very large spectively; amount of Arab oil meet- our daily needs. (4) striking out "(b) knowingly" and lnThe lncbntlve_ Ior $,udl Arabia to supply serting in lieu thereof "(2) knowingly"; anti the United States wi : that much additional (5) add_ing at the end thereof the _olto_oll are not all that persuasive. King Falsal ing: has more money th_ a he needs and the oil "(b) lqo person who t_as made a conl_lb_will gain in value if l" remains in the ground, tion may accept any contract referred to ll_ Neither he nor the _ither Arab nations and subsection (a) _ill (otherbe than award o_ which made aon oont_ct tl_ basis the of Iran appear to be tz ,ubled by the interns, competitive bids) at any time withlfi twentytional economic dtsl_ aliens that the oil embarge is creating. No_ does the economic disfour months after making that contrlbuaster created tn the underdeveloped world tlon. Nc, person who enters into any contract b7 high oll prices jar ;he moral sensibility in deecribe pass this ty-pe of legislation. Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. COOK. 11yield myself, such time as I may require· Mr. President, we discussed this aspect of campaign gi_ing in the Rule,s Committee. What really bothers me is that, in typical fashion, we are ss ying to the individual who gives that I_e can be fined, Yet, appaxentiy nothing occurs to the individual to whom he gives. At least, we have seen this happen, I am on this side of the aisle, and I would only say to the Senator from Oklahoma, as a Republican, that we say people who gave large sums. Il'hey were fined as individuals; they were_fined as corporations. They were sued by public interest groups to pay the i:_tercst on their money. Yet, we 'still sit here and say, "Where is the end result?" The end result is, who has to pay for th,; solicitation of having sought a contributLon from an individual who the Senator wishes to exclude? The only thing that bet:mrs me iS this: As I read the law now, se _tion 611--perhaps the Senator from Alabama may wish to enter into this--we have a provision on our income tax return, and we have had a discussion about whether we are going to make it mandatory, that $1 or $2 may be allocated to a poliiticalfund. I contend that if it is m _de :mandatory tiaat any amount of mone'f from an individual taxpayer ihas to go into this fund, then the architect or the engineer is already violating the law Icy filing his income tax return. If it is optional and he happens to make a mistnke and checks it;, so that he pays $1 or _;2 to a political fund, then he is also in violation of the law, because he has made a political contribution, I say to the Senator from Oklahoma that I get a distinct feelirg that this is a much more seri,yus problem on State and local levels than it is on s national level, 11get the distinct feeling that, somehow or other, we keep putting ;he onus on the individual who might ms ke _ contribution, and we have very litile enforcement on the part of an indivi:lual candidate who is the recipient of a contribution, We read every day that there are literally hundreds of people who fail to rifle their reports. '_Ve read that on State levels, there are numerous candidates who have rafted to file s report. Never yet have we seen, to my knowledge, any prosecution of ';he candic.ates.--the succ,_sful candidates or th_ losing candidates--for their failure t(, file under the law. Yet, we have just gene through an unfortunate episode. We have seen situations in which somebody put '_he bite on people, to find a way to give corporate funds, and now, all of a sudden, they are the people who are indict{_d and they are the people who have paid fines, and the oorporations have paid fir.es. We have to wait and see hc,w long it _akes for those Apri,l 2, 19 74 'vho att,_mpted to solicit funds to be dealt ,,;,ith under the law. Ev_ery time we say that this is going tv make politics cleaner, we are putting the onus on somebody else, rather than :m ourselves. We are saying that some}:ody else has to be responsible. I might say that that is why I voted :_gainst _he amendment of the other Sen_,tor from Oklahoma yesterday, which provided that radio and television staI_onshave to make monthly reports. That is ()ur responsibility. We will have a law to :live under, if we pass this bill, which _vill provide what We do with our time :md how we handle it. But as we try to l::andle )ur ow n posifAon in the polit$cal :J.rena, we keep wanting to force on other l:,eople the responsibility to report, to see lo it th:J,t we are good guys· The respon.';ibility is up to usto do that. Mr. FASTORE. Mr. President, will the :!_enator yield? Mx'..COOK. I yield. Mr. t:'ASTORE. I have not read the amendment, but Ihave read the explana_;io:n given by the distinguished sponsor ,:,f the amendment. After all, contracts on the Federal level :_re of such magnitude that they are :myer given to a person. They are given to a corporation or a combine. Does not _;his necessarily mean that if a contract i_s given, let us say, to X corporation, ,:.very person who is employed in that corlJoratior_ is forbidden to make a contribui.ion? If any person in that corporation makes :t contribution--be it the secretary_ be it the manager, be it the worker, I:,e it thE, draftsman---does that automati_'.ally mean that that corporation cannot engage in a noncontractual situation with t:he Federal Government? Mr. COOK. I think the Senator pre,.,ents a question that-the Senator from Oklahoma should answer. As Senators know, some of them axe partnerships and they have literally scores and scores of members in the partnerships I think it is :_.prope:' question f_ address to the Senntot from Oklahoma because I think he is ahuttin_ the door. Mr. P'ASTORE. Let me ask this quesI_on. I think I know the good motive of the spoIksor of this amendment. We have had a scandal in our neighboring State of Maryland and that is what he is trylng to e_void on the Federal level, and I am ail for eliminating that situation if we can. BuL sometimes in drawing amejld:_nents _e are counterproductive because they axe not explicit enough to accoml:,lish what we want to achieve without _'.reatin_.. more of a problem than we axe ,_olving. I am _sking the Senator if his ame_nd _::_ent means that anyone connected with the- cor]:)oration that does architectural work or engineering work, that that corl:,oratiol:_ itself wouId be forbidden from ,_,ngagin!_ in a noncompetitive contract. Mr. I!;ARTLETT. I would advise the _iistinguished Senator from Rhode Island, first, that this proposal amends lhe present law. It is illegal, naturally, lor corrorations to make such contribui[ons. Normally architectural firms and _mginee:_'ing firms are partnerships· It would l_e my understanding this would l:,ertain to the principles in the firms: April 2, 197'4 CONGRESSIONAL The partners, the architects, and the engineers, Mr. PASTORE. What about corporations? Mr. COOK. They are prohibited by law anyway, Mr. PASTORE. That is the point, Suppose the president of that corporation makes a contribution. My question is: If the president of a corporation checks off a dollar contribution for the Presidential campaign, does that mean that that corporation cannot engage in noncompetitive contracts? This is a simple question. What is the answer? Is it yes or no? Mr. BARTLETT. The answer is no. It is my opinion it would not. It does not apply to the architects · Mr. PASTOR,E. That is not what the amendment states. The amendment states that any person who makes a contribution, that person is forbidden from engaging in noncompetitive contract situations with the Federal Government. Whom do we mean? Do we mean the president, the vice president, the secretary? Whom do we mean by "person?" Mr. COOK. May I say to the Senator from Rhode Island that first of all we have to make a distinction and when we make a distinction we also present a problem. The distinction is that the individual is an officer of the corporation, but the corporation is an entity. Therefore, he is not a partner, an association, or acting in his individual capacity, Mr. PASTORE. Therefore, in the case where there is a corporation and the president makes a contribution, that corporation can engage in noncompetirive contracts, but in a partnership they cannot do it. There is the hiatus and the vacuum in this amendment that should be explained, and we have not had the explanation yet. Mr. COOK. I say to the Senator from Rhode Island, with all due deference to the Senator from Oklahoma, and I do not support his amendment, that under sections 610 and 611 of the code tha_ problem exists, and that problem is really in the law, where an individual who is an officer of a corporation, in his individual capacity may make a contribution regardless of whether he does or does not do business with the Federal Government. But under 9he present sitnation if an individual is an officer of a corporation, he could not. This would extend it for 2 years beyond the life of the contract. Is that correct? Am I correct in my assumption? Mr. BARTLETT. Yes, the Senator is correct. On the first point the corpora-, tion cannot make a gift. On the second point, a corporation's employees today, who cannot make a gift legally to campaigns, the employees can and do contribute. That is the point I was making. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays. Mr. PASTORE. Yeas and nays. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas and nays already have been ordered, Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. President, I think that this amendment gives Congress a chance to set a good example for the States. In 1973 there were only 72 contracts entered into between archi- RECORD -- SENATE feets and engineers and the Federal Government, totaling $8.5 mfilion in fees. So there are not a lot of eontractural relationships, but I do think that it is very clear from conversations I had reeently with a number of architects and engineers that there is a gray area here that the professional people do riot aPpreciate or like. Both point out that when the line is drawn between the pressure they feel to contribute so they win not be blackballed, and not contributing, and then contributing a large amount and have it interpreted as influencing contracts, it is a gray area that they should not be forced into. It places the responsibility in the wrong area. I think the amendment removes architects and engineers from this kind of invasion of their professional ability because they certainly are interested in doing a good job and they are interested and they should be in doing a good job for the Federal Government. I believe this amendment removes a verY muddy area, a gray area that has caused lots of trouble for engineers and architects, I think it is obvious it would set a great example for the States. Mr, President, I reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, I wish to say that one of the parts here I cannot comprehend is how anybody in his right mind could be forced or compelled and I point out to Senators this language: No person who has made a contribution may accept any contract referred to in subsection (a) (other than a contract the award of which bids) xvill be madetime on the basis cornpetitive at any within 24 of months after making that contribution, That means if an individual in a partnership has made a contribution to the Senator's campaign or my campaign, that partnerhhip is prohibited _Ior 24 months, or 2 years from even bidding on an architectural or engineering contract with the Federal Government. Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. COOK. I would be glad to yield in just a moment, Second, I suspect that what one would have to do is get an affidavit. Suppose a person is in the business of bidding on Government contracts. He would have to get an affidavit from every new member brought into the partnership to the effect that he had not made a contribution to a political campaign or to a candidate within the past 24 months; otherwise he would be faced with a problem ex post facto in connection with his ability to bid on a contract for 24 months, Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. COOK. I yield. Mr. PASTORE. And it does not make any difference whether that contribution is $1or $1,0007 Mr. COOK. That is right. As a matter of fact, he could check it off on the income tax return, Mr. PASTORE. As a matter of fact, when he checks it off on the income tax return, he is estopped, Mr. COOK. That is correct. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, in our S 5063 Committee on Rules and Admintstra.. tion, we have a number of contract:3 that are presented to us by various members of the committee or other.. wise for approval, contracts for personal services to carry out investigations or studies on particular subjects. Under this amendment, were it to be adopted, if a person had chi;eked off on his income tax return $1 for political pur.. poses, he would be ineligible to enter into such a contract. Mr. COOK. Not only ff lie had checked it off, but for 24 rnonths of time the contract could not be presented to the committee. Mr. CANNON. And he would be ineligible for 2 years. Mr. COOK. That is correct. Mr. BEALL. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield, does that mean it woudd apply to someone who had contributed to a losing candidate? Mr. COOK. F,ither one, Senator, either a successful or failed candidate. Mr. CURTIS. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. COOK. I yield. Mr. CURTIS. My question does not go to the merits or demerits of the amendmeat, but I would like to ask if it is the distinguished Senator's contention that a chee_koff on the tax return is a contribut:[on on the part of the person who makes the checkoff. Mr. COOK. Yes. Mr. CURTIS. Is it his money? Mr. COOK. Well, we could get into a debat,e about that, but it is his tax liability. Mr. CURTIS. No; he would have the same tax liability whether he checked it off or not. Mr. COOK. That Is right, but he has an option as to what; he wants to do with that $1 or those $2. Mr. CURTIS. But, he does not put up any money. Mr. COOK. I am not disagreeing with the Senator. All I am saying is that until we decide-which, by the way, we will discussshortly--whether this contribution is to be mandatory or at the option of the taxpayer, I would suggest to the Senator that if the taxpayer takes the option that that part of his tax liability be diverted for the purpose of a political campaign, he may well come under this provision or section 611 of the code as it exists. The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time of the Senator ha,_ expired. The proportent of the amendment has 7 minutes remaining. Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. President, I appreciate the point that was expressed by th_ distinguished Senator from Nebraska. I think it is a very good point. I would like t;o mention to the Senator from Nevada that when he expressed concern about the checkoff, this amendmeat would not have the effect of an ex post facto law. It would not apply to checkoffs that may have been made in the past, but would only be prospective in nature. It would, not apply to firms that had contracts in existence, but would apply only to the future. ! would mention to the distinguished Senator from Kentucky, who expressed 321 S 5064 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SE_IAYE April 2, 1974 concern, that there would be a problem with a new architect entering a firm, as to whether he had or had not made a contribution. I think the whole purpose of this proposal is to remove engineering or architectural firms from the arena of political contributions, and I think that is what they want. They do not want to be involved and they do not want to be in that gray area which is sort of between unanimous consent %0 r3odify my own amendment. The PRESIr)ING OFFICE]2. Without objection, it is so ordered The clerk will read tLe modification. The assistant legislative clerk read the modification as follows: The provisions of this subsection shall not _Lpplyto any contribution c aeck-off provided[ on a Federal income tax retcrn. NOT VOTING--10 _kiken Haskell Scott, Hugh :!_u[bright Huddleston .'_cott. Gravel Hughes ' William L. Hartke Mathias So l_[r. BARTLETT'S amendment (No. 1120) v.,as rejected. 'The ]PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill i.S open to further amendment. Mr. ri;OBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, the contribution of an interested and that of trying to influence in Government. citizen people Mr. BAi%TLIVIIT. Mr. P :esident, has all time been yielded back? The PRESIDING OFFi[CEFk Does the, illsugge::t the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk Mr. GOLDWATEtt. Mr. President, will the Mr.Senater yield for a question? BARTLETT. I yield. Mr. GOLDWATEI%. In view of the way this debate has turned, 'I would like to Senator yield back the rcmailader ofhis tinle. Mr. BAI_TLEq.'I'. Yes. The PRESIE,ING OFFICEIt. All time. having been yielded back the question is ask the Senator from Oklahoma what the on agreeing to. the amendment of the situation would be if we passed a law Senator from Oklahoma _Mr. BARTLETT), providing for federally financed camss modified. ]T_e yeas and nays have paigns. Would we not all be contributors? been ordered, s,nd the cl_ rk will call the Mr. CURTIS. Not if we had deficits, roll. We would be turning it over to our grandTl_e assistant legislati _e c!Lerk called children, the roll. Mr. OOLDWATEt_. I am not talking Mr. ROBERT C. BYi%]3 of West ViEabout deficits. If we passed a law for ginia: I announce that the Senator from publicly financed campaigns, would we Arkansas (Mr. FULBr_GH_:), the Senator not, in effect, all be making donations, from Alaska (Mr. GRAVEL), the Senator whether we were doctors, lawyers, or whatnot? What is the Senator's opinion on Mr. that? BARTLETr. Well, the Senator from Indiana _iMr. HaRTkE), the Senator from Colorado (Mr. HASK_.LL), and tlhe Senator absent. from Iowa (Mr. H'U_HES) are necessarily raises a the point.public I, offinancing course, favor of of the proposed lawMr. GOLZ)WATEi%. Neither I further announce the Senator iS from Kentucky (Mr. that EiUDDLESTO_) absent on official business. Mr. GRIFFI:._. I anne unce that the am not in provisions am I. Mr. BARTId__ti'.'. And I hope it does not become a reality, but I think public financing does raise a lot of questions. I believe this amendment does the job of removing from the political arena, and the pressure of making a contribution if for no other reason than just to be considerate or not to be blackballed, architects and engineers, _.nd puts them in a Senator from Maryland _Mr. M.ATHIAS), and the Senator from Pe:ansylvania (Mr. SCOTT) are necessarily absent. I also annour.ce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. SVOTT) is absent on official business, I further am_ounce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Amr_) is absent due t_ illness in the [amily. strictly professional area, which they would to be in. of architects When likea number and en- I further announce thai, if present and voting, the Senator from Pelansylvania (Mr. SCOTT) W0:_ild VOte "r ay." gineers from my State were here recently, around talking theabout the problems that exist country, they brought out the fact that some people feel that the answer would be bidding, but I think bidding would be just as unsuitable for an The result was announced--yeas nays 62, as follows: [_ro. lO4 Leg] YEAS--_8 mlen C_urch JavJts Bartlett Dcmenicl Mansfield Beall Dominlck McClellan Bellmon SEvin Nunn Bentsen Griffin Roth Biden G_rney Schweiker Buckley Hansen Taf'_ ]Byrd, Hart Thurmond architect engineerto obtain as it would for a lawyer inor trying a client,be and I think it is very important that. they be removed from that area. Mr. PASTORE. Senator yield for Mr. BAR'IX_'r. Mr. President, a suggestion? I yield. will the Mr. PASTORE. Why doesn't the Senator modify his amendment to read in the positive rather than in the negative, by saying that any person who has a noncompetitive contract cannot Inake a contribution to any political party within 2 or 3 montk_s from the time of the election? Then the Senator would be estopping tho person. Mr. BARTLeTt. Mr. President, I have an amendment that I would like to have read. The PRESIDING OFFICERi The Senator's amendment would not be in order until all time has been yielded back. Mr. BARTLETT. 322 Mr. President, I ask Harry F., Jr. Helms Byrd, Robert C. Hc,lllngs NAYS---62 AbourezIc Gcldwater Baker Hstfleld Bayh Hathaway Bennett Hruska Bible Humphrey Brock Inouye Brooke Jackson Burdick Jo:anston Cannon Kennedy case Long C:hlles Magnuson Clark Mc. Clure Cook McGee cotton McGovern cranston Mclntyre Curtis Metcalf Dole Metzenbaunl Eagleton Mondale Eastland Montoya Fannin Moss I_ng x_kie Weicker Nel.,_on Packwood Pastore Pearson Pell Percy Proxmire Randolph Rib:[coif Sparkman Stafford Stennis Stevens Stevenson Symington Tahnadge Tower Tunney Williams Young 28, will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call l:he roll Mr. i%OBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, !' ask u:_mnimous consent that the order !!orThethe i_?RESIDING quorum call O_'/?ICER. be rescinded. Without :)bjecticn, it is so ordered. PUBLIC -FINANCING: A CALAMITY TO AVOID Mr. ]E!,UCKLEY. Mr. President, we are _;oon going to have to closely examine _,nd del0ate the most _omprehensive campaign reform proposals ever seriously :mnsidm:ed by this body. l[ am deeply concerned that low unii orm spending limits may work to the :;_dvant_ge of those candidates who can muster nonmonetary contributions or ·;,tho enter a race with other advantages c,ver their opponents that are unrelated :o competence. Thes(_ advantages include better initial _mme recognition, better access to the media and access to other methods of :'eaching the average voter that are not _;ubject to statutory limits. In genera, I, one ale.ss of candidates enjoys these advant_ges over all others and must t:herefo_e benefit from such limits. I am speaking of course of that class to whicl_ all of us here belong. We are ilacumbents. We have access to the frank. We hav,_., a greater claim to media attention than do nonincumbents. In short, ,:ye may soon be voting on legislation that could increase our advantage over any_:,ne who wants to challenge us. This Is something that we .'_houkt avoid. ]f we are going to limit spending on the :_:,art of congressional and Senate eandidates w,_.'should at least give those who ;!_lust run without the advantages asso:'ia'_d with incumbency some chance to offset ol_:r builtin advantages. I urg_ in this regard that an editorial, :_:ublished in the Cincinnati Inquirer and .j _lS_ rep_'inted in Challenge, the publiea_:ilon of the National Federation of Re:?ublicar Women, be read extremely _:_[osely. It represents a reasoned analysis of the problem and one that we _[10uld address when we consider 8. 3044. _] ask _manimous consent that it be ] ,rinted '.in full at this point in the RECORD. qUaere being no objection, the editorial '_;'as ord,'red to be printed in the R_CORr, I!;S follows: ii, BLOC_XNaNC_NG: A CAL_rrY TO Avom The 93cd Congress is closer than any of its l:ltetieces_,ors to taking a step from which there is apt to be no easy retreat---the publc [federal] financing of political c_npaigns. The allure to public financing is, perhaps, _:_aderstal:_dable. Fo_ like all other easy an_,:_e:cs,public financing would _em to elim- April 2, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL inate most, if not all, of what is wrong with American politics, To consider the long-range consequences of using public funds to finance political campaigns, however, is to see that the perils far outweigh the advantages, that the lnequities far outweigh the assets, that the potenrial abuses far outweigh the probable benefits, It is ironic to find among the supporters of the p_blic funding a number of organizatiGriS and individuals who, in general, have a.dvocated "opening up" the political process and making both government and the party structure more responsible to popular tastes and aspirations. Public funding, it seems _o us, would have precisely the opposite effect. The citizen, after all, has only two unfailing devices to influence the political process--his vote and his financial contribution. To deny him the right to contrl'bute, to insulate the parties fr_n the pressures of opinion, would not, in any accepted sense of the word, make American political parties more responsible. Indeed, it would invite them to become even less dependent on the people whose convictions and aspirations they were created to reflect, There are, tn addition, some grave questlons about the constitutionality of outlawlng individual financial contributions to the political parties. For ts not the financial contribution, at bottom, simply an extension of the individual's right to freedom of speech-a right asserted tn the First Amendment? Quite apart from the philosophical and constitutional aspects, there are somesignificant practical questions that none of the sponsors of public funding has answered satisfactorily to date. Certainly the most apparent is how to offset the inherent' advantage of the incumbent in any political contest. Sen. Robert Taft, Jr. has suggested that an incumbent congressman seeking re-election has, by the very fact of his incumbency, a $150,000 advantage over any possic_le challenger. He is saying, in short, that the incumbent's opponent would need to spend $150,000 simply to meet the incumbent on an equal footing, some observers regard Senator Taft's estimate as conservative. The fact remains that an incumbent congressman, senator or President has an immense built-in advantage-the ability to shape events, the ability to command newspaper headlines and television and radio exposure, the ability to blanket his constituency with franked (free) mail. Any method Of using tax revenue to finance political Campaigns that fails to offset the incumbents' natural advantage, is, by its very nature, legislation to help insure the re-election of incumbents, Even more troublesome pro_lems are posed by the allocation of funds between the two major parties. What should the yardstick be? If the answer is treating the two parties exactly alike, aren't voter preferences being ignored? If the answer is using the last election to establish a distribution formula, isn't there a danger of overlooking the possibility of significant shifts in people's preference? The fact of the matter is that the political pendulum in the United States has a habit of swinging far and frequently. The same Republican Party that mustered only 38.5% of the popular vote in 1964went on to win the presidency narrowly with 43.4% of the vote in 1968 and to swamp its opposition with 61% of the vote in 1972. And the same Democratic Party that could muster only 40.8% of the vote in 1928 went on to win the White House with a 57.4% landslide four years later. Clearly, any distribution formula that had been based on, say, the 1928 election would have been patently unfair--so unfair, in fact, as to run the risk of distorting or frustrating what popular preferences actually turned out to be. RECORD -- SENATE Quite another problem is posed by the third party that makes an occasional intrusion into U.S. political life. What yardstick is there for determining its share of public funding? In 1968, Gov. George C. Wallace's American Independent Party, which hadn't even existed In the previous presidential election, garnered 13.63% of the popular vote. Pour years later, what purported to be the same party saw its support dwindle 1;o less than 1%. What distribution formula in 1968 could possibly have assured the American Independent Party the financial support to which it was entitled? And what distribution formula could have avoided overfinancing in 1972 a political movement that had manifestly run out of steam? Supporters of public financing appear to assume that the two major parties that exist today will always exist. In fact, of course, there is the distinct possibility that one or the other may cease to exist---as the Whig Party ceased to exist in the 1850s. Public financing emerges, accordingly, as a means of freezing the present party structure for all times. The challenge to the nation, and in particular to Congress, is to find a series of remedies that will not prove more hurtful than the perpetuation of the existing system, Certainly one crucial goal should be eneouraging truly mass participation in the process by which political campaigns are financed. Congress took one timid step in that direction through the checkoff plan introduced into last year's federal income tax returns-a plan that allowed each taxpayer to earmark $1 of his tax payment for the party of his choice. In the tax returns for the year Just ended, Congress took a regrettable step backward: The checkoff system is still posihie, but the taxpayer is no longer able to designate the party to receive his $1; it goes instead into a common fund to be divided between the two parties, There is a similar need for the full disclosure of political giving---a disclosure systern that will permit the voters to Judge a candidate as much by the kind of financial contributions he receiYes as by the other qualifications on which he bases his campaign. The ability to attract financial contributions is closely akin to the ability to attract votes. To move, as many suggest we do, toward saying that a candidate or a party need not concern itself with attracting dollars, accordingly, is akin to saying that it need not concern itself with attracting votes, It is difficult to see how the cause of responsible, government is hereby served, Americans do not want to see public office become the exclusive preserve of those personally wealthful enough to finance their own campaigns. Neither do they want to see candidates so beholden to narrow, special interests as to be unrepresentative of those they are sworn to serve. But neither, we think, do they want to see the pdlitical contributor shrouded in suspicion. And neither do they want a political process that is immane from the public attitudes and pressures that have been the historlc shapers of public policy in the United States. _ MESSAGES FROM THE PRESIDENT-APPROVAl OF BILLS Messages in wril ng from the President of the United States were communicated to the Set _te by Mr. Heiting, one of his secretari, ;, and he announced that on March 29, 1974, the Presiden_ had approved and acts: S. 1615, An Act for Walz; lgned the _he relief following of August F, S. 1673, An Act S. 1852, An Henrietta Harris; S. 1922, An Martin; and S. 3228, An portation and S 5065 ' the relief of Mrs. Zoaima for the relief of Georgina the relief of Robert J.' to provide funeral frans' expense benefits to the prl,'_mers of war, and for other p_rposes. ECONOMIC GRAi_/I THE PRO-FROM The HATHAWAY) laid sage from the States, which, _sident the OFFICER report, Banking, The message is TO the Con I herewith in accordance the Committee OrL and Urban Affairs. follows: the Unitecl States: to the Congress, section 216 of the Economic amended, the port of the gram, covering 1973 through The :fourth (Mr. mes-of the United accompanying Act of 1970, as recent quarterly reStabilization Properiod October :!, 31, 1973. of 1973 was a pc- riod of growth for the gross national billion, an ' previous quarter. by 85.7 million. tinued to regain although slower economy. Our grew to $1,3313 o! $33 billion over the ,loyment increased one. million workers to American dollar conabroad. During the remained our problera, tinued to rise at pace, due in 1ar shortages, of pattern of price reflect the quarter, inflation serious economic and abroad conunacceptably rapid part to the worldwide raw materials. The also began to of the Arab oil em- bargo against higher world By t]ae ter, the fourth Stabilization underway. The after tZae United States and for oil. of the fourth quarof the Economic had been fully anticipated freeze on prices were spread out over the Phase IV Phase IV was an effective and compliance lead to a gradual labor to the free with the help of mechanism. designed to provide of tight standards that would of industry and Throughout the ] fourth quarter, demor_trated vate sectors of operatively and e: mort goals of the were removed many firms have proceedings and pri' can work coto meet c0mrestraint. As part of under which they inandatory controls, price the control. More many have steppe penditure plans only We are firm meet the ergy shortage lng from it have 7for the future, i-up their capital exenlarge supplies--the _way to halt inflation. our commitment to of inflation. The enthe problems resultadded to this challenge. with satisfaction flces our these problems. _ can, however, look , the efforts and sacrimade in response to 323 S 5066 CON(,RE=SION_&L "' g ' REC()RD The Congress is Administration's continued stabilb this Administratioi with the Congress machinery for resently debating the ecommendation for .tion authority and stands ready to work to develop effective ec¢ aomic stabilization. RICHARD THE WHITE Ho1 F,XECUTtVE MEI As in executive ING OFFICER before the Senate E, April further announced greed t¢ the report conference on the the two Houses oil ;he Senate to the that of disthe bill CFI.R. 6186) to _mend the District of Columbia Revenl e Act of :1947 regarding taxability of di 'idends receJved by a NIXON. 2, 1974. ;AGES REFERRED _ssion, the PRESIDr. HATHAWAY) laid messages from the President of the U dted States ting sundry nomina ,ions, which The message the House had the committee agreeing votes el amendments of -- SENATE submitwere re- corporation fron banks, and oth, The message s House had disa_,q of the Senate t,) establish a Lega insurance companies, r savin_:s, institutions, so announced that the _ed to tk e amendments the bill iH.lq,. 7824) to Services Corporation, and for other p Lrposes; conference askec by the agreed SeniLte to the on the April ,_'_',197'4 "lA) In the case of a candidate for the _,mce of President or Vice President, $250; _md "(s) l::l the case of any other candidate, _,lOO.". On page 76, beginning with line 23, strike :,ut through line 5 on page 77. On pa¢_e 77, line 6, strike out "(el" and insert in lieu thereof "(d)% Mr. AhLEN. Mr. President, under the l:,resent law, contributions can be made to various committees of a candidate of up to $:!;000 without the incurring of a li ift-tax liability. This has eimbled many ';:ealthy contributors to Contribute $3,000 to each of multiple committees, thereby showing them to contribute much more ferred to the appro] riate committees, (The nomination received today are printed at the end of Senate Proceedings.) disagreeing vote ;tof thc two Houses thereon, and s] Mr. PERKINS, Mr. B'awKINS, Mrs. i In_K, Mr. 1V[_,_.vs, Mr. Qui_, Mr. Asmn )oK, anl Mr. STEICER of Wisconsin we e appointed managers than thc* $3,000 to a candidate without iacmTing gift-tax liability. On JUly 30 last year the Senate passed _!I. 372, which at the time was hailed by rlany so-called reformers as a great for- AMENDED on the Dart conference, The message the House had ment of the Sen', to provide for pe: the conference the disagreeing thereon, and t THOMPSON of NC" BUSTON, Mr. Qm Mr. SARA_qlN weE, 0Il the part of th ence on title I of ULLMAN', Mr. BU :Mrs. GgIFFXTHS, A yard step in the regulation of campaign expenditures. That bill provided--and the bill before the Senate at this time, ,5', 3044 provides--for a $3,000 limitation _:er contributor per candidate per election. It is t,:ue that this will permit a man and: his wife to contribute $3,000 each, t:_ereby allowing a $6,000 contribution b';, the family. The p:resent bill provides a $3,000 limit._;tion per contribution, and, Mr. President, I 'i;hink that is going a long way. I think that is certainly a :fine regulation up _o a point. It is contained in S. 372 which was passed last year in this (?ongress, now pending in [he House. I 'believe Jt would be the better part of wi_sdom :if we waited and saw what the RECE_i 14SCHEDULE FOR Mr. MANSFIELD Mr. Fq'esident, on behalf of the distil bmished Republican leader and myself, I _sk unanimous consent that, the ame_ fled recess schedule for 1974 be printed in its entirety, There being no ob. ection, the amended recess schedule for 1:74 was ordered to be printed in the Rrc¢ _D, as follows: AMENDEDREOES_ _CHEDULE--1974 Easter (Sunday, Apz 1 14)--From conclusion of business Monday, April 22.Frida April 12, until Noon, Memorial ]Day (Mc lay, May 27)--From the ltouse at the rther a:mounced that sagreed to the amendto to th_ bill (H.R. 2) sion ref,)rm; agreed to ;ked by the ;Senate on )res of the two Houses at Mr. PERKINS, Mr. Jersey, Mr. DENT, Mr..._ Mr. EaLENBOaN, and appoir.ted managers House at the confer;he bill: and that Mr. KE of Massachusetts, r. ROSTENKOWSKI, Mr. until Noon, Tuesday, 28. eonclusion of businesM y · Thursday, May 23, July 4 (Tihursday)--From conclusion of business Friday, June _8, until Noon, /don- SCHNEEBELI, Mr. ( DLLIER, l_nd ]_r. BROYH][LL of Virginia _ere a!cpointed managers on the par of the House at the day, July Day 8. Labor (Monday, September 2)--From conclusion of businea Friday, August 23, until Noon, _Vednesds September 4. NOTE:AIlrecess perio[ls are subject _ocancellatlon or change to a_lapt to extraordinary conference situations. The PRESIDING The clerk suggest the absence OFFICER. of a _uorum. will call the roll. The legislatiw. · clerk proeeedcd to call the roll. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Pre:;ident, I ask unanimous cement that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFI 2ER. Without objection, it is so ordered, Under the previous order, the Senator is recognized to call tp his amendment. Mr. ALLEN. Iv]h'. President, I call up amendment No. J.059 and ask that It be stated. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk wi:Il read the amendment, The legislative clerk pl'o.:eeded to read l_be amendment. for the Senate first to wait on the beHouse k,_lieve, Mr. President, it would well t,:_ act, b_._cause there is some question as t,> ti_e degree to which the House has embraced o:? will embrace public financing. Once we find what the House will do, the Senate (..an write its version, and then '_e will be very near to an agreement on a bill, which could very neari_y be resolved in:.the conference, and a bill would ensue. We have already sent one bill over to _;]te House, S. 372, passed on July 30 last y!!,ar by a vote of 82 to 8. During the course oJ! the consideration and action a,:_d pass_ge of that bill, a public financJug amendment was defeated by the Sena_:e. Tha_: was just July of last year. So we sent to the House a bill providing for sirict regulation of campaigu expenditures, wibh a strict regulation on cam- Amendment No. 1059 is as follows: On page 75, line 23, strike out "exceeds $3,000." and Insert in lleh thereof "exceeds--'.. On page 75. between lines 23 and 24, Insert the following: "(1) ofinPresident; the case orof Vice a candidate the office President, for $250; p _ign co:ntxqbutions, but confining all of the contributions to the private sector. TI:mt wa,_ the action of the, Senate in J.:&y of last year. NOW, l>efore the House has acted on t):lat bill--I will not say before the House tl_q had :_ opportunity to act on it, not _md the full :House; the committee has not s,;en fit to report a bill, but there is an indication that the chairman of the c_mmittee Is going to see that some legislaMon is reported to the floor--the Sen_l;e :ks beJng called on to pass a bill witll sv]_lentlr(_ly different approm_h. MESSAGE FROI_ THE HOUSE A message from the House of Representatives, by Mr. Hackney, one of its reading clerks mnounced i_hat the House had passed, w thout amendment, the following bills of tte Senate: $. gl. An act for tt relief of Uhel D. Polly; si 205. An _ct for the elief of Jorge Marie Bell; S. Maly; 507. An act for ti: relief of Wilhelm J. 1_. _. 16. An act for the .qief of Mrs. Jozefa SokolowakaDomanski; s. 912. An act for th_ relief of Mahmood Shareef $uleiman; and s. 2112. An act for ite Suong (NlniAnneHoyt) The message also relier a mouneed of Vo Tht that the House had agreed to he amendment of the Senate to the bil (H.R. 1321) for the relief of Mrs. Donir ,,a Pettit. The message furthe announced that the agree meats House of theihadSenate 0 tothethe billamend(H.R. 5106) for the relief of Flora Datiles Tabayo. The message also aI nounced that House had agreed to ti e amendments the Senate to the bill (H.R. 7363) the relief of Rito E. Juc lla. 324 the of for ' Mr. on tg_ ;I of the bill. _ ..... QUORUM CA:i,L 1VIiANSFIiELD. Mr President, I "(2) in the case of any o_her candidate, $1,_0.". on page 76, line 2, strike out "exceeds $3,_),3." and insert in lieu there of "exceeds---". ,On page 76, between lines 2 and 3, insert 2;he following: }louse _'as going to do with respect to (:!_.rrtpaigil financing. There is no doubt that the Senate v,ants strict regulation. The Senator from .Alabama wants stricter regulation. So I April 2, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL What was the effect of our action before? I am not sure how many days or weeks we debated it. I think it may have been as long as 10 days on the floor. The distinguished chairman of the committee (Mr. C_NON) is here. He could give the exact ntunber of days. But the Senate debated that bill for a week or 10 days and decided to keep campaign contributions in the private sector, by a yeaand-nay vote here on the floor, and by a substantial margin, The preSent bill changes that approach entirely and seeks to finance the primaries of the Members of the House and Senate on a 50-50 matching, or po,tentially a 50-50 matching, as between private contributions and the Public Treasury, and to finance general election expenditures 100 per_-ent out of the Public Treasury, which would allow, taking the largest State in the Union, a candidate for the .Senate,--and both of the California Senators have voted for public financing--to have a contribution by the Federal Government, or a part of the Federal Government, of up to $700,000 in matching funds. That would be the .Government's contribution to the candidacy of any number of candidates for the nomination of the two major parties, That would be up to $Y00,000 based on the amount of private contributions for each candidate for the nomination of the two parties. With that kind of financing, I rather imagine quite a number of candidates will be seeking the nominations Of the different parties. And if the Federal Government is going to pay up to $700,000 in matching funds for the contributions of the various candidates, I think there will be a large number of candidates running for the Democratie nomination and a large number of candidates running for the Republican nominatipn. Then, if the two parties choose their candidates, who have been financed to a large extent by the Federal Government, up to $700,000 apiece, the Federal Government will take it over altogether, Paying half the amount is not enough, We are asked to pay half of a candidate's expense---a large expense, I might say. I think that a little later on I shall offer an amendment to cut down the amounts allowed to be spent under the bill I think that this bill escalates the cost of a campaign at a time when we ought to be trying to cut down on the cost of the campaign, What does the bill provide for the fortunate fellows who have been chosen by the two ma]or parties as their candidates in the general election for the Senate? Why, the taxpayers write each one of them a check for $2,020,000. Is that reform? I am for reform; I am not for a public subsidy. I am for cutting down on the overall expenditures, and I am for cutting down on the individual contributions. We cannot write a bill that is too strict for the Senator from Alabama with contributions and expenditures being in the prirate sector, l would not care if they eliminated all private expenditures and all contributions Just so long as they leave it in the RECORD -- SENATE private sector and do not hand the bill over to the taxpayers, Mr. President, they say that the lessons of Watergate make it imperative that campaign election laws be changed and tightened up. They say that the only way we can do that is by handing the bill to the taxpayer. Well, that has been the solution of all of our problems for the last decade. When any problems come up, they pump a little more Federal money into the area of the problem and say that that will solve it. The same thing applies where they pump a little more money into the pockets of the politicians, They say that we will have a clean election in that way. I do not see that policy. That is a non sequitur. There is no magic potion attached to a dollar received from the Public Treasury as distinguished from a dollar received from the private sector. Se turning the bill over to the taxpayer is not going to solve anything. But strict regulations, private contributions and expenditures, and strict rules as to the disclosure of the contributions and expenditures will go a long way. The law that we have on the books now, the 1971 Campaign Expenditures Act, did mighty little in the way of reform. One thing that it did not do was to cut down on the amount of contributions; and that is what needs to be done. It was argued at that time that disClosure was all that was needed; that if we disclosed what each candidate was doing, we would not need to put any limit on contributions. It does not work that way. Another shortcoming, another shortfall in the present law, is that there is no effective limitation on campaign expenditures. What is covered in the campaign expenditure field? Why, all they seek to put a limit on is the expenditures for the -so-called media advertising. I believe it is 10 cents for each person of voting age ' in the political subdivision from which the candidate is running. I believe it is up to 6 cents for radio and television and possibly 4 cents for other types of media advertising, but there is no limlt whatsoever on the tremendous number and amount of other types of candidate types of expenditures. What about mass mailing? I have not sent out any mass mailing as a candidate. However, I understand that is frequently resorted to. Oh, sure, it is hard, with office space, car rental, campaign staffs, and the tremendous number of expenses that can come up. There is no limitation whatsoever on those areas of expenditures. Of course, that means tightening up. S. 372, which the Senate has already .passed, placed a 15-cent limitation per person on those of voting age for campaign expenditures. If we cut that 15 cents down to 10 cents, we would have a better law. That law has not passed, I say that we should wait for the House to send a bill over here that we can work on. Then, at least, we will have the House committed to that much of a concession in the area of campaign reforn_, I would suggest caution in moving ahead at this time with an entirely different theory as to the approach on cam- _ 5067 paign financing_ an approach of 180' in about 11_0 days to switch from private, financing to public financing, which is what we are being called upon to do here by the authors of S. 3044. I say that since the acute need for this legislation is pointed up by what is re-. ferred t_) as Watergate, I think it would be highly appropriate that we wait and examine the report which I understand is going to be filed either this month or next month by the Watergate Committee, the report which the Senate charged that col_mittee with bringing back to the Senate on the recommendation that _he committee makes to the Senate, Congress, and the Nation as to the best way of reforming the electoral process and the best way of properly controlling campaign contributions and expendi-. tures. That mission was assigned to thai; committee, and it has labored diligently for 15 months or more, and received the plaudits of the entire Nation for the dedication of its members and the results which it achieved. Why not wait and see what recommendations that commit-tee will make? Mr. President, I would say it is rather obvious why we are not going to wait on that reI_rt. All you have to do is read some of the votes here in the Senate on some of the issues both last year and this yes_r. It is quite obvious that five members of the seven-man Watergate Committee are opposed to public fi.. nancing of Federal elections. That is one reason why we are not waiting on that report, because it is q:nown what the report is going tO say, in principle. It is not going to recommend public financ-ina; that is obvious from the votes taken here in the Senate. So tha_ is the reason why thi_; bill must be pushed at this time. Mr. President, we have not yet tried strict rE,_ulation, such as would be provided by S. 372. We ihave not yet tried strict regulation of ' campaign receipts and campaign expenditures. If the House, of Representatives would pass S. 372, and it were signed into law and given a fair trial, I believe it would go a long way toward cleaning up Federal elections in this country. And not only has private regulation, or regulation of the election process and control of contributions in the private sector, not been tried, but we already have Federal financing, taxpayger flnancing of Federal elections, up to a point. We already have the checkoff; this, bill as it came from the committee con.rained a plan not only to double the checkoff from $1 for a single person and $2 for a couple to $2 for a single person and $4 for a couple. But they were not satisfied with doubling thai; process, which is going to bring in enough money already to finance the 1976 elec: tion; they wanted to weight the thin{,l in favor of the tax spenders, of. the pollticians running for Federal office. How did they plan to do that? Well, they provided, instead of this checkoff being on a voluntary basis, as it is now, that ff the taxpayer did not say thai; he did :sot want his money checked off, they would check it off anyway, and he would be assumed to desire a checkoff 325 S 5008 CONGRESSIONAL REC ORI) -- SENATE as to his return ff he did not specify law--and this bill seeks to double what to the eontrary.,That was just a little 1: am going to outlineithe present law, twist arom_d to where it made the con1:believe gives a single pel son :m absolute tribUtion involuntary, requiring him to credit. In other words, just handing this take affirmative action to prevent the amount to the taxpayer of $1_I.50 for any checkoff rather than the present law, political contribution that he might which requires affirmative action to tm- make, including, of cour,,e, to the Presiplement or Put in motion the checkoff, dential or the senatorial ar the House of I am aware of the fact that this secRepresentativ_ candidates, tion has been deleted, to come up at a A couple could claim a :redit of $25. later time on another bill, but we might Now if they wanted to, go a different not have an opportunity to discuss it as route and go t'ae deduction route, there fully at tllat time as we have at the was a $50 deduction for tm individual or present time. So let us see _hat this $10¢jor a couple. checkoff provides in the way of money Thihisbill as it came out of tile commit-, out of the taxpayers' pockets, tee doubled tho:se amount _.I think that is Under the present checkoff regdlation going to be the pattern throughout, il'. orlaw, wlqAchthe Rules committee whlch we get this Federal financing, as every brought out this bill passed, I believed, Congress will double wha; it will cost the by a vote of 8 to l_the Senator from taxpayer, Alabama is on that committee, and his But here we have got the checkoff al-. vote represenged the one opposed to the ready financed by the tt,xpayers of the bill--the committee said, on page 28 of country, financed by the Z?ublic Treasury the commit_tee report: it would be better to say, becauWe it does If all returns, individual and Joint, should not cost the t:[xpayer aay more as art take full advantagq of the one dollar check . _ndividual taxpayer to assign a dollar of off the total co_t womd be $117,370,000. his tax liability toward this checkoff! With this amendment that they have: fund. We have that financed by the tax.. If, all returns should take full advantage payers, by the Public' Treasury--the of a two dollar check off the cost would be checkoff plan---and we have the credits $234,740,000.. that are allowed to the t_:payers if they want to go that route, er deductions it! That is what the cost would be under they want to go the other rout_. this little checkoff provision that they Obviously, the deducti, m route would[ have got. That sounds like some pretty lt_ chosen by a person whose income important money coming under the was high because he wouli then get more checkoff. They are going to have enough than this credit. The credit would be moeny under the checkoff to finance the better used by :_person o _ low income, Presidential election of 1976. So, Mr. President, the committee bill: Would it not Joe the better part of _,_ught to double these amounts and wisdom--I will ask distinguished trom meresenior Senator fromthe Illinois (Mr. make it, I believe--speaking PERCY)--;would it not be the better part ory, and if I am wronf', I am sure I. of wisdom_ to see how this plan works will be corrected--the conunittee bill on the 1976 Presidential election before provided for credits of $25 for an indiadding other offices or adding the Presividual, $50 for a couple, (,r deductions of dential nomination and the House and $100 for an individual or $200 for a Senate primary and general elections? couple. Would it not be better-to see how it works So S. 3044--at the Presidential level before adding Mr. CANNON'._ Mr. P_esident, if the other area offices? Senator will yield at that point, the SenMr. PERCY. If the distinguished Senator is correct. That is the proposal that ator from Alabama is asking me, I would was in the bill as we repented it, in adbe very happy to say that I have no ob- dition to raising the dollar checkoff ts, jection to using our best judgment and $2. That is the amount, as the Senator. going ahead with other offices as we in correctly stated earlier, which is now in our judgment think may be good for one title V and was stricken from the bill and level as for another, has been referred to the Finance CornMr. ALLEN. He would not want to raittee. So it presently is not in the bill wait and see how it works before trying as it now stands. to extend it to other areas then? Mr. ALLEN. The Sem_ter from AlaMr. PERCY. All I know is that any bama did not state to tre contrary. He system, almost, would be better than the Stated that t:ae provisLon had been present system we seem to be using, knocked out, but this mi,_ht be a better' Mr. AI_'EN. I thank_the distinguished opportunity to discuss it than we might Senator from Illinois. We are going to try have at a different time. to give him a better system but keep it Mr. CANNON. I was just verifying the. in the.priw_tesector, fact that the Senator's figures are I have been addressing my remarks, I correct. will say for the benefit of Senators who Mr..ALLEN. Yes, and I thank the dishave just come into the Chamber since tinguished Senat6r from Nevada. I apI started talking, to the fact that we al- preciate his diligence, his dedication, and ready haw, public financing of Federal his great knowledge in _his area. Also elections up to a point, and the Presidenhis sincere desire to set up a workable tial election in full under certain cfr- plan that will inure to the benefit of the cumstances, which I will outline in a people of the United States a,,_he sees lt. moment. I just happen to see it differently. But, Other elections are financed by the I would be remiss in my c.uty _ifI did not, Federal Government in the operation of say that I feel the distinguished Senator. the income tax laws because the present from Nevada (Mr. Ca_N,)N), the chair- 326 April 2, 19 74 m;m of the Committee on Rules and Administration, has done an outstanding iJob in this area and in coming up with I:he bill as he was committed to do last :Tenorat. the time the rider' to the debt limit bi'.llwaswithdrawn. But t_he Senator from Alabama dis_grees with the conclusion that the disd;inguished Senator from Nevada has r'eaehe(I, that to a certain extent public JSnaucing is in the best interest of the t_lectior, process and of the people of t_hiscountry. :[ was commenting on the bill as it came l[rom the Committee on Rules and Administration. So, zLow, Mr. President, this bill, S. '_044, sets up a system of matching conI:.ributicns in primaries and financing 100 percent the general elections. Now let us see who is paying the bill. In the primaries the Government ls paying half of $he contributions up to a certain mount in size, and in total _mlount for that matter. Now the taxpayer that is the Governmerit, under the present law and to a _lrceater extent under the Senate bill as Lt cam,_; out of the committee, would provide for matching the individual con-' I;ributio:ns. But the taxpayer can put up t_ large portion of his and charge' it off ,:)n his :income tax with little net loss or cost to the taxpayer on the small con_ributic.:ns. So the Government is getting it in t:ae neck going and coming. It matche:_ the contributions and it funeels the money over to the taxpayer to put up _ portion of his end of it. So, in a _euse, il; is the Government paying it all I;hewa_. The rider that was not agreed to in I:he Serrate did not go so far as to cover primaries of House and Senate Mem-' bens. They said, "This is a' little farther I;han we should go." But I notice that Lhe Rules Committee has come out with ._ bill l:rovlding for matching funds in primaries. Mr. ]President, let us see what it takes in the various primaries to become a candid_te. Let us take the top office and ._;eehow that operates under the Senate bill, and let us see if this is in the public interest. In the first place, it provides that a candid_te for the nomination of one of _he two major parties can spend up to '_15 million in seeking the Presidential aomina[lon. I say that in round figures. :It is ba:;ed on a formula of 10 cents per :0erson of voting age throughout the ,:'_ountry,and that is estimated to be api;)roximately $15 million. Ii; is provided t;hat an:gbody desiring to s_ek the nomination of one of the parties can do so, i:mt he does not receive any subsidy, _n:ygr_nt, any handout from the Federal Government until he has raised $250,00(I, in contributions of $250 or less. .,!is soor L as he reaches that threshold level, a_ it is called, of having raised $250,000, he goes in and makes a showing of that i[o the Commission, I assume, and i:,he Treasury pays him that $250,000. lqow he has another $250,000 with which _l;o:run. Every time he receives a contribution of $250 or less, he is entitled to have that April 2, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL matched by the Federal Government, by the taxpayers of the Nation, up to the point of $7.5 million. That is what every candidate for the nomination will receive; andif this bin is passed, there win be several dozen, including 8 or 10 who serve inthisChamber, I might mention in passing that one of the amendments that has been defeated in the Senate since this bill has been under debate was an amendment offered by the Senator from Alabama that ,would have provided that no Member of thel 93d Congress would be ellgible to receive any matching funds for a race for the Presidential nomination for the term starting January 20, 1977, which Is the next race. That amendment received 36 votes. Numbered among those 36, however, was not a single person who is reputed to be, or alleged to be, or understood to be a candidate for the nom-' ination of one of the major parties, I took the position that if this Congress sets up a subsidy program of $7.5 million for everybody who wants to run for President, the Members of the Congress that creates that subsidy program should not be able to participate in any such subsidy. The majority of the Senate did not agree. I was ple_asantly surprised, however, to receive 36 votes on that amendment. So 36 Members of the Senate felt that a program should not. be set up by the 93d Congress in which Members of that Congress would stand to benefit to the tune of several million dollars apiece. It might be a good idea to reword that amendment before this bill is passed and submit it again, to see what the Members of the Senate think about it, after having reflected on it for'awhile, Mr. President, a person who is very popular in a State and who has no hationwide following whatsoever would not have too much difficulty, in my judgment, in raising $250,000 in his home State; nor would the leader of some pressure group, some far out group, have difficulty in raising that money. He would present the bill to the Federal Treasury and, in effect, would get on the Federal payroll from then on out, by the Federal Government matching his $250 or less contributions on up to $7.5 million, Another consideration is this: It is not necessary that the recipient of this Federal subsidy spend any of it prior to the convention---or ever spend it, for that matter. But certainly he does not have to spend it prior to the convention. If he has collected $7.5 million in contribution of up to $250 and the Federal Government has matched that amount and he goes to the convention sitting on a warchest of $15 million, and another candidate or two follow the same policy, and we have several candidates in Miami or in Chicago--those seem to be the cities that bid for these conventions---they could be at the convention with $15 million apiece, Look at the possibilities for improper practices with these Presidential candidates who are greatly desirous of high office and are willing to work hard in an effort to obtai_ that nomination. So, Mr. President, I believe that the financing of these Presidential election campaigns or Presidential nomination RECORD -- SENATE campaigns certainly is not in t_e public interest. Look at som_ of the beneficiarles of such a program. I notice in the newspaper that the former Governor of New York, Mr. Rockefeller, may possibly aspire to the Presidency. This Pederal subsidy program would make it possible that the Federal Government would subsidize Mr. Rockefeller up to the extent of $7.5 million. Governor Rockefeller is said to be a candidate for nomination, I believe, of the Republican Party. If he were able to get enough private contributions up to $250 he would be eligible for a Federal subsidy of $7.5 million, Governor Reagan. of California would be eligible for'a subsidy of up to $7.5 minion. The distinguished senior Senator from Illinois (Mr. Prac¥) has a cornmission set up to study whether he shall run for the Presidency or not, and ff he decides to run and is able toget sufficient private contributions he would be eligible from Illinois (Mr. P_.ncY) has a cornOn this side of the aisle the distinguished senior Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. KENNEVY) would be eligible, if he were able to get sufficient private contributions, for a subsidy of $7.5 million. Some of the other candidates who have run in the past would be eligible, The distinguished Senator from South Dakota (Mr. MCGOVERN) has shown he can get small contributions in abundance so he would be almost certain to receive a subsidy of $7.5 million if he ran for the Presidency. This is a strange type reform. If that were the law the candidates for the Presidential nomination of the two major parties could receive up to $7.5 million out of the Public Treasury, and that is provided under this bill. Mr. President, you can rest assured that there will be a cry throughout this land for true reform, and that would be to do away with this $7.5 miUion-per-candidate subsidy plan. That is what the reform would be. It is not reform to set up a subsidy program for Presidential nomlnation candidates. Tha_ is not reform. That is subsidizing politicians, and that is not in the public interest, in the judgment of the Senator from Alabama. Now, Mr. President, when the bill first came to the floor of the Senate I questioned the distinguished junior Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. PELL), who was one of the original sponsors of the bill. ! pointed out to him that my examination of the bill did not disclose that there was a starting point for the making of contributions which would be matchable under the provisions of this bill. He stated that that was true. So I asked him if that would indicate, then, that contributions made possibly several years ago, prior to the passage of the bin,_ would have to be matched out of the Public Treasury if they otherwise eomplied with the law. The distinguished Senator from Rhode Island considered there was no starting point, so these contributions made sometime back would be matchable, I also pointed out to the distinguished Senator that I saw no statement that the Presidential elections referred to would be the last Presidential election, and it S 5069 appeared that a man could take the position, "I cannot run in 1976; I am not quite ready and others are better known; I will wait until 1980." So contributions that a person gets now would work toward the 1980 race or the 1984 race. I asked the Senator if that would be matchable out of the Public Treasury. Oh, yes, that would be matchable, too. Would it be possible, then, to have one class o:_recipients of the Federal subsidy running for President in 1976, another class running in 1980, and another in 19847 'Well, he does not see anything to prevent it; that is what the law would seem ta provide. A casual reading of the bin would indicate that andthat was confirraed by the distinguished junior Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. PrLL),_ Now, Mr. President, they talk about whether this is an incumbent's bill or whether it is a challenger's bill; does it make better provishms for the incumbent, or does it make better provision for the challenger? Well, I stated here on the floor before, and possibly some Senators were not here then, as I see it this bill providing for the matching of candidates' contributions in the primary---I startec[ to say for the House and Senate races but it alse applies in Presidential races, as well--the candidate in the ptimary who is weU known, who is the incumbe:at, who is in high office already, is in a better position to obtain more funds and contributions than the norlincumbent who is the less well-known candidate. I use as an example the State of Callfornla. There, Mr. President, it is permitred to receive in contributions $1.4 milliorL in the primary. By the way, I neglected to mention that the purpose of the_amendment is to cut down_n the amount of permissible contributions, and I will gat to that a little later. If all of his contributions Were $250 or less, or $100 or less in the case of a House or Senate candidate, he could receive in private contributions up to $700,000, and the Government wou_d match that with $700,000. I use for an example a lesser known candidate who might receive $100,000. My attention was called to the fact that it took $125,000 to even start the matching, but for the purpose of the illustration, the lesser known candidate receives $100,000 in matchable contributions. 'The better known candidate, the incumbent, if you please, receives, in this hypothetical instance, $700,000 in eligible contributions. Therefore, there is a $600_000 spread, so to speak--a $600,000 advantage--as between the incumbent an,_l the challenger. Thai; is a pretty big advantage. Let us see what happens when the formula ,vf Federal matching is applied. There is a $600,000 spread before the match_ng takes place. The lesser-knov_a candidate's $100,000 is doubled, and he ends up with $2.00,000 to draw on. The incumbent, being better known, having done favors for hundreds of people, and being the favorite, I assume, would be able to receive larger amounts in contributions. In the hypothetical instance° having received $700,000, that is matched 327 S 5070 CONGRESSIONAL by the Federal Government, so he ends up with campaign funds of $1.4 million, The challenger, having been at a $600,000 disadvantage before the public financing helps out, being $600,000 behind, when publi,e financing gets through with him, he ts $1.2 million behind his better known challenger, his better known incumbent, So what is there here for the challenger? It looks to the Senator from'Alabama as though the advantage lies with the incumbent, but we hear a whole lot of pious statements that a bill of this sort, public financing, is needed to do away with large contributions. We do not need public financing to do away with large contributions; all we have to do is pass S. 372. That cuts it down to $3,000 per contribution, But the pending amendment which, after these few preliminary remarks I have gotten, to, makes this provision. The $3,000 is too high. The $3,000 permissible contribution is too high, in the opinion of the Senator from Alabama. Mr. KEi_.NEDY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. ALLEN. Yes, I am glad to yield, Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I have been listening to the comments of the Senator from Alabama, and I am interested in the. basis for his feeling that the $3,000 contlqbution limit is too high. As I understand it, the genius of the proposal that has come out of the Rules. Committee is that it provides the aitemmtives of either public or private financing. It leaves the decision to the individual candidate as to whether he wants to choose one method or the other to finance his campaign, or a combination of the two. S. 372, which also came out of the Rules Committee, was debated here on the floor of the Senate last July, and by an overwhelming vote of some 80 to 8, it was the considered and overwhelming judgment of the Senate that $3,000 was a realistic limit for private contributions--low enough to prevent the most serious abuses of large contributions, but high enough to enable candidates to finance their campaigns without undue difficulty, I wonder why the Senator from Alabama, who has obviously taken such a strong position in OPposition to public financing, is offering an amendment whose effect may well be to eliminate the possibility of private financing of campaigns for public office, by setting the contribution limits at a level so low that no candidate may be able to fir[anco his campaign privately, i_ost experts would say, I think,,tj_at this amendment would make public financing the only realistic way to go. It seems that ori the one hand, the Senator isl;aying, "I am opposed to any public financing of campaigns," but on the other hand, he is saying, "I am going to make it extremely difficult to finance campaigns privately, by fixing the contribution limits at very low amounts." I would appreciate hearing what evideuce the Senator from Alabama has which indicates that those who are attempting to run. for election to the Senate or the ]louse, particularly those who are virtually unknown, will be able to 328 RECORD -- SENATE April 2, 19 74 l]Lnance their campaig, xs _mder his J:nftuenced by contributions that they amendment. How is a c_ndidate going rczil;ht accept. to build up a recognition factor or deI thin:t_ that Members of the House and velop the kind of suppol't to fina_me a filenate ,,;hould show restraint; in this fold. campaign in a major irdustrial 'State, .1:think they should be wilting to adopt where hundreds of thousands, or even _. lower level of contributions, a lower millions, of d¢,llars are now routinely _levelof ,';pending. I will submit that public spent. How will they be able to reach _Lnancing, far from cutting down on the t:hat amount of money b-g contributions _mount of average expenditures in poof $100 or less? ![fica1 r_;mes, is going to escalate, in the And his effort to raise funds will be jadgmer_t of the Senator from Alabama. more difficult, because other candidates Sol[ believe that the best way to reform for other offices wiU be trying to tap the 'i/he eleci;ion process, the best way to get same pool of small contributors. What 'i;rue reform--I will certainly say we are happens when tK)th candidates for Presi_:.ot going to get true reform just by turndent, both candidates for ';he E_,enate, and ing the bili over to the taxpayers--the both candidates foF a /louse seat are best wg7 to get true reform is to limit trying to raise smaU contribut:ions in the _rveryb_:ly--the incumbent and the ehais_me congressional district? ]:s the pool ]enger--.to the overall expenditures and of contributors inexhaustible? What if 'i.o :limit the amount of permissible concandidates for State mid local office '_ributions. are also makir_ the eft)ri to tap the Mr. I{ENNEDY. Mr. President, will the pool? Woqld not the well run dry? _:!',enator yield? I wonder why the Senator is opposed Mr. A:[_LEN.I had not finishedanswerto what I think has beer. the very conJ:!lg, but I shall be glad to yield. s_;ructive and positive compromise in S. Mr. B:ENNEDY. If we follow the rea3044. Public arid private financing can sorting l:ff the Senator from Alabama, it exist side by side as reasonab'.[e alterna'_:villlead us to publi c financing. He is ti.yes. A candids,te could s:_y, "I am going talking about reducing .the amount of to run on public financing, so that I will contributions to an exceedingly low limit. not be obligated to any _;pecial interest That is the essence of public financing groups, and so that I will be acoountable _.n¢l the dollar checkoff--the dollar to all the people." Ano';her candidate c.heckol_i can pay for the entire 1976 could say, "I ara going 'z) rely on pti)!"residential election by what are, in rate financing, because :: would rather efft_et, $1 contributions from millions of not use public funds for my campaign, I:_axpaye:t's. and the danger of Sl_.'cial influence If we follow the reasoning of the Sengroups is not very great if their contribu_L,terfrc,m Alabama, I think it leads us ti.one are limited to $3,000." To me, the right in'l;o the public financing legislation amendment of the Senstor from Ala- which we are currently considering. Inbama runs the risk that it abolishes _:.tead oi large contributions, the Senator completely the opportunity tx} run with from Alabama thinks that $1,000 is too these kinds of alternatives. ]:_rge.So the Senator from Alabama goes I would like to know whether the Sena'1o $250 in a Presidential race and $100 tot from Alabama can indieab_ to us the :in a' cont,_ressional race. amount of morley that Las been raised I_t ets carry that argument to the already to fund Senate races. I would _:,oint-of the dollar checkoff periods for like to know whether ti,at raoney has '_::heindividual taxpayer to contribute $1. actually been contributed in arnounts of U:'hat is the system of public financing $100 or less. I wonder whether the Senathat hm_;been incorporated into this bill. for from Alabama has any flgu:res on that Zl::tmakes the Members of the Congress point, responsible to all the people because all Mr. ALLEN. l: thank th _ Senator from I.he peol_le are financing the; campaigns. i_[assachusetts lor his cornment. I am deMr. A:tff_EN. Mr. President, I thank the lighted that he :finally got aroumd bo ask_!:istinguished Senator from. Massachui_tg a question rather than making selfs.atl_. The point that the Senator from serving comments. _labam_[ is making is that if we limit I would say [a the Sent,for :_rom Masc,ontrib_:tions to $250 in Presidential m_chnsetts that there is no magic in the _'aces and $100 in House and Senate. $3,000 figure. Certainly, it is a step in the r_ces, tlxere is no possibility of these evil, right direction, because under the present corrupting influences that the Senator law there is no effective llmi[t whatso:_rom M'_,ssachusetts fears. There will cerever. I support _;he $3,000 limit, if that is tainly be no way, for a vested interest to the best we can do. _;ain any support or. influence from a When S. 372 was before the Senate, if :I,,_ember of Congress ff his contribution the Senator v_[ll recall, there was an i_ limited to $100, or to $250 in a Presiamendment that sought t,) cut the $3,000 d.erttial :ace. It would be just as fair for down to $1,000. :fl I am rot mistaken, a {me as for the other. It would deprive the public service organizatLon known as lncumb_mt of his ability-k-supposed Common Cause recommended the $1,000 _bility---to get large sums of money, and limitation. The Senator from Alabama _:'ould pat him on the same basis as the voted for that limitation. At that time he c,hallentl:er, whose contributions in all would have voted for a stricter limitation. _:.kelihoc,d would be small. The Senator from Alabama ils not on'e So thc effect of the amendment of the .who believes .that Members of the House _!;enator from Alabama would be to have and Senate, ant. those who make races to s. leveling influence, and not have the the point Where they migt t challenge the biggest :md fullest amounts, as would be iV[embers of the House a:td 8:snare, are _:,ermisslble under the bill as presently people of such nature thai. the_Lrconduct, dra,_n. :1:feel that a $3,000 limit ts better tiaeir votes, and their ac:ions would be Limn no limit whatsoever. When we were APril 2, 197_ CONGRESSIONAL unable to reduce the amount in S. 372 to the $1,000 limit, the Senator from Alshams was glad to suppo_ the $3,000 limit. At that time the Senate took a stand for regulating campaign contribu¢Aons and expenditures in the private sector. It saw no need back in July, at the time S. 372 was passed, of presenting a bill of a half a billion dollars every 4 years to the American taxpayers to ehable the politicians in the land to run for Federal omce. So, as the Senator from Alabama sees it, under the present bill there is no matching for amounts over $250 in Presidential nomination races and no matchtng for contributions over $100 in the House and Senate races. So, there must be something evil or sinister about contributions above that amount, therefore, ¢o cut them all down to the amount that the Federal Government will match, Thereby, we would help the challenger, the challenger being unable, according to the theory of the Senator from Massachusetts, to attract large contributions, So this would put the challenger on the same basis as the incumbent, because every dollar that each of them would get would be matched, and the incumbent would not have the supposed advantage of getting out and getting large contributions that would not be available to the challenger. So, as the Senator from Alabama Sees it, this amendment cuts contributions down to $250 during the presidential races and to $100 for the House and Senate races, and certainly a challenger's amendment, It is a little man's amendment. It is an average man's amendment, and would better enable any person who aspired to Federal office to become a candidate, and to be on a level with the incumbent, Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield further Mr. ALLEN. Yes. Mr. KENNEDY. As I:understand the thrust of the Senator's argument, he is concerned about challengers, Mr. ALLEN. That is one of my concerns, Mr. KENNEDY. One of his concerns on this particular amendment, Mr..AIJ._N. Honest elections is my main concern. Mr. KENNEDY. Honest elections. Mr. ALLEN. Yes. Mr. KENNEDY. His concern is to make sure that a challenger will be able to finance his campaign and present his campaign program and campaign platform. Second, he is concerned about the sinister influence of large campaign contributions, Mr. ALLEN. I was quoting the distinguished Senator from Massachusetts in that regard. The supposed sinister influence of large campaign contributions. Mr. KENNEDY. The fact remains, Mr. President, that the best way to provide for challengers is to adopt the present provisions of S. 3044, because that will make it possible for the challenger to receive the same amount of money as the incumbent. Surely, if an incumbent and challenger are both forced to cornpete for small contributions, as the Senator's amendment would require, the RECORD -- SENATE challenger would be under a serious handicap, because the incumbent would generally be far better known, So I believe the challenger would be served best by providing him with the opportunity to accept public financing for his campaign. If we carry through the logic and the reasoning of the Senator's argument, if his goal is to Provide equity to the challenger, tb.at is what S. 3044 would do. It provides an equal amount to the challenger and the incumbent, so that the challenger can go to the American people and say, "I am accountable to you, because you funded and financed the campaign." Or, the individual may say, "I do not want to use public funds, I would like to run my campaign on private contributions." In this case, we have, to provide some limit, some cutoff point:, which will provide sufficient funds to flnance a politlcal campaign, but would be sufficiently low that the candidate will feel obligated to his contributors. We have 1_ avoid the situation in which a candidate no longer has the appearance of owing ibis primary obligation to the American people. What the Rules Committee has done is close the loophole in the election law that permitted W. Clement Stone, whose business happens to be the health insurance business, to contribute $2 million in 1972. The bill would reduce the total amount that he would be able to contribute to just $3,000. ! think that is real progess, down to $3,000 from $2 million, What the Rules Committee has attempted to do is give the incumbent and the challenger an alternative. If the challenger wants publio funds, he can go to the Treasury for public financing, If he wants to use private funds, he can do so, but only at the rate o_ $3,000 per contributor. I do not maintain that $3,000 is necessarily the proper figure, Yc,u ca_ get a difference of opinion as to v hether it should $2,000 or $4,000. These are ballpark figures, but they carry through what I think is the sound intent and purpose of the limitation, and that is to guarantee to the American people that no single contributor :is going to have undue influence, in the committee rooms or in the Halls of the Congress of the United States. Mr. ^Iz,]eN. Mr. President, ! thank the Senator for his valuable contribution to the discussion. I was interested when he said S. 3044 would provide the challenger and the incumbent with an equal amount of money. Obviously that is incorrect, in this respect: that one of the supposed purposes of the biltl is to give the challenger somewhere near an even break with the incumbent, because of the incumbent's admitted ability to raise larger sums in contributions for campaign financing, I submit to the Senate that S. 3044 compounds the advantage t;hat the incumbent already has, because if the incumbent can obtain more money in contributions than the challenger, then the contribution of the subsidy ar the handout by the Federal Government to the incumbent is measured by the amount of his private contributions, as is the contribution to the challenger; it is measured by the amount of the contributions $ 507.1. that he has received. So if the incumbent has already received more in contributions t_han the challenger, how in the world is it helping tile challenger if the Federate Government doubles the amount that the incumbent has? Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. ALLEN. When I finish my thought I will be glad to. I assume that the Senator from Massachusetts was right here when I gave this illustration: Take the State of California, where, .in the primary, it is possible for the Government to contribute as a subsidy to a candidate in a primary election up to $700,000, based on the amounts contributed by the individuals to the incumbent or the challenger. The incumbent, supposedly having the abfiity to get mOre in private contributions, might well obtain in the private sector $700,000 in matchable contributions, whereas the less known challenger might have to be satisfied with receiving $100,000 in contributions from individual contributors. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. ALLEN. Let me finish my point. I understand that it takes $125,000 to trigger this procedure, but it is harder th} work out the problem of mathematics with $125,000, I will say to the Senator, than with $100,000. The challenger, receiving $100,000 as against the $700,000 received by the incumbertt, that is the position he finds himself in before campaign reform, before public financing sheds its beneficent influence on the race. But at that time the Federal Government comes in, and presents to the incmnbent $700,000 and to the challenger it presents a check for $100,000; so that, whereas the challenger was only $600,000 behind the incumbent before public financing enters into the picture, when public financing gets through with him, he is $1.2 million behind the incumbent. So it is hard for the Senator from Alabama t,) see how the public financing aids the challenger, it looks to me like it is taking care of the incumbent just as this provision for $7.5 million for the rations candidates for the nomination for the presidency takes care of Members of the 93d Congress. So :[i believe that this amendment should be adopted. Il; would prevent the case of the incumbent, supposedly able to get larger sums in contributions than the challenger, receiving the large contributions and would put the incumbent and the challenger on exactly the same basis. _.['ney would be limited to a $100 contribution ff _ they are running for House or Senate. I might say to the distinguished Sen.ator from Maryland (Mr. MATHZAS),after his campaign has proceeded up to a certain point, arid certain contributions have been received in his race, that he put a $100 limit on contributions that he is to receive in his race for the SenatA_ right now. I notice that Representative VANIX4of Ohio is not going either to accept a con.tribution or to make an expenditure. My hat is off to him, to a man who will re.. ceive no contributions and make no ex.. 32'9 S 5072 CONGRESSIONAL penditures. I would be glad to vote for an amendment of that sort on this bill and would gladly abide by it. If aH expenditures and all contributions were eliminated, that would suit the Senator from Alabama. Certainly the limit of $250 in a PTesidential race and $100 in a House or Senate race, properly enforced, would see a transformation in American politics and in the American Government, if this amendment were to be adopted and it became the taw of the land. So, limit contributions to $250 for the presidential nomination or the presidenrial general election. Limit contributions to $100 in House and Senate primary races, So, Mr. President, this would be a reform amendment. Public financing is not reform. T1_zt is just an added burden upon the taxpayer. That is all public financing is. Does it help to clean up American politics and provide a system whereby $15 million could be spent by a candidate for the Democratic or Republican nomination for President, as much as half of it coming from the Federal Government? Put them on the same basis. Ii they want to run., let them run. If they have the support, they will get the votes. If they have not the support, they will not. It is as simple as that. 'It is not necessary for the American taxpayer to :provide $7 ½ million worth of hoopla and carnival'type politics. That is what this money will be used for. It will put on a big show. It is not necessary to spend that kind of money to present the issues to the American people. Whoever gave the public finance peGple the idea that by making more money available in the couldst for the presidential nomination, that would clean things ul)? RECORD -- SENA'_dE April 2, 197j The way to clean things up is to leave fir_ancing of Federal elections in the ptirate sector :and to reduce the amount of contributions, So, Nrr. President, it is a q_aestion of wZaether we want to bring campaigns down to reality. I remember reading back in the 1920's w;here one Sen.ator from a .%tare was denied a seat here in the Senate for hay:ing spent I thin;_ it was a:'ound $100,000 :in a race for the Senate. What we need to do is to 10ass a law limiting contributions in t;xe private sec_or and then proceed to ,mforce it and not just turn around and h and the money over to the candidate at _;he expense of the taxpayer, I might say, _o, Mr. President, that the Federal subsidies that go to the variGUS candidates that are paid ils the primaries on the be.sis of the matching contxibutions, they :are not paid OrEthe basis of matching expenditures. So that after the race is over, it will be up to, the Government to get b.ack its money ff it could, if all the money was not expended plx)perly, Mr. :President, there is zLothing in this bill that provides for prudent management of this Federal subsic y. It is handed over to the candidate on a silver platter, both in the primary and the general election. There is nothing in [.ere that I can read that would prevent a candidate hirlng his brother-in-law t(, serve as his campai_,m manager at a ,,;alary of $100,000. There :is nothinl: in here that would prevent a candidale from giving some person or agency an averl:ide on all campaign exper_ses. The money would be thrown away, :frittered away. But I do nc t suppose that :is reason enough to ask that the Federal Government not. institute a subsidy program--the fact _fimt the money' might be wasted. But wasted it will be--we can count on that---because some c:a_udidates would never have had it so good as under this public subsidy. The F(deral Government would be pumping more money into their campaigns than the_ ever dreamed of. More than $2 million _;o each candi'date for the Senate in each general eleclion in California, $1.9 rc:illion to each Mr. PJ:esident, the distingxllshed for:hi.er Senlttor from Delaware, Mr. John J. 'Willian_;, had a most distinguished eareer in tl:xe U.S. Senate for some 24 years, I believe He was such a high-minded and :able Sen ator, he was such a man of int,!:grity end nobility of purpose, that he ',.vas kno,arn for many years as the con,_;:'ience of the U.S. Senate, and he re'l:::ced from the Senate voluntarily at the .i_eak of his career. I heard him on one (x',casion not on the Senate floor, explain '_i_::Lathe had proposed a constitutional amendment that no Member of Congress s:tould t:_ke the oath of office as a Momher of Congress after he reached the age 0_' 65. In other words, if he were 64 at the ti:me and took the oath of office, he might :f]maishout his term; but after he reached :bLs 65th birthday--I could be wrong on t:i:).edate: it could have been 66 or 67, but :I believe it was 65--he would no longer be eligible ta commence a term :in Congress. He stated that while that amendment a_)ver di,_ get anywhere in the Senate, e yen tho ugh it was not agreed to, he felt bt:)und b:y :its provisions inasmuch as he had pro])osed it. It takes a mighty big :n::a_l to adopt that attitude. It takes a :n:.an of ilreat integrity, integrity one has {;:) stdmi]'e: So, having served four terms :ia. the Senate, and having passed the age of 65, he did not feel that he should ask 'L;i::tepeolcle of Delaware to return him to 'tZ:xeSem_,te, as I feel certain they would :have do:se overwhelmingly, and he ret:ired frc,m the Senate. So certainly he wo_2d to:ko an objective view; he would :not have a biased view of an issue pend)y).g before the Senate. But this great man,-this conscience of I::iae U.S. Senate, has written an article v'hich ai)peared in the Reader's Digest :in. D/Iarch 1974. Mr. P:_:esident, I ask unanimous cons<_nt to :!'lave this article printed in the iF_'.ECOR__',t the conclusion of my remarks. The P_ESIDING OFFICER. Without objeetio_:t, it is so ordered. (See e>_hibit 1.) Now, Mr. President, this amendment does not eliminate public financing. I wish it did. I wish it could be adopted. All it provides for is that it shall be the limit of a contribution in the private sectot by an individual as an individual, It still provides for public financing, It still provides for matching. But it puts everyone on an even basis. Any challonger, if he has got any following, could get out and raise campaign contributions in this area up to a $100 contribution. It would certainly remove any sinister infiuence. I do not quite understand the thinking of the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. KE_Nr_Y) that every Member of the House and Senate is susceptible to improper irzfiuence. I just have a higher opinion of ;Ulembers of the House and Senate thaxt do some who espouse the candidate for the Senate in the State of :New York. It would be haudecL to them, ;Mr. President. Let us examine that f)r a moment. What do Senators make" In a 6-year period, they make a quart ._r of a million dollars, roughly that. Yet in California the Government is going tc pay each senatorial candids,te, for his expenses, $2,121,000, and lesser amounts on down. Talk about campaign re::orm. That is some reform. It is change, yes. But every change is not reform. Reform, I would think, would mean to impr)ve, _o perfect. W'ell, is that improving the election process, to provide s_ campaig:_ ftmd, out of the public Treasury, nine times as great as a Senator's earnings in 6 years of his term? There is something wrong with a system of that sort. Mr.._,LLW. N. Mr. President; former ,Su)nator Williams has made :five suggesI::ions as l;o reform of the election process. :[ belier( that Members of the Senate :t:_.ight profit by reading this article and '_;!:xey mi$:ht profit at this time if I were '_,:, read excerpts from the article. The '.article i; entitled "After W'atergate, A ]?Lan to Control Campaign Bankrolling." ./_ man k:zown for years as the conscience oli the Senate proposes five essential .,steps to remove the for sale sign from the '[:;.S. Government." cause of public financing. I just do not believe that any Member--I do not know of any Member of the House or Senate who would act improperly as a result of having received a campaign contribution, I feel certain that ff contributions were limited to $100, I do not feel that that would put any Member of the House or Senate under a tremendous obligation to any person, to limit contributions to $100. The Federal O.overnment, after having _mneed up to ,';700,000 for each candidate in the primary, now :;ets up a campaign fund for each candidate i)a the genera1 election that is nine ti:nos as large as a Senator will earn as a Member of the US. Senate in a 6-year period. If that is campaign reform, Member_ of the Senate have a different idea of reform from that of the junior Senator frore Alabama. 330 I have heard language like that on the :(loot of the Senate, that that was the s i:atus Gl affairs in this country. I would ;h:zte to _;.hink that were true,. Let us see 'what he suggests. Possibly he has a pub]!ic finan:ing plan to suggest. I did not l_l'LirLkhe would when I first picked up l$]:'_emagazine and read the article. On resxting the article, I find he does not :a_ake that suggestion. His first suggesti_)n is t(, shorten the campaign: Politlcat campaigns cost so much, b,_cause tJ:xcy last so long. in part, Well, _he Senator from Connecticut .cMr. WI_CKER) had a plan to shorten :_):'_.ecampaign. His amendment did many Apri_ 2, 19 75 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE S 5073 other things, but I do believe Members of the Senate might be willing to vote to shorten campaigns. As a matter of television time. With costs in other metropolitan areas--New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia--even it is posts not surprising that candidates higher, for federal lng age down to 10 cents per person of voting age in the general election, and in the tile primary cut per it down 7_ voting cents from 10 cents person to of fact, I believe last year we did pass a bill to shorten the campaign by providlng the primary must be held closer to the time of election. That was a good measure, but also in the House and Senate races, campaigns should be shortened, They last too long. There is too much apathy and there is too much boredom, I suggest the0t is why the sponsors of the bill try to create a $15 million fund for these various candidates for the Presldential nomination, so that they can shake some of the boredom and apathy out of the people and send up a lot of balloons, have a lot of girls dancing, with bands playing, parades, and the like paid for by the taxpayers, of course, We need to remove some of the apathy from Federal campaigns. I believe the suggestion by Senator Williams to shorten the campaign would do that. I would hope the manager of the bill might offer an amendment to the bill that would accomplish that purpose. I do not believe he feels that the provisions of the bill are so sacrosanct they cannot be amended, although I admit he has not favored the amendments the Senator from Alabama has offered. I do believe there are amendments he would agree to. The article states further: The custom of prolonged campaign_'lg originated at a time when much of the country was sparsely populated and a candidate had to travel by train or even on horseback for many months to communicate with the electorate. This tradition has been made obsolete by the Jet airplane, television and other mass media. Yet our campaigns still drag on needlessly, consuming vast amounts of money and providing endless repetition, I recall that after President Eisenhower once spoke in my state, of Delaware, I cornpltmented him on his speech. "Well, Senator," he replied, "the first time I made that speech, z thought it was pretty good. The next ten times I made it, I thought it was okay. Now I've made it so many times I think it's terrlble." had to spend $32 million for TV and $28 million for radio in 1972. In urging free time for legitimate candldates, it is important to recognize that television and radio stations exist and make handsome profits because they have been given channels, public property--namely, sion of which there axe transmisa limited number. So it seems to me only fair that the stations partially repay the public at election time by providing bona-fide candldates with the means of free communication of their political views, Then, skipping ahead, and the entire article will be printed in the R_.coR_, he goes Oll to say: 3. Get Big Business and Big Labor out o/ politiea_ bankrolling. The law has long recognized, in theory at least, that it is wrong to allow corporations and unions to try to buy votes through political donations. As far back as 1907, Congress prohibited business contributions and unsecured loans by banks for political purposes, a ban that was reaffirmed Laws enacted in 1925 and 1971. Oongress byapplied the same prohibition to unions in 1943 and 1947. But corporations and unions---as well as both major political parties--have flouted the intent of these prohibitions with virtual impunity, Mr. President, I submit that that is what the amendment I have offered, No. 1059, would do. It would make small contributors the backbone of political financing, age. I doubt that there is a politician alive who has not felt that way or who could not tell the people all he knows and thinks in two or three months. Thus, I believe that Congross should fix a uniform, nationwide date for the primaries and nominating convertlions affecting all federal offices. BY cornmerxcing the primary campaigns in early August, and the general-election campaigns in early October, we would at once sharply lower the cost of politics. At the of same time, we would improve the quality political discourse and heighten public interest in it, Of $100. That would provide $200,000 in a primary. Bear in mind that this amendment does not remove the Federal sub- WhUe reducing He is talking the costs of campaigns-about suggestions he has made that would reduce the cost of campaigns. I do not see that this bill would reduce any costs-Make small contributors the baclebone of political financing. While reducing the costs of campaigns, we should endeavor to spread the legitimate costs that do remain among as many citizens as possible, So, Mr. limitation $100. Say ua_ls in his President, I have proposed a for House and Senate races of a candidate got 2,000 individState to comply with the limit That is a most constructive suggestion made by the distinguished former Senator from Delaware, Mr. John J. Williams. I continue to read from the article, and this, in some respects, has been discussed on the floor: sidy. The Federal Government would then match that with another $200,000, That would provide $400,000 for a candida%e in a primary, That is over 10 times what the Senator from Alabama would spend in the primary this year in his home State. But all he would have to do would be to get 2,000 people to make a contribution of $100, and he would have a fund of $400,000. Does he want more than that? This is the primary; it is not the general election, It certainly is not beyond the realm of the possible or likelihood that this pro- "2. Grant rights." vision, political free television time and mailing The distinguished Senator from Delaware (Mr. ROTH), I believe, has in mind offering amendments that would carry out these suggestions of his former colleague, Senator Williams. Oandidates ia the seven Oonga_s_ional districts in and around Detroit usually pay a_bca_t $2000 for one minute of prime network if adopted, climate of would this change country the by putting campaign financing in the hands of people who would contribute $100 or less to House or Senate races and $250 or less in Presidential races, still carrying forward the matching feature, If this amendment were adopted, we could follow it with an amendment that would cut the 15 cents per person of vol- Sena'_or WXLLIAMS said, and I beliew_ this is the best af the five suggestion:; that he made: Make small contributions the backbone of political financing, What is not what this bill does. This bill permits contributi, ons of up to $3,000 per person. For a man and his wife, it would be $6,000, and I daresay they would find other ways to make $3,000 contributions;. Technically, present law makes it filegal for anyone to givea adonor candidate than $5,000. However, ac:ay more contribute to unlimited numbers of local committees establis:hed solely to funnel money to a candidate. As I pointed out at the start of my remarks--Thus, big contributors continue to supply a disproportionate share of campaign funds. I believe if the word ever got aroun,d in this country that who elections financed by people could were not being contribute more than $250 to a presidential race, and $100 to a race for the Senate or the House, we would have a whole lot more interest being taken in our political campa:[gns and in our election process and in the operation of government generally, The people would feel that they have an interest in a part of the election process. Mr. President, I believe this amend-merit is an amendment that should re-. ceive widespread support throughout the country, and I would like to see a vote on it, but I feel that we ought to ws;it overnight for a vote on this amendment. One m_endment the Senator from Alabama offered last week in order to accommodate the leadership. The Senator from Alabama agreed to bring it up. There was no opportunity to test the feeling of the people throughout the country. Senators made their decision on the spur the moment, the amendment was of defeated after and having received 36 votes. That was an amendment which provided that no Member of the 93d Congress would be eligible to receive any Federal matching funds for a presidential nomination campaign for the presidential term starting January 20, 1977, which is the next term, of course. Th:_t amendment, if adopted, would have prevented any Member of the House or any Member of the Senate from receiving any Federal subsidy to aid his campaign for the nomination of either of the two major parties for President in 1970. It is clearly an amendment that should have receiw_d widespread support, because it is not right for Members of this Congress to set up a brand new scheme to draw money from the public treasury when they will benefit from such subsidy. And if that amendment had been discussed for sortie 2 or 3 days, I believe it would have received a larger vote. So, Mr. President, I believe that this amendment, cutting down the $3,000 downto $250 for Presidential nomination campaigns and to $100 for House and Senat_ primary and general elections, is 331 S 5074 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENA'YE a most inll_rtant amendment and one that should receive the careful consideratlon of all Members of the Senate. I only wish that more Senators were present to head this matter being discussed. Let us read on: Recognizing tltat a candidate should not become beholden to a comparatively iow larg_ donors, Congress is currently considerlng a proposal to have the federal government finance campaigns for national office, Worthy as the aims of this proposal are, ][ think such a plan is both undesirable and impractical. That reminds me, Mr. President, of something the Washington Post has to say _about this plan. They did not think nluch of the primary plan. Let us see what they said. I do'not usually quote the Washington Post. However, I think their comment here is rather interesting. This is from the lead editorial of March 26, speaking of S. 372, a bill which I voted for in the Senate, as did most Senators, since the bill passed by a vote of 82 to 8. The lead editorial tn the Washington Post of date, speaking of the bill, though not that by name, had this to say: thus the Senate last summer sent the · · · House a very solid bill to curb private giving aud spending and to strengthen the enforcement of the elections laws. And today the Senate begi_ debate on a very ambitious bill to extend public financing to all federal primary general-election · . . Theand problem with the campaigns, latest Senate bill is that it tries to do too much, too soon, and goes beyond what is either feasible or workable. _r one thing, the bill provides for full publiic financing of congressional Eeneral-election campaigns, and that is clearly indigestible in the House this year, since the moderate t_[ouse leadership even chokes the more matching-grant approachon embodied in t&e Anderson-Udall bill. That goes along With my suggestion that we ought to try to wait for the House to send us a bill and let us tack our provisions on and then let it go to, conference. As the editorial suggests, this plan is indigestible in the House this year since the House leadership even chokes on the more moderate matchinggrant approach embodied in the Anderson-Udall bilJ. ! continue to read from the editorial: :The more serious defects in the Senate bill involve the inclusion of primaries, That is one of the things that the Senator from Alabama has been trying to bear down on. I continue to read from the editorial: That is one of the things that the Senat0r from Alabama has been trying to bear down on. I continue to read from the editorial: The more serious defects in the Senate bill involve the inclusion of primaries. No aspect of the federal elections process is more motley and capricious than the present steeplechase of presidential primaries, That is pretty rough langauge about our friends who go out seeking the presidentiai nomination. And we have stone of those in this body, although they are not here right now. However, they are Members of this body. I continue to read from the editorial: No aspect of the Federal elections process is more motley and capricious than the pres- 332 ent steeplechase of presidential primaries, That is what the W_shington Post thinks about this questk,n o_._ the psire aries, I continue to read fro= the editorial: Injecting even partial public funding Into thais procea_, without ratlont_lizing it in any ,other way, kames little sense As for congressional primaries, they are so varied iL size, cost and significance among the states that no single system of public support seems justifiable withe.ut much more careful thought. So I say, "Amen'; to thE.t phase of the editorial from the Washington Post. Mr. President, I was rerainded of that editorial by the :_rticle written by former Senator Williams. I read again from the article by former Senator Williams: Worthy as the alms of this proposal are, _ '_hink such a plan is both andeslrable and _mpractlcable. Fo_ one thing, Federal financlng would make z9olitlcal parties unresponsire to the people. Ouaranteed millions of dollars from the public tr_,_asury, a party Womd pursue extremist or outworn alms year after year simply because it would not have to go to the peopIe for financial support, And there is a much more ]important point. In the general elections, if we do del_rive the people of their right to make contributions, we would j_t sa;_ that the taxpayer is goillg to pay it ali and the People do not have to participate and that we do not need thei:. · mc,ney. How n%%lCh interest is a membe:, of the public going to 'take in the election then. There is enough apathy _lready. There is enough disinterest already in the political process without a bill o_ thl.,_ sm_ that Would make for more apathy and more di_'_interest. I read again from the ar_;lcle: In areas that are predon.inantly Democratic or Republican, candldl,tes ¢,f the lessfavored party wouhl recelve lax frmds vastly ali';proportionate to their popular support, That is another good p>int--in areas that are predominantly Democratic or Republican, candidates o:_ the less-fa: cored party would receive tax ftmds vastly disprol_)rti0n_te to thei:' popular support. In other words,, if the Democrats trove 80 percent of a district and the Republicans have 20 percent, then both candidates would get the same amount of the public subsidy even though the people in the area are predominantly the other way. I continue t_ read from the article: The federal-fina_acingpropc,',_l also seeks to impose _ ceiling on overall campaign expenditures by lim:(ting the a:nount a candtdate may spend ar._ by restricting individual tio_ation._ to $100. In reality, this subsidy setleme could easll _ lead to ev _n costlier camt_igns, wittx the f(._leral treasury simply addlng on another layer of mone_, Incidentally, that has been the system of Federalprogr_ms in the country. They start out small. There is one program--I will not say which one it was---that was j_t added as an afterthought to an appropriation bill and I heard Senators disct_sing it. I believe they put in some $40 million in this particular _rogr_m. lin a matter of some 6 or 7 years, it had increased and mushroomed up to a billion dollars; and it was just put on as an afterthought on an appropriation bill. i_,O that could well--col taini[y not to April 2, I9 74 that extent, but an increase, in the program would certainly come about. They rs,re already talking about doubling the amount of the checkoff, doubling the amount of the income tax credit, doublil_g th,_ amount of the deduction. So, _,,_. Pre_;ident, we could look for a furthor esc:_lation of this Federal subsidy if it ever bi_omes law--this adcUtional Fede;t'a] subsidy, because, as I have already pointed out, we already had subsidizat ion to a certain point. While candidates themselves could not exc,_ed specified limits, nothing would prevent ,,_<,-called 'public interest" organizations from 'u_ing th_,,tr own money to promote politlc:ians of their kept choice.fromNorpromoting could a wealthy ,_yflicsseek,_;rbe himself b_fore he o/ticlally became a candidate. I notk,e that the chairman is making s,:_me holes from time to time. I would like, at _{;ome later date, to be informed aS tO just when a campaign gets started _:Mld when the limit of overall expendi'l;!.lres starts applying. A_ an alternative to straight federal fin:lmcing, ! think we should adopt an Idea :first advocated by President Kennedy. Its o t)Jective is to stimulate myriad small cont.:_ib'utton_, which would leave candidates _anobligaisd to a few big donors. Such stimulus could be provided by allowing taxpayers a 50-percent tax credit on donations up to, s_y, $300. Thus, if a man earning $10,000 and _ man earning $100,000 a year each cont'4buted $800, th_ two of them would be %seated equally--each would receive a tax a,b_te of $1_0. Well, that is a little higher than I feel they should go, but that is moving in the l:'hght dirge,orion, anyway. That is the right p_!an. And ! understand that the disting_fished Senator from North Carolina (Nfr. ER¥IN), joined by the distingu_hed S,_mator from Tennessee (Mr. BAKER), o]:_. temo:_ow will offer an amendment tl]_at WOli_ld strike title I and substitute ir_ lieu thereof a provision enlarging on ti:_e amo_mt of the credit; It might be this very same figure--I rather believ_ Jt ia--of :t;300. Simultaneously, to discourage large cont_tbuttonl_, Congress should bar a candidate from rec_iving money through, more than one committee-I think that is certainly a step in the r:_ght dir,_ction. Instead of having 200 or 3{)0 comxaittees, just have one. Just have one, who,_;e becks have to be audited. Just t_:;_ve one committee, so that these contribution_ cannot be split up and lost sight of, and come within the gift tax er,:emptien. I think that is fine, to have 6]:dy one committee. Congres;_ should bar a candidate from rece lying money through more than one cornmlttee and prohibit anyone from giving a candidate more than $300--with stiff tax penalties and Jail terms for those caught cleating. Candidacies founded upon the s_:ontaneeus, truly voluntary support of m_ny sm_dl contributors would be the most ltl;ely to produce the best political reproscntation for all the people. Item ._o. 5, suggested by Senator Williams: En/orce _he cam_atgn-/unding laws. If properly _nforced, existing statutes are, by s,nd large, adequate to deal with u_l instaz_ces of dishonesty that the will indivldalways be with u_. Thus, _o new laws were necessary _;_ring the past two years to successfully _:_osecute former Vice President Spire T. Apr.7 2, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL Agnew; Sen. Daniel Brewster of Maryland; Representatives Cornelius Gallagher of New Jersey and John Dowdy of Texas; and former Illinois Governor Otto Kerner. However, too often existing laws have not been enforced, To provide for enforcement of the reforms that inevitably will be enacted, Congress should establish a federal-election commtssion composed equally of Democrats and Republicans, RECORD _ SENATE A_I beyond Watergate we see flaws, inadequacies and multiplying problems in many sectors of our society. But, for all its defects, our democracy is still worth preserving and improving. Thus, it ls vital that the Congross begin now to cleanse our politics and thereby to revitalize our faith in the demoerotic process. If the men presently in Congress do not act convincingly and effectively in the coming months, then at the polls next November all of us can exercise the oldfashioned American recourse of replacing Thisbill does provide anupindependen_ election commissionmade pretty well themwith menwhowill. as SenatorWilliamssuggests. The assurance that future scandals .not be lcovered up, no matter who volved, wlll of itself help revlve public fidence, it watergate would be has damaged foqlish to will is incon- the country, and pretend otherwise, These are five made by former liams, of Delaware, tinuction in this who became of the Senate. excellent 'known as the Wildisand conscience not a single calls for public financing o,f these one of elections five them in the suggimtions, manner provided by this bill. He does suggest added credit to be allowed to individual taxpayers for their contributions, amd he does advocate requirin_f free broadcasts over te]ea/isJ_a. and radio at times. Mr. President, the Rules Committee has provided a most valuable paper iii- dicating the proposed candidates' ex- penditure population suggestions Senator John J. who served with body for 24 years, S 5075 Of limi_ation,_ figures as I ask printed There based of July unanimous consent in the RECORD. being no objection, ordered to be printed in on the U.S 1, 1973. to the the have table RecoRr, iit was a_'; follows: PRQPOSED CANDIDATE EXPENDITURELIMITATIONS, U.S. POPULATIONFIGURESAS gF JULY 1, 1973 Voting age population (VAP) (18 yrs and over) . Geographicalareas United StatesJPrimary2 ............. United States--General a............. Alabama........................... Alaska ............................. Arizona ............................ Arkansas........................... California........................... Colorado........................... Connecticut ......................... Delaware........................... District of Columbia ................. RoNda ............................. G4mrgia............................ Hawaii............................. idaho .............................. {Rinois............................. Indiana ............................ Iowa............................... Kamas ............................. Kentucky ........................... Louisiana ................... _....... Maine.............................. Mary}and,.......................... Massachusetts ...................... Michigan........................... Minnesota .......................... Mississippi ......................... Missouri ............................ Montana........................... Nebraska ........................... Nevada............................ New Hampshire..................... New Jersey ......................... New Mexico........................ New York .......................... North Carolina...................... North Dakota ....................... Ohio............................... Oklahoma ....... _.................. Oregon ............................. Pennsylvania ....................... Rhode Island ....................... South Carolina...................... South Dakota....................... Tennessee .......................... Texas .............................. Utah............................... Vermont ............................ Virginia ............................ Washington ......................... West Virginia....................... Wisconsin .......................... Wyoming........................... Outlying areas: Puerto Rico.................... Guam ....................... Virgin Islands ................... 143,403,0O0 141,656,000 2, 338,000 200,000 l, 345,000 l, 374,000 14,143,000 1, 631,000 2, 101,000 382,00O 529,000 5. 427,000 31140, 000 549, 000 501,000 7, 568, 000 3, 530,000 I, 957,000 l, 570,000 2, 235, 000 2, 399, 000 689, 000 2,720, 000 4, 006, 000 5, 922,000 2, 575,000 1,453,000 3, 251,000 474, 00O 1, 0¢2, 000 365,000 531,000 5, 030, 000 691,000 12,665, 000 3, 541,000 421,000 7, 175,000 1,832, 000 1,532, 000 8, 240, 000 677; 000 1,775, 000 454,000 2, 799,000 7, 785, 000 715, 000 309, 000 3,243, 000 2, 329,0O0 1, 228,000 3,033,000 234,0O0 : ], 651, 000 52,0§0 44,000 S.3{144_1§eper VAPin primary electionst S. 3044--15_ pe_' VAP in general ' elections $14,340,300 NA 233,800 20, 000 134,500 137,460 1,414,300 163,100 210, 100 38, 200 52, 900 542,700 314,000 54, 900 50, 100 756, 800 353,000 195,700 157, 00O 223, 500 239, 90{) 68, 9OO 272, 000 400,600 592, 200 257, 500 145, 300 325, 10O 47, 400 104, 200 36, 500 53, 100 503, 000 69, 100 l, 266, 500 345, 100 42, 100 717, 500 183,200 153,200 824, 000 67, 700 177, 500 45, 400 279, 900 778, 500 71, 500 30, 900 324, 300 232,900 122, 800 303,300 23, 400 President, February history of the Con1974 eonthe public financing legislation, beginning on page 35. The foreword points out: Viewed by some Members of the Congress as the most eomplex subject which the newly-convened Second Session is likely to face is that of how U.S. election campaigns are financed. One aspect of the subject which Primary 165,100 5, 200 4, 400 247, 650 ...................... 7,800 125,000 6, 606 125,000 I this its }75, 000 ].75,000 NA $2, 833,120 46, 760 4, 000 26,900 27,480 282,860 32,620 42,020 7, 640 10, 580 108,540 62, 800 1O,980 10, 020 151,360 70, 600 39, 140 31, 400 44,700 47, _0 t3,780 54,400 80,120 t18,440 51, 500 29, 060 65,020 9, 480 20,840 7, 300 10, 620 100,600 13, 820 253,300 70,820 8, ¢20 143,500 36, 640 30, 640 164,800 13, 540 35, 500 9, 080 55, 980 155,700 14,300 6, 180 64, 860 46, 580 24, 560 60,660 4, 680 33,020 l, 040 880 State commiRae_ NA NA $46,_50 4, 000 26, <.t30 27,480 282,850 32, 620 42,020 7,640 10,080 108,540 62, 800 lO,980 10,020 151,360 70,600 39,140 31,400 44,700 47,980 13, '780 54,400 80, 120 118, 440 51,500 29, _)60 65, _20 ' 9, 489 20, _{40 7. 300 t0, _20 100,680 13, 320 253, 300 70,820 8, 420 143, 500 36, _40 30,640 164, 800 13,M0 35, 54]0 9, 080 55,980 155,7]]0 14,300 6, 180 64, 8:60 46, 580 24, _0 60. 660 4, (;80 33, 020 1,040 (;80 areascould participate in the presidential nominating processto the extent that they are perrditted to send delegates to the national nominating conventions. _ VAP for the general electioo includes all geographical area populations except Puerto Ri,:(), Guam,and the Virgin Islands becausetheir Besidentsare not permitted to vote in the presidontiul general elections. wUl receive particular attention is whether, as some Senators and Representatives have proposed, some system should be adopted of using Federal tax revenues to provide significant financing to campaigns for Congress and for the Presidency. Mr. President, sent to have page 35 until the RECORD. Generalelections--Expendituresby National and State political party committeos-2¢ times VAP of geographiearea General NatiomMcommittees NA NA NA $21,248,400 ....................................... 350,700 ...................................... 30, 000 $125,000 $175, 600 20[, 750 .............. .'......................... 206,100 ....................... _................ 2, I2l, 450 244,650 ........................................ 315,150 _._: .................................... 57, 300 125,000 175,000 79, 350 125, 000 175,000 814,050 ........................................ 471,000 ........................................ 82, 350 125,000 175,000 75, 150' 125, 000 175,000 l, 135, 200 ..................................... _-529, 500 ........................................ 293, 550 ........................................ 235, 500 ........................................ 335, 250 ........................................ 359, 850 .......................................... 103, 350 125,000 178,0O0 408, 000 .................. : ..................... 600, 900 ........................................ 888, 300 ........................................ 386; 250 ........................................ 217, 950 ' 487,650 ....................................... 71, 100 125, 000 175,000 156,300 ..................... ; ................. 54, 750 ' 125,000 175,000 79, 650 125,000 175,000 754, 500 ........................................ 103, 650 125, 000 ]75, 000 l, 899, 750 ...................... _ ................. 531, 150 ........................................ 63, 150 125,000 175, 000 ], 076, 250 .. ............................ l........ 274, 800 ........................................ 229,800 ........................................ 1,236, 000 ......................................... 101,550 125,O00 1.75,00O 266, 250 ...................................... . 68, 100 125,000 ] 75,000 419, 850 ........................................ 1, 167,750 ....................................... 107, 250 125,0§0 175,080 46, 350 125,000 175,000 486, 450 ....................................... 349, 350 .......................................... 184,200 125,000 ..................... 454, 950 ............................ 35, 100 125,000 ).75,000 t Presidential primary can_Jidatesmay spend in any State twice the amount a candidate for Senate nominationmay spend, subject to a natioual limit or $.10times total VAP in connectionwith a campaignfor presidential nomination. : VAP for the primary electiou includes all geographicalarea populations becausethe outlying Mr. ALLEN. Mx. gessional Digest of rains an interesting Baseor minimum expenditure{ ask unanimous article, beginning conclusion, printed conon in There being' no objection, was ordered to be printed in as roi]lows: the article the RECORD, CONTROVERSY IN CONGRESS OVER PROPO6ED FEDERAL CAMPAIGN FZNANCZNG FOREWORD Viewed by some Members of the Congres_ as the most complex subject which the new]yconvened Second SessLon is likely to face is that of how U.S. election campaigns _re 333 S 5076 CONGRESSIONAL financed. Orie aspect of the subject which will receive particular attention is whether, as some Senators and Representatives have proposed, some system should be adopted of using Federal tax revenues to provide significant financing to campaigns for Congress and for the Presidency. Over the years since 1910 (see page 36), Congress has enacted a number of laws seeking to regulate campaign financing. The 92nd Congress took several far-reaching actions in this regard, passing in 1971 the socalled "tax checkoff" plan of presidential campaign financing and--_effective in 1972--a comprehensive "Federal Elections Campaign Act" (see page 37) requiring, among other things, detailed disclosure of both contributic)ns to and expenditures by candidates for Federal office, Notwithstanding these developments, efforts have been mounted in the present 93rd Congress to legislate further in the area of campaign financing. As will be seen in the article on page 40, pending before both HSuse and Senate are a number of bills touching upon diverse areas of campaign reform, with a majority concerned in some degree at least with the question of campaign financing, Although some Members express the view that the detailed statutes enacted within the past few years will, if properly enforced, adequately serve to prevent major campaign financing abuses, majorities in both House and Senate have indicated a willingness to consider further the subject of general campaign financing reform, Sharp controversy has arisen, however, over the question of public financing of polltical campaigns. The present tax check-off system which makes funds availal_le to the major parties' presidential candidates for their general election campaigns was, prior to its 1971 passage, debated and rejected on several occasions since first being proposed in the mid-1960's. _In the First Session of the present 93rd Congress, although hearings touching upon public campaign financing were held in both houses (see page 41), the one concerted public campaign effortfinancing to secure law adoption died in ofthea face of a Senate filibuster by opponents of such financing. Proponents of public financing cite the heavy increase in campaign costs In recent years, a development attributed in part to infation but, in much greater measure, to the mounting use of expensive mass medis, particularly television, in campaigns conducted in even the smallest constituencles. Reliance on privatecandidacies financing, less than it is argued make,_ recipient wholly independent on legislative questions affecting individuals and interests contributlng substantial funds. It is further argued that lack of access to the financing required today to run for pttbllc office impairs the democratic process by foreclosing such op-portunity to many worthy candidates who lack the financing required to mount a campaign, Opponents, on the other hand, have characterized the effort to secure campaign financing from tax revenues a "Treasury raid," unnecessary in an open and affluent society, The fear is frequently voiced that public financin_ would place the allocation of campaign funds to all parties in the hands of the one incumbent national party--an arrangement potentially perilous to the free opera(ion of the American party system, In the coming months further considers(ion and debate on the st_bJect have been promised by, the leadership of both houses of Congress, wit:h omnibus measures including both general reform provisions and public financing features expected to be included in any propo_:als finally presented to the respective houses for a vote. How they will fare in the political climate of a congressional election year, in the face of resumed "Water- 334 RECORD -- SENA"')I:E gate" hearings, and in the :¢ftermath of the highly-charged political events of 1973, remains to be seen. EXHXBrr I CA:5/iPAIGN FIIqA1VCn'_c REFOR_J[ (By Senator John J. Williams) It will probably be a lon_ time r_efore we can fully assess the impact of Watergate and related scandals on Anerican life. Indeed, at this point we eanr.ot foresee what r_Lore may yet emerge from continuing investigations. But from the :;qualid evidence already visible, it is clear tk at political norruption in this country is r_ot just a moral problem. It is one that inLperils the very survival of our democracy, There is, of course, no magic solution to the problem of corruption, and we should be wary of any political nostrun that purports to offer one. But the recent scandals do iE(mninate one area where reforms are both essential and possible. For the reprehensible, clandestine political acts 2onnected with V_'atergate were financed anl made possible by an excess of campaign donations, many of them secretly and illicitly obtained. Equally important, the flow of massi Te contrFoutions in.to both parties has created the impression among millions c,f Americars that the government of the United State_ can be bought, To restore public confidence in the lntegrity of government, we need to end the dependency of our candidate_; on special-interest contributions. This We can do to a slgnificant extent by reducin_ the costs and changing the methods of campaign financing. I beliew_ there are a numb_r of reasonable steps that can be taken town,rd this goal. 1. Shorten the campaign Political campaigns cost so much, in par*, because they last so long. The custom of prolonged campaigning originated at,a tim_ when much of the country was sparsely populated and a candidate had to travel by train or even on horseback for many months _o communicate wlth thc; electors-ts. This trsdltlon has rveen made obsolete by the Jet air)lane, television and other mass :media. Yet our campaigns still drag on needlessly, (onsuming vast amounts of money and providing endless repetition. I recall that after President iEisenhower once spoke in my state of I]elaware, I eompllmented him on his speech. "_gell, Senafor," he replied, "the first ti_e I made that speech, I thought it was p:'etty good. The :next ten times I made it, I thought it was okay. Now I've made it so ma:iy times I think :it's terrible." I doubt that thattherewayis or a pollSlclan i_as not felt wh) could alive not who tell the people all he knows ancL thiliks in two or three months. Thus, I believe that Congress should fix a uniform, _iatio:awide date for the primaries and nominating converttions affecting all federal offices. By cornmencing the primary carat,signs in early August, and the general-election campaigns in early October, we would it once sharply lower the cost of politics. At the same time, we would improve the quality of political discourse and heighten public interest in it. 2. _rant free television time and mailing nit,hts. Candidates in the seven Congressional districts in and around Detxolt usually pay about $2.000 for one minute o f prime network te)ievision time. With costs in other metropolitan areas--New York, Les Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia---even hi:her, it is not surprising that cs. ndidates for federal posts had to spend $32 million f)r TV and $28 million for radio in 1972. In urging free time for legitimate candidates, it is important to recognize that television and radio stations exist and make handsome profits because they have been given public property--namely, transmission channels, of which thexe are a limited number. So it seems to me only fair that the stations part [ally repay the public at April 2, 19 74 ,E_lection time by providing bona-fide candl.l!iates wi':.h the means of free communication ,:ff their political views. At the same time, tl_e pres,_'nt law, which requires stations to ii,ire equal time to anyone claiming to be a ,::andidate, whether he has any serious credentials or not, should be repealed. Congress should then promulgate criteria by which state-election officials can certify _::ona-fid,_ candidates for national office. It _[lould s.lso stipulate how much time sta'1ions m_st allot to them. This free access to ):_roadcas_; medLa would greatly diminish _'hat is ti'ten the largest item In a campaign I:_udget. The dependency of candidates on outside c ontribui;ions could be further lessened by allowing them to marl one or two pblitieal ,_batemexlts to all voters free of charge. _resently prevailing printing and mailing costs maine such mailings prohibitive. A Sen_.te candidate running in California would z:loat ilkdy need to spend at least $1.1 million. to reach every registered voter in the :_:ate. In Ohio, the total Would be more than _!;500,000; in New Jersey, $400,000; in Georgia _1250,000. Incum!)ent Congressmen and. Senators are _lready permitted to make mass mailings of ':_ion.-pol:.tical" material that promotes their re-election efforts. By giving challengers liraii;ed mai_ing privileges, we would level the i:,olitical scales now tipped in favor of those ia office. In Great Britain, the practice of _ warding candidates mailing privileges--and l'_'ee tele_dsion time--has proved both work_,l)le and effective. 3. Get Big Business and Big Labor out of ji:..olitical bankrolling. The law has long resc,gnized, in theory at least, that it is wrong l::, allow corporations and unions to try to b_y vote_, through political donations. As far kack as 1907, Congress prohibited business contribul:ions and unsecured loans by banks :t:)r political purposes, a ban that was reaffirmed _y laws enacted in 1925 and 1971. ,Uongress applied the same prohibition to t:nlons l::x 1943 and 1947. But corporations a:ld unions--as well as both major political _:lrties--]lave flouted the intent, of these proh_bl.tions with virtual impunity. As of last December, for example, at least eight exe2utives had publicly admitted that _;:ieir corporations made illegal contributions to the 1972 Nixon campaign. But Democrats s.s_ well a:_ Republicans have shared in such political largess. Dairy lobbyists who gave $:O0,000 to the Republicans in 1969 also _assed ol_t hefty contributions to prominent [::,emocrats in a position to l$.fiuence Coni_i_'essional legislation affecting dairy interests. ' As for the unions, many, by a variety of r_.easures, extract "voluntary contributions" f:_:om the:ir members. These fixed "contrlbut_ons," regularly deducted from each mereb_._r's paycheck along with his dues, go into political funds controlled by union bosses. Li the 11168 and 1972 elections, millions of :c:mk-and-filers disagreed with the political c_ndidates subsidized by their dollars. But t:i:iey had no voice in the matter. Unions furti::Ler aid favored candidates by financing "political education" and "voter registration" d_'ives. A1 _hough nonpartisan in name, such c_.mpaigns are actually ultra-partisan bec:;.use the y are conducted only in those areas aad amor_g those voters known to favor the uriion lesders' candidates. Author Theodore ]fd. White notes that in 1968 unions regist_red 4.6 million voters, distributed 115 mil]_on pollti.cal leaflets, supplied 72,225 houset,:_-house canvassers, and on Election Day d:,ployed _4,500 volunteers for political purp:_ses. 'To be sure political activity--including g,_nuinely voluntary contributions--should be encouraged among all citizens. But Cong:'ess shocdd enact stringent new laws which effectivel_ bar corporate and union con(ri~ b,:tions ir. any form. April 2, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE 4. Make small contributors the backbone o/ political financing. While reducing the costs of campaigns, we should endeavor to spread the legitimate costs that do remain among as many citizens as possible. Tech, nicaily, present law makes it illegal for anyone to give a candidate more than $5000. However, a donor may contribute to unlimited numbers of local committees established solely to funnel money to a candidate, Thus, big contributors continue to supply a disproportionate share of campaign funds, Recognizing that candidates should not become beholden to a comparatively few large donors, Congress is currently considering a proposal to have the federal government finance campaigns for national office. Worthy as the aims of this proposal are, I think such a plan is both undesirable and impractical. For one thing, federal financing would make political parties unresponsive to the people. Guaranteed millions of dollars from the public treasury, a party would put-' sue extremist or outworn aims year after year simply because it would not have to go to the people for financial support. In areas that are predominantly Democratic or Republican, candidates of the less-favored party would receive tax funds vastly disproportlonate to their popular support, The federal-financing proposal also seeks to impose a ceiling on overall campaign expenditures by limiting the amount a candldate may spend and by restricting individual donations to $100. !n reality, this subsidy 'scheme could easfiy lead to even costlier campaigns, with the federal treasury simply adding on another layer of money. While candidates themselves could not exceed specified limits, nothing would prevent socalled "public interest" organizations from using their own money to promote politicians of their choice. Nor could a wealthy officeseeker be kept from promoting himself before he officially became a candidate, · As an alternative to straight federal financing, ! think we should adopt an idea first advocated by President Kennedy. Its objective is to stimulate myriad small contributions, which would leave candidates unobligated to a few big donorS. Such stimulus could be provided by allowing taxpayers.a 50-percent tax credit on donations up to, say, $300. Thus, if a man earning $10,000 and a man earning $100,000 a year each contributed $300, the two of them would be treated would receive a tax rebate ofequally---each $150. S 507'7 beyond Watergate we see flaws, inadequacies and multiplying problems in many sectors of our society. But, for all its defects, our democracy is still worth preserving and iraproving. Thus, it is vital that the Congress begin now to cleanse our politics and thereby to revitalize our faith in the democratic process. If the men presently in Congress do not act convincingly and effectively in the coming months, then at the polIs next November all of us can exercise the oldfashioned American recourse of replacing them with men who will. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, recapitu- and Senators are refraining from asking for quorum calls hoping that other Merebors of the Senate might come in, so that we could discuss the matter. But tile Senator from Alabama is not insisting on lating the action that has been taken Oil some of the amendments which have been acted on here in the Senate, the first amendment that was offered was an amendment by the Senator from Alabama that would have stricken title I of the bill. The bill contained at that time, Mr. SYMINGTON. I thank the Seru_tor from Alabama very much. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, the Senator from Alabama was discussing the inadequacies of present law regarding campaign expenditures and he pointed out that there is no limitation, as he re- I believe, five titles, one of the titles being the public financing title. The first amendment that was offered sought, to strike that whole title from the bill. However, it was defeated. The theory O:F the amendment was that the proper approach to campaign financing and the limitation on campaign financing should calls, m areas other than media advertisins, that limitation being 10 cents per person of voting age, I believe, with not more than 60 percent of it going to the media and 40 percent to ether forms of expenditures. But he pointed out that this leaves so ma_kY other areas for expendi_ure that are not limited, as in aU be to deduct the overall amount of the permissible campaign expenditures and to limit the amount of campaign contributions, Strict regulation of Federal elections in thc private sector has not been tried as completely and as fully as should be traveling expense, all lodging expense, all overhead, all payroUs, all printing, all stationery, all telephones, all automobile expense--no ].imitation at all on any of that. So there should be a limit on that. I am glad that the present bill does increase this overall amount to--I say in- the case, because present law is cornpletely inadequate in this area. In the first place, it does not place any limitation on contributions, the thought being, I assume, that full disclosure of all contributions would be regulation enough. But this has not been the case, nor were campaign expenditures proper- crease it---I am not glad about the increase, but I am glad they made it apply to all :forms of advertising. I would prefer to have the 10 cents per person of voting age, but the Rules Committee has raised it up i_o 15 cents per person of voting age in a general election and 10 cents in the primary. This Senate bill adds the prl- ly regulated. I believe, under present law, as to media advertising only, that is, radie, television, newspaper, and I believe billboards, the expenditures in that area are limited, the overall limit being 10 cents per person of voting age in the political subdivision from which the candidate runs. maries, the House and Senate primaries. They were not covered in the original rider that was offered here last year and that failed of passage. So the present law is inadequate; and the Senate last year, realizing that fact, passed a bill on JUly 30, 1973, by a w)te of 82 to 8 and sent it to the House, where SimultaneouslY, to discourage large contributions, Congress should bar a candidate from receiving money through more than one committee and prohibit anyone from giving a candidate more than $3000--with stiff tax penalties and Jail terms for those caught cheating. Candid_mies founded upon the spontaneous, truly voluntary support of many small contributors would be the most likely to produce the best political representation for all the people, 5. Enlorce the campaign-lunaing law& If properly enforced, existing statutes are, by and large, adequate to deal with the individual with instances of dishonesty always be us. Thus, no new lawsthat werewill necessary And not more than 60 percent to go to radio and television and the balance to other forms of media advertising. But no limitation whatsoever was praced on the large number of other forms of expenditures, and no limitation was placed on the amount that could be spent for a it still reposes. That bill did limit campaign contributions to $3,000. It provided that no cash contributions in excess of $50 could be made. A separate election commission was set up. All these were constructive proposals; and in time, I daresay, the House will act on this campaign manager, so to speak, and no limitation was placed on the amount of expenditures for mass mailing literature, or _or the printing and distribution of brochures and cards, Mr. SYMINGTON. Mr. President, will the Senator from Alabama yield? measur_ and send it back to the Senate. The significant feature of S. 372 was that it provided for financing Federal elections in the private sector. No mention was made of public financing whatsoever. No extension of what we already have was provided for. As a matter of during the past two years to successfully prosecute former vice President Splro T. Agnew; Sen. Daniel Brewster of Maryland; Representatives Cornelius Gallagher of New Jersey and John Dowdy of Texas; and former Illinois Govcrno¥0tto Kerner. However, too often existing laws have not been en/orced, To provide'for enforcement of the reforms that inevitably will be enacted, Congress should establish a federal-election commission composed equally of Democrats and Republicans. The assurance that future scandals will not be covered up, no matter who is involved, will of itself help revive public confidence, WATEaOAT_ has damaged the country, and it would be foolish to pretend otherwise. And Mr. ALLEN. I yield, Mr. SYMINGTON. I am trying to make my own plans. May I ask the Senator if he plans to have a vote today? fact, the Senate, while this was still under consideration in the Senate, ¢!efeared a public financing amendment by a vote, I believe, of 52 to 40. It defeated Mr. ALLEN. I respond to the distinguished Senator from Missouri by saying that I would like to see the amendment carried over until tomorrow and, at such time as we could reach ail agreement to that effect, I would be glad to see the Senate recess for the day: But I feel that the Scott-Kennedy amendment at that time, because it proposed Federal financlng. That was tm_aed down; and a pure bill--that is, a bill not infected with the public financing feature--went over to the Blouse. Now, Mr. President, this whole theory this amendment should go over until tomorrow rather than to be voted on, especially since we do not appear to have a quorum of Senators present on the floor, has been changed. No longer, apparently, do so:me Senators want to keep financing all campaigns in the private sector. They want to add public financing. They want a vote. If an agreement could be reached that we vote at a _ven time tomorrow, the Senator from Alabama would be glad to yield the floor. Mr. SYMINGTON. Then the changes are that there will be. no vote today? Mr. ALLEN. I believe we need to vote on this tomorrow. 21235 S 5078 CONGRESSIONA]L RECORD -- SENA(I?E Apri{l 2, 19 74 to turn this bill for Federal campaign financing to the public Treasury. That is their'over answer to the lessons, if ally, user theory here, to the ex;ent that every _ter pays fee, for and public that funding fee is used to provide the afund of the i_,'he r'RESDIN_ OFFICF. R. Without. cbj _ctio]l, it is so o_ered. of Watergate. Reform the procedure? Greatly restrict contributions and expenditures? Provide foi' full disclosure? Is that enough? No. You have to hand the bill to the taxpayer. You have to let the taxpayer pick up the bill. If that is the answer to _Vatergate, if that is all the ingenuity and resourcefulness the Senate has, to present this multihundred million dollar bill to the taxpayer, we do campaign. In that way the people who do not choose to vote or r.articipate will not get soaked for the expense of the campaign. Mr. ALLEN. That is an i)xteresting proposal, but I do not think ] Would submit such a proposal or be in favor of it. Mr. TOWER. I doubt that I would ei_her, hut it seems to me that would be a fair way, rather than to take money from the general revenues of the United & ORDER FOR ,e_RIOD FOR THE TRANSACTION! OF ROUTINE MOR]_4ING BUS :NESS TOMORROW Mr. MANSFIELI Mr. President, I ask uL_animcus consenl that there be a brief iDeriod 'i_)morrow 'or the conduct of :morning business or not to exceed 15 :minutes with a tim limitation of 3 mtnti I;_; att_,,ehed there ;o. The PRESIDIN OFFICER. Without notWhen have the to() Watergate much originality. Committee was set up some 15 months ago or so, the States. Mr. ALLEN. It may be, but it does not offer too much appeal to m _. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, will the Senator yield when he corrLpletes his objectio)_, thoughts? Mr. ALLEN. while. 1059 l_[r. MANSFIELD. 'lmanimous consent resolution provided that the committee would investigate these various happenings and make recommendations to the Senate as to what changes should be That will take quite a goingmade into thecomeelectiOnout withPr°cedure'a report,TheYeitherare yieldMr'now?MANSFI]V'LD' Will the Senator this month or next month, making recMr. ALLEN. I am delighted to yield to ommendations. I do not believe anyone the distin§_ished majority leader, has to be a seer or a soothsayer to predict that recommendations are not going to their embody any public financing proposals. Why do I say that? It is not that I am a member of the committee. It is not that I have made inquiry as to what recommendations they are going to make. All one need do is to check the votes of the Senators on the Watergate Committee. By checking the votes closely, or just casually, one will find that five of the seven members do not favor public financing. They believe that there are better answers to our problems, and better solutions, than just presentlng a great, big, fat half-billion dollar Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I understand the Senator does not desire to vote f:'om on his Alabama amendment tonight, Mr. ALLEN. That is the request made by the Senator from Alabsma; that it be voted on tomorrow. Mr. MANSFIELD. Would the Senator care to suggest a time? Mr. ALLEN. I have no suggestion at ali.; any time the distinguished majority leader would suggest, Mr. MANSFIF. LD. How about 12:30 p.m. tomorrow? Mr. ALLEN. _.Ehat is ali right, or an earlier time. bill--and by "bill" I mean statement of accounf---to the taxpayers. They think there are better solutions than that, and I agree with them.. They are voting against these pub!lc financing provisions, because they know that is not a true reform. If you reform something, you iraprove it, you change it for the better, and you do not just give up and say, "Let the taxpayer pay the bill. _' I note that pending at this time are amendments by the distinguished Senator from North Carolina (Mr. ERVII_) and the distinguished Senator from Tennessee (Mr. BAKES) to knock out title I, the public financing feature, and to Mr. MANSFIET.D. How a3out 12 o'clock neon? Mr. ALLEN. That suits me. Mr. 1VLANSFIE',LD. We will come in at 11 a.m. I wonder if the Senator, in view of the informal agreeme:_t just made, would consider the possi Mlity of continuing his remarks tomorrow fa the free period left, so that the distinguished Senator from .Delaware (Mr. ROTH) could offer his amendmel_t this afternoon, on which amendment there is a time lir_itation of _ hour, Mr. ALJ_EN. I have no objection. I wonder if the distinguished rrajority leader would incorpora'_._ in his request a little substitute itl lieu thereof a tax credit provision allowing the taxpayer a credit on his political contribution. It may be asked, Why not just subsidize the eleclion? This would give the taxpayer the right to funnel his own funds to such candidate as he sees fit. The plan embraced in this bill, S. 3044, requires the time for further discusson when we Inight possibly have a' greater number of Senators present, Mr. MANSFIElkD. Mr. Pr _sident, a parliamentary inquiry, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will state it. Mr. M-ANSFI_',I_D. The Senator from taxpayer to pay candidates with whose philosophy agreement. Mr. TOWER. Senator yield for , Mr. ALLEN. I the Senator/'rom Mr. TOWER. Montana wishes to ask the Chair what Senators have be_.,n recognized under special orders for tomorrow, if any. The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are no special orders for the recognition of Senators tomorrow. for the campaigns whose views and he is in entire Mr. President, a question? of with dis- will am delighted to yield Texas. The 24th amendment the to prolfibits the imposition of a poll tax or the payment of any other tax as aqualification for voting. I wonder what the Senator might think of perha ps amendLng the Constitution and applying the 336 -_ ORDE_FOR..qr__URNI%FENTUNTIL 11 A.M_TOMORB,OW Mr. MANSFIE_,D. Mr. P:_esident, I ask unanimous consent that w/_.en the Senate adjourm_ tonigh], it stand in adjournment until 11 a.r_. tomorrow. ORDER VOTE it is so o_ _ed. FOR DIVISION OF TIME ON ALLEN AMENDMENT AND NO. Mr. President, I ask that the remainder of the time on the Allen amendment be e_u_lly divided between the distingaishe, d _!_enator from Alabama who n0_q ]has the floor, the author of the amendment (Mr. ALL_.N), and the manager of tile bill, the _tistinguished Senator from l_l'evada {Mr. CANNON). The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objeetioi:t, it is so ordered. Mr. 1M:ANSFIELD. And that the vote ca the Allen amendment occur at the hour of 12noon tomorrow. The P[_ESIDING OFFICF, R. Without objectioi:_, it is so ordered. iV[r. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I' express my appreciation to the disting,.:fished Senator from Alabama for the a?:reeme::_t which has been rE_ched. CLOTURE MOTION Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I send to Lhe desk a cloture motion and a_;k that it be read. The P]ZESIDING OFFICER. The ciotlzre motion having been presented under rule XXtI, the Chair, without objection, directs the clerk to read the, motion. The a_;sistant legislative clerk read the cloture motion, as follows: CLOTURE lOTION We, th_ undersigned Senators, in accorda::Lce witl_ the provisions of Rule XXII of the S:anding 1Zules of the Senate, hereby move to bring to a close the debate upon the pendir.g bill S 3044, a bill to amend the Federal E:ection Campaign Act of 1971 to provide _:oc public financing of primary and general election campaigns for Federal elective office, a_:,d to an'.end certain other provisions of law relating t_:_the financing and conduct of such cmmpaignm Mike Mansfield, Warren G. Magnuson, James B. Pearson, Robert Dole, Hugh Scott, Clairborne Pc11, Frank Church, _ueni;in N. Burdick, Marlow W. Cook, william Proxmire, Clifford P. Case, He_ry M. Jackson, Daniel K. Inouye, Hubert H. Humphrey, Joseph R. Blden, Jr., 'red _stevens, Stuart Symington, Floyd K. Haskell, Birch Bayh, William D. Ha(haway, Edmund S. Muskle. Jen~ nlngs Randolph, Dick Clark, Jacob If, Javits. :Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, will the _%,nator _4eld? Mr. M_!2qSFIELD. I yield. :Mr. ALLEN. I thank the distinguished _;enator for his remarks made in the first Ap._l 2, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-- SENATE S 5079 half of his statement about the Senator from Alabama. I appreciate his kindliness in that regard. I offer no thanks for his offering the cloture motion. Mr. MANSFIELD. I am sure that the (2) "Federal office" means the office, of Senator or Representative; "Representative" means atheMember the (3)House of Representatives, Residentof Commissioner from the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the.Delegates from the 'Dis'- unanimous Consent that the the quorum call be rescinded. The ]PRESIDING OFFICER. objection, it is so ordered. Senator from surprise. trlct of Columbia, Guam, and the Virgin Islands; (4) "general election" means any regularly scheduled or special election held for the purpose of electing a candidate to Federal office; and ORDER The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill (S. 3044) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing of (6) "State" means each of State of the the United States, the District Columbia, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any terrltory or possession of the United States. AUTHORIZATION unanimous-conse: b request side,has been cleared on the Re ,ublican Mr. President,: ask unanimous con.sent that when re_ tired from the House, the message on Iq R. 12627 and the biIl primary and general election campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend certsJin other provisions of law relating to the financing and conduct of such campaigns, Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order at this time to ask for the yeas and nays on the Allen amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is before us. Mr. MANSFIELD. I ask for the yeas and nays on the Allen amendment, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there sufficient second? There is a sufficient second. The yeas and nays were ordered, Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, again my thanks to the distinguished Senator from Alabama. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum pending the arrival of the distinguished Senator from Delaware. Mr. ALLEN. May I first yield the floor? SEC. 602. (a) Each candidate for election be held temporari at the desk. to a Federal office in a general' election is The PRESIDIN OFFICER. Withou_ authorized to make three mailings of his objection, it is so < iered. campaign material, free of postage, to persons registered to vote-(1) in the case of a candidate for election QUOlq JM CALL as Senator, in the State in which he seeks election; and . Mr. MANSFIEI D. Mr. President, I in the case of in a candidate suggest the absen_ ] e[r. of President, a quorum. if the as (2) a Representative, the districtfor inelection which Mr. TOWER. he seeks election. Senator will yield, would he amend the (b) Campaign material of such a candirequest so as not a charge the time to date may be mailed free of postage only If either the propor uts or opponents of the material-the Roth amendme Lt? (1) is mailed not earlier than sixty days Mr. MANSFIEL ). I make that re.preceding the date of the general election in which the candidate seeks election; quest. (2) bears corner on thethe outside in the upper The PRESIDIN( OFFICER. Withou't right-hand words "Campaign. Maobjection, it is so ardered. terial"; and The clerk Will 11'the roll. (3) sent to each registered voter each The assistant gislative clerk promailing does not exceed sixteen ounces, ceeded to call the oil (c) There are authorized to be appropriMr. MANSFIEIJ ). Mr. President, I ated to the United States Postal Service an ask unanimous co_ sent that the order amount equal to the postage that would have been paid on the campaign material mailed for the quorum call _e rescinded. in accordance with this section, if thl_ section The PRESIDIN( OFFICER. Without had riot been enacted. In determining such objection, it is so 'dered. amount, the campaign material shall be considered matter mailed by a qualified nonprofit organization under section 4452(b) of ORDER TO LAY I[NPINISHED BUSItitle 39, United States Code, as such section. NESk_ BEFORE II'HE SENATE TO- Alabama FEDERAL ELECTION AMENDMENTS was not caught by CAMPAIGN OF 1974 Mr. MANSFIELD. Yes. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I yield the floor, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair wishes to ask the distinguished Senator from Montana if in his unani- TO HO_ THE DESK 12627AND THI M_r, MANSFIE' order fol, Without )_[POR_ILY /IE,TqSAGE ON BILL n. I understand AT H.R. thi.s that suggestion at this time. The PRESIDING OFI_'iCER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. MANSFIELD. Now, Mr. President, what ia the pending business? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The pending business is still the amendment of the Senator from Alabama. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I take it upon myself, with the approval of the acting Republican leader, to ask unanimous consent that the Roth amendment be laid before the Senate. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated, The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to read the amendment. The amendment is as follows: TITLE VI--MAILING OF CAMPAIGN MATERIAL DEFn_IITZONS on August 11, 1970. LIMITING USE OF FRANKEDMAIL s_c. 603. Section 3210(a) (5) (D) of title 39_ United States Code, is amended-(1) by striking out "or general"; and by following: inserting immediately off)(2) ", the "and less thanafter one "runhundred and twenty days immediately before the date of any general election (whether regular, special, or runoff)". PROHIBITIOIqAGAINSTOTHERI_AILINGS SEC.604. (a) Except as authorized by section 602, no candidate for Federal office shall make a mass mailing of his campaigr_ material less than one hundred and twenty days immediately before the date of a general election (whether regular, special, or runoff) in which he is a candidate. (b) As used this section, the term mailing" shall inmean mail matter the "mass content of which is substantially identical but shall nat apply to mailings-(1) which-are in direct response to inquiries or requests from the persons to whom the matter is mailed; or (2) of news releases to the communleations media· Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum without the time consumed thereby being charged to MOI_',ROW / ' ' Mr. MANSFIELD! Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent[ that on tomorrow the unfinished bUs,less be laid before the Senate at the[ conclusion of the morning hour. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so rdered. Mr. MANSFIELI Mr. President, I suggest; the absence of a quorum, withken out of anyone's out the time being t time. The PRESIDING OFFICER[ Without objection, it is so or_ ered. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant le_ islative clerk proceed to call the/roll Mr. JAVITS. M_ President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be x ;scinded. The PRESII)ING )FFICER. Without objection, it is so or ered. SEC. 601. For the purpose of this title-(1) "candidate" means any legally quailfled candidate for election who (A) meets the qualifications prescribed by the applicable laws to and hold (B) the is office which applicahe is a candidate, eligiblefor under ble State law to be voted for by the electorate directly or by means of delegates or electors; either side on the Roth amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask TIL MIDNIGHT '[ONIGHT , Mr. JAVITS. Mr[ President, I a_k unaniraous consent [ha_ the report by the Committee on _abor and Public Welfare on S. 3293, [o amend the Na-. tional Labor Relatior[s Act, may be filed by midnight tonight.[ mous-consent request he asks that the pending amendment be set aside $0 that there can be a discussion of the amendment by the Senator from Delaware? Mr. MANSFIELD. I did not. I appreciate the suggestion of the Chair. I make existed AUTHORIZATION ON 7.ABOR AND TO FILE REPOR 'OR COMMITTEE 'UBLIC WELFARE ? ON 8. 3203 UN- 337 S $080 CONGKESSIONAL The PRESIDIN 4 OFFICER. objection, Without it; ii aa q_red, PIgDERAL]_._?_,_r/ONCAMPAIGN ACT OF 1974 The Senate continued- with the consideratio_ of the bill (S. 3044) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing of primary and general election campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating to the financing and conduct of such campaigns. Mr. ROTH obtained the floor, Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, ff the Senator will yield, I ask unanimous consent that the time on the Senator's amendment run from the time of the recognitiort of the Senator from Delaware. The PRESIDIN(] OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered, Mr.-MANSFIELD..Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the amendment, The yeas and nays were ordered. The PRESIDING OPFICER. The Senator from Delaware is recognized. Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I call up /ny amendment No. 1121. The PRESIDING OPFICER. The amendment is already bef'ore the Senate. Mr. ROTtL Mr. President, I _k unanimous consent that Ray Jacobsen, of my staff, be. permitted the privilege of the floor dm-lng the consideration and votes on my pending amendment and others, The PR]_BIDING OPFICER. Without objection, it is sO ordered, Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I am today offering the first in a series of amendments which I plan to offer to S. 3044,Amendments the Federal o_ Elections Campaign Act 1974, Before proceeding to explain this amendment, however, [ am compelled to state my general views concerning campaign reform on which each of these amendments are built. ' 'Without a doubt, there must be a reform of the current methods of conductlng and financing political campaigns, These campaigns are too long, they are too expensive, they force a potential candidate to raise large amounts of money to purchase television time, make mass mailings, or travel throughout the Nation, his State, or his district. The bill now under consideration, S. 3044, corrects several of the abuses associated with improper campaign activities, It limits the' amount of money which any candidate can spend on behalf of his campaign. It limits the amount of funds which any particular person can contribute to a candidate's campaign. It requires each candidate to disclose the identity of his contributors and{ the amounts received by each donor. Moreover, an independent Pederal Election Commission will be created by this bill to enforce the reporting and disclosure requirement_ of the 1971 Election Act and the penalties for violating these proVisions have been increased, Yet, in addition to these salutary provisions, S. 3044 goes one step further by 338 authorizing RECORD-- SEN'AqCF. the use of l_;ders_ funds to pay the costsofiq(_., a/ allI h·_e _uture opposed campaigns for Federal the concept of "public financing" because I believe that it makes a fuadamentat,_ cJ_ange in campaign finazLcing which dimlnlshes each citizen's ro[e in the lmlitic_alprocess. As an alterno;_ive to "lmbtic linancing," I have introduced legislation to allow e_ch taxpayer to take a 50 10ercent tax: credit for a political contribution of $150 by a single taxpayer or :;300 on a joint. return. It has been estimated that public financing would cost $2(0 million in a. Presidential election y('ar while the Treasury Department says my tax credit a:pproach will cost only $152 milllom Through a combination ,)f my proposal s_ad the present dollar checkoff, it is my eJ_timate that over $200 million will be available for the financing of all Pederal elections in 1976. I intend to preser_t this proposal to the Senate Finance Comn_itt_; when the Committee considers ea(h off the taxrelated provisions of S. 3)44. Mr. President, it seems to me that the "public financing" provts:__s of S. 3044, in realitY, place more, rather than less, emphasis on th(; use of m(,ney in political campaigns. In additibn, these provision.,_ may tend to separate the (;andldat_, fr_n his const_tuency. For, once a csaadid!ate learns that he can tap the Petera][ Treasury for his campaign funds, he will no longer be encouraged to seek the maximum _mount of personal con ;act wlth prospective'voters. Instead of carrying his campa/gn to the l_.'ople t_n_tgh debates, pexsonais candidate atg_aranceswill or on television be encouraged to allow an elite group of specialists-_mch as ";ampaign cons_fitants"._to nmnage h_ campaign by "packaging" the candida_ through use of the latest Madison Ave]me i_chniques. In the futw'e, slick, well-rehearsed ",,_pot' announcements w/Il become even more prevalent once "public financing" becomes law. Zn order to gh,e each cit:zen the know1edge which is :_ prereqg_ite to ail infarmed exercise of the right to vote, I am offering two amendments to t_ae'Pederai Election Campaign Act. One amendm,.-nt will azaend the Coramunicatious Act of 1934 to direct the Federal Communications Commission to d_velop, regulatlions to require television licensees to grant free aLr time, on an equitable basis, to candld_-,tes for Federal office. This will ihelp equ:fiize campaign resources, The second amendmen,,--and the one which I am today submitting for the Senate's consideratkm--will permit all cand/dates for congressional office, whether irLcumbents or challenge::s, to mail, at Government expense, th]ce mass mailings of their campaign m_terlal to their potential constituents ir. th(; 60 days prior to a gener_d election, In exchange for the auth_izatl0n to make tluee mass mailings during the final 60 days of the camp:_ign period, all cimgresslonal candidates wiI[ be pro_bited from making any mass mailings ,:ff theh April cmnpaign ltterl_ 2, 1.97;_ within the [20 days lm_mediate_ ,,:,ral ele:_lon day. This _p_ is aiagiro_ecordance with S. 343° the _ _i_7Senator BYu of West Virginia and ,i;_a4_sedby the Senate last June which ;7auld ,,_horten .the campaign perl_l to :_Lpproximately 8 wee_. l[nclmied in my amendment is a change :(n the laws governing the. _ of the :_ira,nkinjt privilege by Members of ConL_i_q_s.A_ present, no Member of Congress _a maJi:e a mass mailing to his consti_u_!_ts dn:_ug the 28 days prior to a general e_ectton in which he ii · candidate. My _!Lmend_le_l_lenlC_ens this time 0ertod to 120 ctays in order to place both aa iacumbent and a challis_ 8er o_ _ teems. _ re;ed in my amendment, t_ term "mass raailings" includes literature, [_ new_tdetters, which are substant/ally ,.!identic_din aPpearance or content. IZe_eludes l_ailings which are in _ to 7._ersons who have written l_) the candl4at_ durin_ the eaml_gn_ period. In addition the term does n_t _nclude news .':'elease_ sent by the candidate to the :nembers of the press. Mr. President, by giving each candi([ate the opportunity to.mail, witl/mi$ !_;_tage. these mass mailings to pote_Aai 7oters, (_ach candidate will be encouraged :_',opresent his or her views to _ whom :hey se(,k to represent without incurring _:h(; lar_:e postage costs which are associ',_edwil:hlarge-scale mailings. By adept:ng this amendment, I belieYe the Senate '_ll ha_ _ made a substantial c(m_biltion ';award ;ef0rming our _ methQd_ of campaitiming for Federal office. I urge the 13enate to adopt this amendment. Mr. p_.T.T,. Mr. Preai ___t, I recowal_ _;ho of the Senator Del,;_are.obj_:_tive It is an excellent objective.fromI recap]:_lzealso) his thinking here, that it would eli,ninai_ abuses, while I feet compelled _::oOPl_;e it. cipal cc,_t of However, three massI believe mailingstheof_in.';art to every registered voter would be ,';u[_tan_-,/al and should not be _ fca' by the ]!q_blic Treazury. It ac{really _;_mount to more than the pee_-nt 10-oerft _'dlowance in a primary or a 15-cent al]owance in a general election. We are just cl_;cking now with the Post Office :!or the .actual figures as to what it wmfid cost. I think these are expenses that .';hould i_e properly borne by the candi. dates a_d committees. And the way to handle _t is to make sure that the frank J,_ not a_used. And this we have d/me by ,';tretchiag out the present 30-de4r pro?xi[dt/on to make it 60 days. Those are my reasons for objecting to the Senator's amendr_ent. t_r ii,at reason, and recogalztng the objective and the merits of the Senator's arguments, I feel compelled to op_se t:he am(_ndment. Mr. B;OTH. Mr. President, I would llke to make two or three ob_rvatlons with respect _x)my amendment. As I _tated. what ! would like to see _i_one is a deemphasl,_ of money /n the caxapal_m rather than an emphasis _n J_rLds. Of c_aarse, ! feel that is the basic i:i_rust _md one of the basic criticisms i:hat cm:_ be made about pl_bllc finmlciag and thi_,t what we _ really saying Is April 2, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL that public funds should continue to be a major factor in the conduct of the campaign of any candidate. What I am trying to do through the series of amendments I am offering not only with respect to this bill, but also in legislation which I have introduced in the past and will propose in the Finance Committee is to deemphasize money and the use of funds, I would say to the Senator from Rhode Island that these mass mailings would go third class and they would not require, as they do not on the House side, the cost of addressing. I do not mean that it will not cost some money to the Goveminent, because it will, but it will not involve the great cost that is envisioned, In any event, it provides in an _luitable manner for a fair means toward all candidates, whether they be incumbents or not, to communicate with their voters in such a way as to help deemphasize the use of money and biqng back the campaign of the people directly to the candidates themselves, Mr. PELL. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection,it is so ordered, Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my amendment be modified so as to provide for two, rather than three, mass mailings. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? The Chair hears none, and the amendment is so modified, Will the Senator from Delaware send his modification to the desk? Mr. ROTH. Yes. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum, and ask unanimous consent that the time be not charged to anyone, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. PELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered, Mr. PELL. Mr. President, I have ascertained what the cost of third-class postage rates would be. The bulk rate is 32 cents a pound. Since this amendment, as modified, would provide for the sending of up to 2 pounds to each registered voter, or 64 cents, which would actually be more than sixtimes the aIlowanee for primaries four times the allowance for general or elections, I would be compelled more strongly than I had believed to oppose the amendment, because of the cost to the Government. Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I would point out that those figures are, as I understand them, what the post office would charge. Is that correct? Mr. PELL. That is what the post office charges; that is correct, RECORD-- SENATE Mr. ROTH. Thai is not necessarily ex_ actly what the out-of-pocket cost to the Government would be. Mr. PELL. We have not been able to ascertain that, but knowing Uncle Sam's reputation, I cannot believe that he would charge many times the cost of delivery. Perhaps he makes a little profit, Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, how much time do I have remaining? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware has 3 minutes plus. Mr. ROTH. I just want to make one further observation. It seems to me that if we are willing to pay unlimited postage for incumbents, as we are---every Merebet of this body as well as every Member of the House of Representatives has no limit on the number of mass mailings he is · permitted to make--this proposal would be well worth the cost to help the electior/process ase well as to deemphasize the need of money. I agree that while it would involve a certain amount of cost to the Federal Government, it seems to me that if we can justify it for our own use during our time in office, it is justifiable as well during the campaign period, Mr. COTTON. Mr. Preside.hr, will the Senator yield for a question? Mr. ROTH. I am happy to yield to the Senator from New Hampshire. Mr, COTTON. From my hasty reading of the amendment of the distinguished Senator from Delaware, I take it that it refers to mailings, Mr. ROTH. That is right. Mr. COTTON. To three mailings? Mr. ROTH. That is correct. Mr. COTTON. I am in sympathy with that, the purpose of the amendment, because I come from a State that depends on mailings, since we have no television that reaches the entire State. However, the postage is now 10 cents, _nd if I were running for reelection--with the 10-cent postage rate, and depending on direct mail, as I have in every one of my campaigns, I would find some way, through my own organization, to distribute from door to door such literature and campaign material as I waned to distribute, because I would not want to pay 10 cents postage on even three mailings, If the Senator really wants to accomplish the purpose and limit all candidates to the same policy, to only three paraphlets or three letters or three appeals, I would find a substitute for mail distribution, because with a 10-cent mailing rate I think you would find in many States, particularly in the smaller States, that even as a matter of just sa_ing dol1ars and cents, the candidates would be able to devise and find some other way. I know that the night before election.-The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator from Delaware has expired, Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to proceed for 5 more minutes. Mr. PASTORE. I object, Mr. President. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard, Mr. PELL. Mr. President, how much time do I have remaining? S 5081: The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-. ator from Rhode Island has 5 minutes. Mr. PELL. I yield it to the Senator from-Delaware. Mr. COTTON. As I was saying, I re-member that just before an election re-cently, I think it was my distinguished collea_me from New Hampshire (Mr. Mc:.. INTYRE) who was running that year, I had a very beautiful brochure pushed under the front door of my residence. They were distributed by hand. That is my inquiry. Mr. ROTH. Let me answer the Sen-ator quickly, as I wk,;h to yield, if I may, the remaining time to the Senator from New York. As I mentioned during my statement, what we are trying to do is deemphasize funds. I have a series of amendments. It seeras to me that this provision, ewm though it would cost the Federal Govern.. ment a certain amount of money, affords ail candidates, whether officeholders ¢,r not, an opportunity to communicate dj.-. rectly with the voters. I understaJad there are other methods to communicate, and they still might use those, but I would hope t]aat this meam_would decrease tile demand for other media. I yield whatever time I have remain-. lng to _;heSenator from New York. Mr. ]BUCgT,_.Y. Mr. President, I thank my friend from Delaware for yielding me this thne, and I thank my friend from Rhode Island for yielding the time to my friend from Delaware. I do believe that' this is a very important amendment. It is one of which I am very pleased to be a cosponsor. It goe_,_to the heart of what has been one of my great concerns over this legislation; namely, the fact that incumbents have undeniable adwLntages, the advanrages of incun_bency. I feel that we must recognize that one of the principal sources of the advantage of incmnbents is their ability to cornmunicate with their constituents at pul)lie expense. This is a necessary right of comm_aaication. I have no objection to that. lq.ut I believe we should also recognize that it is terribly difficult to draw the line between those Communications that are, you might say, i,l the line of du_y as a Senator or Member of the House of Representa_ves and those communications that undoubtedly begin poaching on the whole campaign process. So I see in this amen.dment two elements of reform: first,, drawing a dividing line be:yond wlflch an incumbent is not allowed to mail, on a basis that gives him an advantage that is not equally applicable to the opponent, so that it seems t;o me that equity, it seems to me that considerations of trying to give a challenger some of the advantages that accrue to incumbency, it seems to me the kind of convenience of access that the mails :_pply, which is more not necessarily possible especiaUy in the rural areas to people to volunteer_all of these con.siderations taken together suggest tha't the amendment is necessary, that it Is an amendment that will spare this body a great deal of criticism, and that it is an amendment that recognizes there are advant4_ges oI incumbency that should be neutralized and equalized. 339 S 5082 CONGRESSIONAL REC DRD-- SEN'ATE I want to. compliment the Senator from I say, we have got the no-fault insur-, Delaware (Mr. Ro_m) for offering the s,nce bill to consider, hav_ we not? I say' amendment. I hope that my colleagues to my good friend, the disbingulahed Sen-, will vote in favor of it. ator from Waslhington (l_r. MAa_VSON), Mr. pELt.. Mr. President, I yield 2 that this is a bill which is very importanl; minutes to my distinguished senior colto the people of this counl ry. Y/rehave go/; league, Mr. PASTORZ. a lot to do in education. ,['flel_ are ]nany The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. other pressing problems that. will come BXDEN). The Senator from Rhode Island before the Senate. is recognized for 2 minutes. ! say, let us begin to :_ct like legisla-, Mr. PA,STORE. Mr.- President, if I tors and stop kidding ourselves, because thought for 1 minute, without trying to the people of this country are not buying: Impugn the motives of any sponsor of an this charade for one moment, amendment, that those sponsoring these Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, will the amendments were amenable to the idea, _enator from _Rhode Isl_md yield? the philosophy, and the ideology of Mr. PASTOB;E. I yield. public financing, I would be more reMr. ALLEN. Has not the Senator from luotant to do what I intend to do, and ]hhode Island just made s very fine argu-. that is to move that this amendment be :ment for drawing the bltl down and let, tabled. _ proceed _o other matters more, Mr. President, what we are doing here important? is imposing on the Postal Service. The Mr. PASTOB;E. I do not want to draw Po_tal Serarlce is more or leas, a private down the big i_ue, which is, a:re we for (n_' institution today. Here we are, bringing not for public financing'.. Let us face it. . Up all these amendments in a debate That is what this bill is intended to do, that is fast becoming a charade to the _.[_natis the qut_tion. people of this country, a charade The PRES][DING CFFICER (Mr.. essentially because these amendments BIDEN)_ All time has now expired. are being sponsored by those who will Mr. PASTORE. Mr. P! esider_t, I move vote against public financing, to lay the amendment on the table. Financing is the name of the game inThe PI_ESIDING OI_ICER. The ques... sofar as tiffs bill is concerned. So that tion is on agreeing to th_ mc$ion of the when the proper time comes, Mr. PresiSenator from Rhode Is:land (Mr. Pas-,. der_ I mn going to move that this _:ORE)to tay on the table khe t_nendmenlt; amendment be placed on the table beof the Senah)r from Delaware (Mr cause I am afraid, with all the pressing _OTH). problems that confront the people of this Mr. HRUS_LA and '.VIr. PASTORE country today, here we are in the Senate, asked for the yeas and nars. with the price of meat going up, with The yeas and nays w_.re ordered, the price of food going up, and we are The PRESIDING OF_CER. The ques-. in this inflationary spiral--why only totion is on agreeing to th_ motion of th_ day I heard from my own Governor Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. PAs-.. who told me that the fuel adjustment _:ORE)to lay on the table the i_,nendment will cost the consumers of Rhode Island of the Senator from Delaware (Mr,. one third additionally on them heating ROTH). bills. But here we are, fussing around On this question the yea,,_ and nay_ whether we will have two mails, or three have been ordered, and the clerk will call; mails, on a bill that is not going to go the roll. anywhere once we pass it in the Senate. The second assistant regis]Lot/ye clerk I think we can use our time to a more proceeded to call the roll. advantageous purpose. After all, ff this Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD of West Vir-.. Congress Is against public financing, let _,dnia. I announce that t2.e Senator from us stand up and vote against it: If we are North Carolina (Mr. ERWN), the Senator:' for it, then let us vote for it. But we are from Arkansas (Mr. I_ULBRXGHT), th(_t beginning to puncture it with holes. As ,'Senator from Alaska (Mr. CrRAV_L),the, the days go by, it begans to look more Senator :from Indiana (l_[r. H_R_s), the like a sieve. Senator from Iowa (Mr. H_oHzs), the These people who sit up in the galSenator from Georgia (Mr. TAL_AD0_.),, leries and watch us, will look down on :md the Senabor from Zalffornia (Mr., this very austere body and to the last T'UNNEY) arenecessarUy:_bsent, breath of their survival, they will say, I further announce that the Senator "What are, you doing down there? You from Kentucky (Mr. HUDOL]_S'00N),is ab... are acting like a bunch of schoolboys." _;ent on official business, We have been at this thing for 2 weeks Mr. GRIFFIN. I ann _unce that the now and we are going nowhere---and we Senator from Tennessee, (Mr. BaOCK), are going nowhere pretty fast. I say, if the Senator from Oregon (Mr. HATFIELI)),, we are for public financing, let us say so. and the SenaN)r from Maryland (Mx, If we are against it, then let us say so. ]_[ATHIAS), are necessaril:_ ab_,;ent, Let us have it done with, regardless of I also anno_mce that the Se,nator from how we decide it---it makes no difference Vh'ginia (Mr. _]'ILLIAM I.. SCOTT), iS ab-.. to me. Bu_ we get up here and say we ,,_ent on official business. should do this, and. then we should do I further announce that the Senator that, and then we should do the other from Vermont (Mr. AII.'EN), is absen:l; thing. We passed a similar bill a short due to illness al the family. time ago. It is lingering and languishing I further announce that, ff ])resent and over in the House of Representatives. It voting, the Senator frmn Oregon (Mr,, will never see the light of day. Now we ]['IATFIELD),would vote "yea. _ come along with this one. It will never The result was annmmced--yeas 55,. see the light of day, either, nays 32, as follows: 340 Ap_l 2, 19 74 [I¢o. 10s Leg.] _EAS---55 Al_)urezh Hathawe,y Muski® _let_ Hollings Ne_on I_a:_h _ruska _Una 13ennett Humphrey Pastore I_,ntsen Inouye Pearsoa IMt,le Jackson PeU I_rooke Javlt_ Proxmtre I[tt_rdlck Johnston t_andolph I_.d, Roi)err C. Kennedy ttibicoff cannon Long EIcott,HUg_ f_k Magnusoa Staeor_ IT_ol;ton McClellan Steven_ _ransto_, McGee Symingtma g_,deton Mc/3overn Waft I_astland McIntyre Wower Po:ag Metzenbaum Williams _oldwat,_r _Iondale _'oung _:_urney Montoya _:_a_ken Mo_ NAYS---32 ,,alan Clark McOlure _:_ter curtla Me_Alf _e,m DOle Packwoo_ I_ellmon Domenici Percy I_iden Domlnlck Roth I_uckley Fannin Schweikee _i_t, EIparkm_ Harry _i_., Jr. Grifi_n Hanson Stennis _ Hart Stevenson Chiles Helms ¶Thurmo_dt 0hurch Mansfield Wetcker NOT VOTING---13 ,_m:ea Hartke lk_ott, _r_ Hatfield William L, _vtn Huddl_sto!l Walmadge ::,_uJtbrigh _ Hughes Wunney _:_n_vel Mathias So Mr. PAs_oam's motion to table Mr. IZor_'s amendment was agreed to. CAMPAION8_[_DING Mr. PERCY. Mr. President, we now t:xave the opporttmity to det_te and vote i_nthe _!_enate on the type of financing of _::a_mpaigns that we think best serves the interests of this country. :in studying this issue ][ keep three fundar_ental objectives in mind: First. .El,_tions should be won and lost on the _:elat/ve, merits of the candidates and their positions, not on the basis of who ca;a rai;_e and spend the most campaign funds; Second" No contributor should be tn a positioz to extract special treatment :[rom art office-holder; and Third. Additional safeguards are needed to ];)revent self-enrichment through I;_ im_:roper use of Public office. :l favor realistic, enforceable limits on campai_gn spending with insurance that ,'.m_ible challengers have a fair chance I_) obt_,in campaign funda In my own case in 1972, commit/ceos for my reelecI;ion campaign raised and spent a total of $1,700,217, including $298,140 raised and sp_mt prior to April 7, 1972, when _he pr_:,visions of the Y-_deral Election Ce_npalgn Act of 1971 became effective. This stLm of money, though $1,000,000 less th_m a senatorial campaign for reelectior, also conducted in 1!}72 in a State '.)f com0arable population, still enabled me to _iar outspend my opponent in the 1972 Illinois Senate race, leaving him at a substantial disadvantage in getting his messag_ across. 'The Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974, S. 3044, currently being debated in the Senate, would limit a Sen_£orial candidate in nUnois to $756,800 in the primary and $1,135,200 in April 2, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL the general election of $1,892,000. had been in If this effeot in been under in 1974 for a total expenditure ceiling 1972, the allowable by $191,783. I am aware that I would campaigns States may have been over the posed limits as they were have spending more total in other new procostly per such as a capita due to other variables hotly contested primary, the number markets, media party the viability organizations, and of of the State so forth, so Illi- nois may not be the best example ofthe effects that passage of S. 3044 would have in the future. However, I think Illinois is an instructive example. RECORD -- SENATE a puny amount compared with the cost of recent full-scale campaigns, but nonetheless an enormous sum of money--especially for those who have to raise it. As more and more money oozed its way into the political process, it probably was inevitable that the irresistibly seductive noture of so much cash would one day take its toll. And in 1972, it finally did. Today, it is not Just the President who is paying a dreadful price for the perversion of money and power we call Watergate; we all are paying--Republicans, Democrats, big business, politicians at every level--and especially those of us in Congress. The entire country is paying a telling price in national self-esteem, KEYNOTE ADDRESS BY SENATOR CHARLES II. PERCY FEBRUARY 27, 1974. I'm not sure that it's fair to ask me to cover the subject "Money---dash--Polities" In the brief tlme allotted. Alice Roosevelt Longworth, who is sharper than the rest of us, has been talking about money and politics for 90 years, and even she has barely dented the subject. Add gasoline lines, the Redskins and sex to money and politics, and you encompass g0 percent of the conversaflon in Washington on any given night, The temptation and consequences of money in politics have been with us for a long time. While Washington's army starved at Valley Forge, Samuel Chase, a signer of the Declaration of Independence and later Chief Justice of the United States, tried to corner the flour market on the basis of inside information. Andrew Jackson's Postmaster General was forced from office for accepting kickbacks in awarding contracts for carrying the mail. President Lincoln had to remove his Secretary of War, Simon Cameron, who had arranged military contracts In a way, unhappily, we all deserve to pay. For much too long, we often turned away from obvious abuses of money in American polities, When John Kennedy won Illinois' electoral votes bi 1960 on the basis of some widely disputed returns from Chicago, much of the country winked at the triumph of good old fashioned machine politics, In'1972, when burglars connected to the NJxon campaign were apprehended in the offices of the Democratic National Committee, much of the country--including most of the media---dismissed with a shrug 'the ominous implications. The nation had become so cynical about polities and politlclans, in fact, that spying and break-ins were widely assumed to be commonplace facets of campaign strategy, I, for one, do not believe they are politically c_mmonplace at all, but the corrupting infiuence of big money in politics unquestionably /s. If ever we are to reform the rickety apparatus which supposedly regulates the interaction of money and politics, surely this is the moment. In the aftermath of Watergate, public attention and concern at last are focused on the problem; we must act now, for ff not now, then when? The trouble is that while the malady fs obvious, the sure cure is not. That is one reason I believe this conference is so timely and important, In the weeks Just ahead, Congress will be dealing with highly complex legislative initiatlves tn this area, some of which would reshape our politeial landscape. This is partlcularly true of taxpayer-financed _ederal election campaigns, which Common Cause and others believe ls the only workable alternative to thepresent system, I don't know if it is the onZy workable alternative, but some form of public financlng seems the most sensible one that any of ua have yet proposed if we are to preclude a repeatof 1972. for companies in which he and his friends had an interest, Two things, I suspect, have been responsible for transforming the dilemma money in politics from a nuisance into a of catastro- Public financing, like the other reforms now lmder consideration, deserve the most thorough possible airing, in floor debate, in the and right here for the next two days. media phe: 1) Elected now personal often play decisive role. inofficials both our and the institutional financial affairs. If, for example, government did not have the power to infiuence milk prices and milk profits, it is doubtful that we would be concerned with the propriety of a political "milk fund" today. And 2), the costs of gaining public office have reached stratospheric proportions. In 1956, it cost Dwight Eisenhower some $8 million to campaign successfully for re-elsetion to the presidency; in 1972, Richard Nixon spent more than $60 million to do the same thing. It has become expensive to run for ahnost any broad-based office, but staggeringly expensive to run for the presidency, This year, as most of you know, I am exploring the feaslbfiity of a '76 presidential race myself. Our proposed 1974 budget for this limited exploratory effort is $200,000-- Throughout this refining process of discussion and debate, I hope we all can keep in focus at least three fundamental objectives: _ 1: Elections should be won and lost on the relative merits of the candidates and their stands, not on the basis of who can afford the most elaborate and costly campaign. In my 1972 senatorial race. my campaign committee far outspent '.hat of my opopnent. I like to think that I would have won on the basis of my record in any case, but obviously Congressman Pucinski was at a substantial disadvantage in trying to get kis message across to the voters of Illinois. Not only must we place realistic, enforceable limits on campaign spending, but we must see that credible challengers somehow have a fairer chance to obtain s_._cient campaign funds, Objective _2: No financial contributor should be in a position to extract special treatment from an office-holder, which means Therefore, to the Mr. conclusion President, that I have we need come respon- sible legislation on campaign spending that will make the system fair for all who seek public office and a main concern of ours must be equity for the challenger, TO further elaborate my views on the subject of campaign spending, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a speech I delivered before the Money/ Politics Conference in Washington on February 27 be printed in the RzcoRr at this point, There being no objection, the speech to be printed in the RECORD, was ordered as follows: S 5083 that we must place e**]orceable ceilings o:n campaign contributions and ensure that s:[1. contributions and expenditures are matters of public record. I am reluctant to place a:n absolute proh_bition on individual contrib_]tions, far I believe that widespread citizen participation in politic_ is a healthy and deair, bls thing. But Watergate is a hax_,;zb reminder of the perils of five- and six-figure politica:L contributions. We ought to get rid of them once and for all and try the more reasonable upper limit of $3000 proposed in the Senate passed reform bill. Objective #3: Additional safeguards are needed to prevent sell-enrichment through the imlc_roper use of public office. In this regard, I :regret that there was no time on the conference program for an examination of the entire question of disclosure. Frankly, I do not like the loss of privacy that goes hand-in-hand with mandatory financial disclosure by candidates and office.holders. As the IIearst case demonstrates public knowledge of a family's financi_d status (_x sometimes directly affect its very safety. Nonetheless, tlae public trust has been so frequently and flagrantly abused that I am forced to conclude that some form of significant di,_;closure---especlally by candidates fc.r national office---Is in the public interest. Therefore, should I decide to become a fullfiedged candidate for the 1976 Republican presidential nomination, I will disclose the value of my assets, now held in a bl_nd trus_, and will release full ta_ data for all the yea:cs I have held office, whel;her the law then requires i_ or not. .As we, grapple with _;uch thorny issues as disclosure and campaig_a financing, those c! ua in Congress have a two-sided opportunity. We can pass legislation which will help prevent fast and lo<>se money from further perverting the political process; that's one opportunity. Or---itS reverse--we can fuel the contempt we already have earned by perpetuating the toothless guidelines whlch govern raoney in polities now. Many national institutions are on trial teday, sohio literally, some figuratively. So, too, CongresLs stands at the bar of public opinion as once again we assume responsibility for policing ourselves, a role we have performed with minimal dh_tinotlon In the past. Perhaps It has always .been the case, but one of ttae roadblocks to genuine political reform is that those of u.'; who devise the rules of the game are hardly disinterested speetators; one asumes the Redskins would have made it to the Super Bowl tl_.is year, if on/y George .Allen had been the referee. My hope Is that time, we will look beyond our self-interest to the public interest. Thc, country is understandably demoralized. Americans need a clear ,;ign that their elected representatives remain capable of actually doing something about a given national probleto. If we fail tills time, we shall richly deserve the election-day consequences which are almost sure to follow. Ultim_tely, of course, even the best legit,;lotion can not by itself stop pay-offs, unreported contributions, peddled ambassadorships, l_mndered money, and all the other shoddy political rip-offs to which America has here,me so cynically accustomed. With or without legislation, it Is going to remain difiq.cult to clean up American politics in an atmosphere of widespread public callousness. "Everybody does it" is hardly a maxim con.. ducive to reform, much less national distinc.tion. Everybody does not do it--every politicia:a does not flaunt the law or grow rich through public service. That is not our most commo:_ lapse within the American political commu.. airy. Ra_sher, our most pervasive failure, espe.cially these past ten years, is in the realm ol_ intellectual integrity, or the lack of lt. Most of us, myself included, are drawn too easily into the subtler deceptions of politics--. 34.1 S 5084 CONGRESSIONAL tlae 10-second[ spot, the groundless charge, tile rainbow promise. Forever understating our ambitions, overstating our accomplishments, over-rating our "solutions", we hardly notice that we have created a nation of disbelievers through this process of indirection. Our political dialogue has become so laden with minideceptlo:as that now they are completely taken for granted. It is as if deception is what is expected of us politicians. Score one for the "everybody-does-it" syndrome. One result of all this is that something important and quite wonderful has sl_pped away from us in recent years--not so much innocence as mutual tr,usL We trusted our readers in America, as indeed we trusted most of our institntions, and each other. Government has long been viewed as foolish, bureau, cratic and hopelessly extravagant, but only recently has :it become an object of national contempt. I don't know if we can reverse these trends toward disgust, despair, and disbelief; some would say it's foolhardy to try. But I think we must make a determined effort if these United States are to remain united in any fundamental sense. Political leaders can help . . . must help, really, ff we are to regain what John Gardner calls "a sense of ourselves as a people . . . of our own worth and ou_ own values." A good way to start is by seeking an end to the kind of duplicity and secrecy in government which produced first Vietnam and then Watergate. Much too much of the public's business is stamped "Top Secret", or shrouded in a dubious cloak of national security, or carried on behind closed doors. Why be so secretive about the workings of a government, which, after all, still belongs to and serves the people? The refor_ you will be analyzing at this conference can do much to "declassify" the elective process. But those of us who run for office must do more than merely comply with the letter of the election laws. I think we must take onr cas_ to t_le voters in a much more straightforward way than either we or they are accustomed to. For if we don't level with voters as _ seek an office, how can they possibly expect us to level with them once we get there? Our campaigns ought toaddressthemselves more to the often.unspoken realities of government, chief among which is that every_g costs some_t_--usually money, sometimes freedom, too often human life. Whatever the costs, candidates are reluctant to discuss them. And because citizens have been promised so much--great societies, law 'n' order_at no apparent cost, they are underetandably angry and disillusioned when tho costs overblown. turn out to be staggering and the promlses Mr. P:esident, I can No. 12_ and ask that April', 2, 19 73 Mr. _J_GNUSON. l_[r. ]?resident, may we have order? The PRESIDING OF],'ICER. There will be order in the SenatE. Senators will please be seated. The Senate will be in order so that the Senator can be heard. T:he Senator ti,as reque ;ted that hM '0nited Slates Senators and Representatives :_l'tall be as follows: 11 postmeridian stand,,_:,'dtime in the eastern time zone; 10 post_::teridian standard time in the central zone; 9 postme:_idian standard time t.n the mount_Lm time zone; 8 postmerldian standard time _.:t the _f'acific time zone; 7 po stmeridtan sl:andard time in the Yukon time zone; 6 postmeridian standard time in. the Alaska:_[awali time zone; and 5 postmeridian standa:_'d time in the Bering time zone: Prov{ded, amendment be called n p. l_rnaninlous consent is required since it already has been agreed that the amendment of the Senator from A:[abama is pending. Mr. DOMINICK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that amendment No. 1][24 may be called up. The PRESID:_G OFFICER,. Is there ']'hat the polling places in each of the States si:mil be open for at least twelve hours. Mr. DOMINICK. Mr. President, I shall :aot take very long because I think this is 'a relatiw_ly simple amendment. The other day the Senate adopted, and I might say against my vote, the amendment offered by the distingul_;hed Senator objection? 1V[r. DOlViINICK. Mr. President, if anyone wishes to object, I do not mind. The PRESIDinG OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered, Mr. M_NSFlqELD. Mr. President, will the Senator explain the mnendment fi!fst? fl:om Oklahoma (Mr. BELLMON), which provides that none of the media can retes_;e any information on Presidential e:iections until midnight of the day that il:lc election occurs. Well, it seems to me tlmt there are a lot of difficulties with t:t:mt measure. First of all, I do not think ii:; is goi._g to be possible to enforce, as The t_f_ESIDING OFFICE_t. The Senate will be in order. 1V_r.MANSPI_ILD. Will the Senator exp].aln the amenctment? 1Vfr. DOMINI(_. I am happy to. Mr. MANSFIELD. It l_ the intention Of the Senate to have nc further votes ti:xe distinguished Senator from Nevada _aid. Second, I do not think it is constitLitionaL I think there is :really grave doubt as to whether we in the Senate can ]:ass a ]aw stating that no one can do s0methi_lg of that kind. Therefore, this amendment, which has tonight. Mr. DOMI_:[CK. Mr. President, I wsuld like to have this z_eas_re as the pending businesa. I would ;_e happy when we come back in to take i; up. It may be there will not be a vote. _.There is a possibility the amendment _.11 be accepted, This amendment provide_ for a simul- '_._een accepted before as part of the Amerlean Bicentennial deal, was proposed, _i.rst, to take the sting out of the Bell_,:_on amendment and, second, because it i_; advisable in and of itself. The different time zones have a great _,ffect on elections, as the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. HUMPHREY) and the taneous poll c']osing throughout the country. Mr. I_SFIELD. I ha_e no objection, but I would call to the a;tention of the _mator that the pending business is the Allen _nllendm(Elt. All _,greement ha_ _!,enator from Arizona (Mr. GOLDWATEE) _._id the other day; and I shall not ment_,ion New Hampshire, but I have, and ._l'ew York, for instance, can influence _otes and in other time zones, particul_r]y when predictions are made on a been reac_hed to vote on ttat amendment at 12 o'clock tomorrow. Mr. I)OM1Y_(_[_. That _s fine. Mr. MAI_SI_ELD. So the Senator's mnendment would follow the Allen a]nendment. I suggest if the Senator's _mendment is riot accepted, any rollcall w_te be put over until tontorrcw because [ have gone out of my way and told Sen- _Lationwide basis. It see:ms to me that the easy way to _::et out of this situation would be to have s:[m.ultarteous closings of the polls. This v_,ould b_ difficult unless the people are giwm eItough time to vote, so we have required that the polling places would be open for 12 hours, starting in the eastern _:one from 11 until 11, the central zone Isn't it about time that we eliminated this shadow-dance we perform at election time? it's long past time we faced up to extremely difficult and complicated choices in this country. How can the American people be expected to choose wisely ff they are continually uninformed and misinformed by their present and would-be representatives in goveminent? More critical still, how can political leadership be effective until people find cause _galn to trust politicians? we in political life must work te regain that trust, for the cynicism which today engulfs American politics makes it terribly difficult to recover our ua- afore on both sides that ;here would be no furt:aer vote_ 'tonight. Mr. DOMINICK. I am happy to cornp:[y with that request. I-f there is to be a rollcall vote maybe we ,'_ould put this right after the Allen vote Mr. MANS_iF, LD. That is fine. Mr. I_0MINICK. I could talk about it lrom 10 to 10, mountain time from 9 to 9, i:ae Pacific time zone from 8 to 8; then '_,_rego tc the Yukon, Alaska, Hawaii, t'he _!_e_ng _traits, which would be § to 5. ]3ut I do not think that an awful lot of _:_eople will be voting out there anyway. ]3ut they do get up earlier than we do in l:[le Eas_;ern zone and they would have plenty of time to vote. So it does not tional momentum, But trust must be earned. And to earn it, our commitment must go well beyond reform of campaign financing. We have got to revamp communications between candidate and voter, government and the governed. Our entire political dialogue tn America has to be more open and direct. It is time, quite _imply, to trust t_e people with the truth. Only then will we truly deserve the privilege of holding public office in a free society, proceeded to r._ad the smendment. The amendment is as f.)llows: 342 Mr. DO:_INICK. U]) Iny arnendment it be stated. RECORD -- SENATE tonight. The PRESIDING OF_:CER. Without ol_jection, the Senator from Colorado is recognized. The amendm,_nt will be stated. The second assistant legislative clerk TI_E V--POLL CLOSING TIME SEc. S01. S_:_L_a_EO=S POLO CLOSm_ TXME.----On every national election day, cornmeneing on the date of the national electlons In 1976, the closing time of the poling. p:kaces in the several States for the election of electors for President an ! Vice President o:,' the United E_tates and the election of create a problem for anyone. If it does :t_.ot create a problem, then it would take _0nle of the sting we have as a result of '_he Bellmon amendment. It is advantageous we seek a solution to this matter. that Mr. President, I have felt for a long 'L[nlethat predictions made on the basis ¢_.fcomp ater Projections before people go i0 the l_fiis create a _imcult situation for many w)ters. Many stay home, saying, _'It is not worth voting," e_nd others get _:lad an,i say, "I am going to vote be._'.al:_e I do not like the computer system;" _,n(t stil_ others simply want to be on the April 2, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL winning side, if the computers show that that is the way people feel about it. This provision would be effective in 1976, not in 1974, so we would have plenty of time before the next Presidential election to see if there are any serious difficulties in it, other than the preemption of the right of the States to set their polling times. That is the only defect ! see, but if we are going to have major elections i_ seems to me advisable to close the polls at the same time regardless of whether the States say it is easier for their people to get up at 10 o'clock, or whatever it may be. I hope my friend, the Senator from Nevada (Mr. CANNON), who I am sure has run into this problem in his State as I have in Colorado, will agree to the amendment, I remember during the debate on this matter--I think it was last year or early this year the Senator from Kentucky said he thought this was a far better approach than the Beltmon approach. It would be my hope, therefore, in view of the fact that the Bellmon approach has been accepted, that we can take some of the sting out of it bY putting this particular amendment on the bill Mr. CANNON. myself 3 minutes. Mr. President, I yield I think there are a lot of practical problems in this amendment. The Senator has suggested that the polling places would close, for example, in this area at 11 at night and open at 11 in the morning. There are many people who prefer to vote as they go to work, in the mornlng. This has been traditional throughout the country. Therefore, most of the people, before they go to work, would have the opportunity to vote. If this amendment were adopted, it would mean there Would be complete shifts of people worklng at the poLLing booths, on the election boards, and so on, or else there would be a whole series of overtime problems, if the polls should open early in the mornlng and then remain open until 11 in the evening' I wonder if the Senator has explored what cast might be involved with respect to the various States that would have to make this kind of shift, increasing the number of hours, and going into nigh_ttime hours, Mr. DOMINICK. No, I can say to the Senator; I have not explored that. Mr. CANNON. I suppose it would be quite difficult. Basically, the Constitution provided that this would be a matter that the States would determine, although it provides that Congress may make such changes as it deemed advisable, except as to the places of holding elections. However, I think it is quite clear that at least the intent of the Constitution was this was an area in which the States will make a determination, While I recognize the problem posed by the amendment that was adopted the other day--and I, too, voted against it; I think it was bad legislation; I do not think it §hould have passed through this body; I do not think it will ever get through conference--I do not know whether we ought to compound one piece of bad legislation by substituting for it another bad piece of legislation, because RECORD -- SENATE I am not at all convinced in my own mind that this is the kind of legislation we ought to be adopting to get at the problem that the Senator is very much concerned with. Mr. DOMINICK. I can say to the Senator that, under the circumstances, I guess I had better get a yea and nay vote on it to see how the whole Senate feels about it. I do not think there are enough Senators here to order the yeas and nays on it at the present time, but let me say this to the Senator from Nevada. Let us say that there is a plan with a two-shift arrangement. There is plenty of time for them to go home in the daytime, and if they happen to have the early mornlng shift, they can vote before they go to work. Under present circumstances, it is perfectly easy for them to do it right after supper. If it goes from 11 to 11, there is more time, generally speaking, than there is other_se, although most of the States now have a 12-hour polling time. Certainly they do in my State. I believe they have a 12-hour polling time in Nevada. My guess is that it would not be any more expensive, and it would far more equitable, If one wants to put it this way, in a horse race, we would like to be there at the finish line. A person is not there at the finish line under present circumstances, because ali he is doing now is picking up a television projection_ It does not always turn out right, but the Senator from Arizona (Mr. GOLnWATER) has said it did hurt him, and the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. Hm_PHREY) said he thought it hurt him in 1968. All I can say to the Senator is that I cannot see how there could be much additional expense, and I think this is a far more equitable way to handle it than any way we have now. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, wiU the Senator yield? Mr. DOMINICK. I yield, Mr. COOK. I wonder if I may make a suggestion. _e Senator knows how I have felt on this for some time. Mr. DOMINICK. Yes. Mr. COOK. My chairman and I differed on the Bellmon amendment, In view of the fact that the Sena_r from Colorado wishes to have a roLLcall, and therefore that would occur after the vote on the Allen amendment, I wonder if the Senator, if he has completed his discussion, would withdrawhis amendmerit now, and we could agree that his amendment could be disposed of after the Alien amendment, To make a further suggestion, if the Senator would take the language of S. 372, we have already provided in that biLLthat Election Day would be a holiday. If that provision were in his amendment, _along with the time zones, I think it should be a holiday. I think we are probably the only major country in the world that does not have a holiday in general elections. That is why in our history we have never even gone as high as 70percent participation of the qualified voters, which I think in itself is nothing to brag about, If the Senator were to combine those two provisions into his amendment, I think it would be more palatable, S 5085 Mr. E_OM'INICK. I thank the Senator from Kentucky for his courtesy. I think the fimt_ part of his suggestion would be something I would be happy to comply with, namely, to withdraw the amend.. ment and put it off for a vote after the Allen amendment. As far as making election day a holiday is concerned, I went into that at some length. There were enormous problem,i connected with that proposal. One of thc; pro151ems that everybody cited was thal_ this wa:_ a Tuesday. If it were a holida$_, immedi:_tely there would be a demand for a long weekend, upon which occur.. rence everybody would take off, some to go South and go fishing, and some to go North and go hunting. Mr. COOK. Tbere is merit in the Sena.. ter's remarks. I do not know why we in the Congress and we who are responsible for the conduct of elections should find _ great deal of magic in Tuesday. Again, I think we would have many more people participating tn the elections in the United States if the election were held on a Sa'_urday. Somehow or other, it is very easy to sil; here in Congress and decide to shifl_ birthdays and decide to make someone',; birthda'._ on a weekend, _hen that wa_,5 not his birthday at all, and then we get accolades 'from the people because of a long weekend. Perhaps the best thing we cot:'! do about elections is to have them held on a weekend, so the people could get another l_ng weekend. There is noth.. lng magical about _xesday. I think we make a mistake when we do that. I think the question ought to be considered on the basis of the fulfillment of our re-. sponsibiility and seein_to it that the big-. gest percentage of the American people possible--95, 96, 99.44 percent--who are registered and who are eligible to vote participate in the American electoral process. That is reaLLy what we ought t_:_ be looking for. If that cannot happen on a Tuesday, then it ought to be our re-. sponsibility to find a time when we could get the greatest number of people who have the greatest amount of time to participate in a national election. Mr. I_OMINICK. X (;an say to the Sen.. ator from Kentucky that I wrestled with the problem of changing the whole struc.. ture and trying to have an electiol_L earlier and the primary earlier and the convent:ag of Congress: earlier, so that we do not come into session in January and that we try to comply With the school law. I did all kinds of things in this area. The difficulty I ran into is that part of it requires a constitutional amendment, part of it requires a law, and after 1_i months of it I gave up, realizing that I was not getting anywhere. Mr. COOK. OK. When the Senator from West Virginia, who is present on the flocr, discussed an amendment t,:, have all primaries in the United States for Federal elections take place in AU-. gust, and moved the date for the general election from November to October, un.-. fortuna'{ely he and I were still tradition.-. alist, because we stUCk with Tuesday. Yet we were perfectly willing to move the primary dates, We were perfectly willing to move the general election dates, bul; we still stuck to Tuesday. Yet I think: the Senator would honestly agkee With. / 34J; S 5086 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-- SENA rE April 2, 1973 me that we could move that date for the election, Mr. DOMINICK. I agree with the Senator. It has been clone fox' years, that is all. And I hesitate to change it at this point and make it a holiday and undoubtedly give a lot of people a long week end when they would not do much about Especially in. ti] les lik_ this when thc integrity of thc a( ministration of justice and of the legal pl )fessioa are constantly an issue before tu Frank Hogan's career stands as a mod 1 insp:ration, For Mrs. Javit.' and myself I extend our most profoun condolences to Mary ][-Iogan.. _- Upon the dispr_ amendment, the D, Amendment No. 11 again with a time 1 utes th,_reon after w And we have been boa ro:llcallvote. [tton of the Allen minick amendment, 4, will be called up mitation of 30 minLich a vote will occur. notified that it will voting. Mr. COOK. That was merely a suggestion, Mr. IX)MINICK. I would say to the Senator that' much as I would like to comply with him, I will comply with him at this time and withdraw my amendment at this time and offer it after the Allen amendment in the morning, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may withdraw my amendment and call it up right after the Allen amendment with a one-half hour time limitation, the time to be equally divided in accordance with the original order, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered, DEATH OF F'R]__IDENT POMPIDOU, OF _RANCE ADJOU] Mr. ]_OBERT C. I if ther,._be no furtl before the Senate, I with tLe.previous o] st:and .n adjournm tomorz ow morning. The _aotion was _ p.m. tlc Senate ad row, VJednesday, a.m. ,NMEN'T YRD. Mr. President, er businessto come move, in accordance _er, that the Senate mt until 11 o'clock QU O_[_1_ CALL Mr. ROBERT C. ] I suggest the absen The PRF. SIDING will call the roll. The second assis proceeded to call t] Mr. JAVITS. iq unanimous consent ;YRD. Mr. President, e of a quorum, OFFICEI{. The clerk ant legislative clerk roll. President, I ask mt the order for the quorum call be res_ nded. The PRESIDINC OFFICER. out objection, it is o ordered, Mr. JAVITS M President, I feel cer.. tain that Senators have heard of the an.nouncement from Prance that Presidenl; Pompidou has dic 1. I know that many ,roll join in the e: pressi)n o:f sympathy for the people of "rancc, who have lost their Chief of St_' Le, wl[ich is always a tragic moment :in ;he lif_ of any people.., It is uniquely ap dicabb, because death merges all the 2ar_ of Hie and allows re.statement of _;he '.xeme adous bonds of friendship which exist between the French people an( ours fives. This goes back in our hi,;tor_, to the most perilous, earliest days, whe] France, through its great military ].:tevoiutionary lng American lead win the Wa] _rs, and helped t.o bringto into be.ind, oendence. Ali of our difficulties--and ti: serious--become v, pared with the bo: the love of freedorr in arins, including J.n World War II, i estimable privilege, 1;o serve. _y are many and are ry Slqlall when com..ds of friendship and and (,ur comradeship comradeship in arms whiv. h I :had the in._ as a military officer', NOMIN ,_reed tx); and at 5:48 )urned until tomor)ri1 3, at 11 o'clock kTIONS Execitive nomina ;ions received Senate April 2, 1974 DEPARTME] TOP STATE by the Henr_ Texas, of Pro_ocol for E. theCarlo, V/hireJr., )f ouse, for Chief the rank of Arabassador. John E. Murphy, of iaryland, to be Deputy Admini:;trator, Agenc,. for International Developmf at, vice Maur .'e J. Williams. DEPLRTMENT OF Iq )USIN'G AND URBAN' DEVELPMEN'T Jame:: L. Mitchell, f Illinois, to be Under secret/ny of Housin and Urban Development, vice Floyd H. _'de, resigned. DEPARTM] T OF STATE I express the ho' e that in France, as here, the really pr( _oun¢.ralliesof free.dom and justice,o: civillzationand cu].l;ure,which we sh_ :e with France, may bring us both to a )ette:_understanding of our respective p, sitions, and may en.able us to work out our immediate prob.].ems and continue nder our auspices fol: l{ober%Strausz-Hu _,of Pennsylvania,to be Ambassador Extr; }rdinaryand Plenipotelatiar_: of the Unite .States of America to Sweden The :,ollowiug-namd persons to be Repre;sental:ives of the U] ired St_Ltes of America to the ;Sixth Special lession of the General Assemb y of the Unite . Nations: Frank S. Hogan, a nan who served for three decades as a district attorney of New York County. There can be no ,_reater tribute to a man than that he rried out his duties in the service of th _ law and its equal application to all w th a single-minded devotion to the tra_ ition and purity of all mankind. France is a _grea nation with a proud history. I knew Pre_ iden'.; Porapidou per-sonally. Nothing co Lid in any way be of ]nore benefit ill tl_ _ eflort toward the peace and prosperi g of all mankind to :rekindle as a result of Pcesident Pompi.dou's untimely dca h tkis new attitude VVillit,m E. Schaufel John PI. Buchanan, from th e State of Alalc l%obe: t N. C. Nix, U the Sta;o of Pennsylw Clarence Clyde F Jersey. theBarb_ra Alternate M. White,, Repres [hat law unmatche( in his time. The death of Fr_ ak S. Hogan today marks the end of legendary career which for more tha:_ 30 years stood for integrity, competen e, and fairness in of cooperation an _ be comme,n That, I believe, wou President striving, Porn.'oidou's finest mem( rial. " Mrs. Javiks and; extend ,our deepesL states of ,:ff bhe SixthofSpecial Scssion theAmerica General to ssembly' the United Nations. D_PART_ENT _ AO_ZC'_LTU_ 3Arith - ]FRANK . HOGAN Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, I wish announce to the S_ mate the passing the to of sympathy to Mada] Pompidou family. administration ustice, From his earliest _ays as an assistant Pompidou and the roll business. F,xamples _,re: Former tary of State Willia n P. Rogers, time limitation, therein, at the 344 to the Paris Peace alsh, Judges Stan;I, Murray Gm'fein, Whitman Knapp, chairman of the my State Supreme hers of the State rofessors, I_'RO( _RA;_ on each cone usion Senate will rasume unfinished business, lng question at that adoption of the All, 1059), orl whic'.n thor with a w)te to occur meat at 12 noort. Th, been ordered thereof G. Scali, of th L. Feltner t Secretary :!Orunthaver, District of Columbia. Jr., of Ohio. r., U.S. Representative Lma. 5. Representative from nia. rguson, Jr., of New fntative l%_%ssachusetts, to be of th'e United of Illinois, of Agriculture, re [gned. to be an vice Car- IN THEM_lINECORPS -_ Mr. ROBERT C. t YRI). Mr. President, the Senate will mvene at 11 a.rn. tomorrow, After the two lea _rsor their designees have been reccg_ize un, ier the standing order, there will be )eriod for the trans.-. action of routine rf )rnJng business for' not to exceed 15 min_ tes, witiq, a 3-minute judge and Ambassad¢: Talks, Lawrence E. V ly Fuld, Charles Brei! William iFlerlands, Charles Tillinghast, board of 7'WA and r_ Court Justices, mom legislature and law A. Richard Assistar, to the late Thomas t_ Dewey, Mr. Hogan sought to make the _anhattan District Attorney's Office a n 0del for the Nation and he succeeded I reatly in this end.eavor.Theindepenc _nee or the integrity of his officewas neve: in ques%ion. Assistant district attorney were chosen on a nonpartisan, merit 1 asis. Many alumni of Mr. Hogan's offic_ went on to distinguished careers in la _, Government, and Secre-_ former John The f_lowing-nan_e, speech made of which the onsideration of the S. 3044. The pondtime wi!t1 be on the n amendment (No. is _, division of time ,n the Allen amend_ ye_,s and nays haw_ (Navy Enlisted Scien- tific Edacation Progr_ _o m) the graduates permanenl appointment grade offor second lieutensntin the Ms ine Corps, subjectto the qu:_Aifications th _reforas provided by law: c_poot, Michael Grav,:,s, Willian_ C. Kane Thomas G. The i_lowing-naxne (Naval Reserve Officer Training Corps) grad_ _tes for permanent appointm_nt to the gra_ of second lieutenant m the Marine Corps, _bJeet to the quallfications tlr erefor as provi lied by h_w: Bt_ch Dan O. Potocki, Mark L. Keffer, Samos C. Thom/u;, James P. Moore, Charles Wade, Joe]. M. The _ollowing-n_m_ [ temporary disability ret'rEed )fficer for reapl ointment to the grade of colorel in/>he Maxlr _ Corps., subject to tho q_talific_tion_ therefe az provided by l_w: SENATE FLOOR DEBATES ON 5.3044 APRIL 3, 1974 April 3, 19 75 year ending June 3( the fiscal year endi $400,000,000 for the 30, 1977. sec. 602(a) Not mc funds appropriated al of this act shall be authorized under T_tl (b) Not more than appropriated annual] this act shall be use ized under Title V. MESSAGES FRO_ CONGRESSIONAL 1975; $300,000,000 for g June 30, 1976; and scal year ending June _ than 5 percent of the nually for the purples used for the purposes III. 5 percent of the funds for the purposes of for purposes authorTHE PRESIDENT Messages in writi_ g from the President of the United State were communicated to the Senate by A r. Marks, one of his secretaries, EXECUTIVE ME_ AGES REFERRED As in executive s ssion, the Presiding Officer (Mr. I4ASK_ :L) laid before the Senate messages frm the President of the United States submitting sundry ·nom/nations which vere referred to the appropriate eommi_ ees. (The nomination received today are printed at the e Ld of the Senate proceedings.) ENROLLED BIL _S PRESENTED · The Secretary of he Senate reported that on April 2, 1974 he presented to the President of the Uhi' _1States the followlng enrolled bills: S. 969. An act relati: to the constitutional rights of Indians; s. 1341. An aet *_o _rovide for financing the economic develop: xent of Indians and Indian organizations, a Ldfor other purposes; s. 1835. An actto a_ lend the act entitled "An act to incorporate he _merlcan Hospital of Paris," Stat. 654); approved and : muary 30, 1913 (37 S. 2441. An act _ amend the act of February 24, 1925, inc( perating the American war Mothers to ermit certain stepmothers and adoptive ithers to be members of that organization, CONCLUSION t _F MORNING BUSI2 ESS · The ACTING PR] SIDENT pro ternpore. Is there furthe: morning business? If not, morning bu_ _s is concluded, FEDERAL ELEi_TION CAMPAIGN ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1974 The ACTING PRESIDENT pro ternpore. Under the previous order, the Senate will resume the consideration of the unfinished business, S. 3044, which the clerkwill state. The legislative cIerk read as follows: S. 3o44, to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 bo provide for public financing of primary and general election campaigns for Federal elective Grace, and to amend certain other provisions of law relatlng to the financing and gonduct of such campaigns, The ACTING PRESIDENT pro ternpore. The pending question is on agreeing tO the .amendment of the Senator from Alabama (Mr, ALLEN) NO. 1059. Time for debate on this amendment is RECORD -- SENATE equally divided and controlled, between the Senator from Alabama (Mr. ALLEN) and the SenatOr from Nevada (Mr. CANNON), with a vote thereon to occur at 12 o'clock noon. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum, with the time taken from both sides. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro ternpore. Without objection, it is_so ordered, The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, what is the pending business? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The pending question is on the amejdment of the Senator from Alabama, No. 1059. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, the time is under control until 12 o'clock. Is that correct? The PRESIDING OFFICER. Each side has 15 minutes. The vote will take place at 12 o'clock, Mr. ALLEN. I yield myself 5 minutes. Mr. President, the purpose of this amendment is to reduce the amount of permissible contributions to Presidential primary or Presidential general elections and House and Senate primaries and general elections, Under present law, the existing law, there is no effective limit on the amount of contributions, and I feel that therein lies much of the problem, and that by limiting the amount of total overall contributions, the amount of total overall expenditures, and by limiting of the amount of individual contributions, the election process can best be reformed, and not by turning the bill over to the taxpayer and requiring that individual taxpayer, in half the cases, probably, to support the views and philosophies of candidates with whom they disagree, and taking out of the election process the voluntary participation by the electorate. That is the evil of public financing, The bill, S. 3044, as it comes to us, provides that in Presidential nomination contests, the contributions can be matched, provided they are $250 or less in Presidential races and $100 or less In HoUse and Senate races, and permitting candidates for the nomination for the Presidency to receive up to $7.5 million of public funds to aid them in their campaigns. But the bill, S. 3044, permits contributions far beyond the matchable contri_utions, We have heard so much talk about, "Well, you have got to take care of the challenger in these various races. You have got to protect the challenger." It is admitted all the while that the incumbent, by reason of his being known, by reason of his name identification in the minds of the voters, by reason of the many favo. rs he may have done for his constituents through the years, would be in better shape to attract larger contributtons, and the challenger would be at a disadvantage in this country, So this bill, while it matches contrl- S 5173 buttons up to $250 for the President and $100 for the House and Senate, allows contributions to be nm_te up to $3,000 .... The PRESIDING OFFICER. The 5 minut_es of the Senat_)r have expired. Mr. ALLEN. I yield myself an additional 3 minutes. And in the case of a man and his wife, up to $6,000. That is something that is going to benefit the incumbent. That is not going to take care of the challenger. The purpose of the amendment that is now pending, cutting contributions down to $250 for the President and $i00 for the House and Senate, is to broaden the ba,_e of those participating in our elections. The p_ponent_ of reform say they want to eliminate the large contributions. I beliew_ the $250 limit is going to elimi.hate the so-called large contributor. The $100 contribution for the House and Senate is going to eliminate the large contributor. Thai would put the incum.bent and the challenger on exactly the same basis. .This whole process can be solved inside the framework of private financing, by the small contributer and still allow Federal matching. It seems Members of the Senate are going to insist on having their campaigns subsidized by the ta_r.payer. That vote is quite evident here in the Senate. Members of the Senate want to see the taxpayers finance their campaigns, because I had an amendment knocking Members of the House and the Senate, out 0f the subsidy, and that amendment was voted down. So it is er!i-. dent Senators are going to want pub]iie financling. Therefore, let us l_mit the public ii-. nancing to the amounts set out, $2_(! and $100, but let us chop off all amounts above that, because there seems to be Something evil or sinister about contrib.. utions that are over $250 for the Presi.. dent and over $100 for the House and the Senate, because we are-not allowing the Government to match these excessivE; contributions. So ff Senators want reform and not just public subsidy_ let us cut these con-. tributions down to where the campaigns can be financed by the average citizen of our country, which will encourage citizen participation in our election process. That is what the amendment does. It drastically cuts the amount that can be contributed. We have heard a lot from Common. Cause Lo the effect that, "Well, We wan.t to cut these contributions down." Let us see if Senators who seem to be influenced. by that plea---or demand, would be a bel;ter word--by Common Cause ... The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator has expired. Mr. AI,LEN. I yield myself 1 minute. Let us see if they are going to be for cutting contrib/ltions down to a realistic amount, an amount that would lead the average citizen tO feel he has a part in the election process. Let us see if they want election reform or if they want I°ederal subsidy. That is the issue pre.sented by this amendment. I reserve the remainder of my time. 34-7 S 5174 CONGRESSIONAL Mr. CAN"NON. Mr. President, I yield mysetf5minutes, Mr. President, the problem of campaign reform is certainly not a blackand-white issue. It is not susceptible of very easy solutions. It requires a long time and a lot of lessons need to be learned before something is actually accomplished. As a matter of fact, since I have been in the Senate, I have been involved in campaign reform bills. Since 1959 the _;enate has either passed in the Senate or has reported to the Senate out of the committee a bill in 1960, another one in 1961, another one in 1967, which I may say passed the Senate by a vote of 87 to 0 and went to the House side, and then amendments were passed in August of 1971. On top of that, S. 372 that we passed by an overwhelming vote last year and sent to the House, has not been acted on as yet. ! might say frankly, Mr. President, to the Senator from Alabama that I believe that had S. 372 been acted on by the House last year, I believe we would not lqave had 1;he pressures we now have to get into the area of public fnancing, ]But we have had pointed out, as a result of the Watergate hearings, the un_ortunate aspects of big money in camloaigns. That is what we have tried t_ resoIve. We have not done it completely, but we have tried to do it an an equitable fashion in the pending bill. We have left it so that the candidate need not go to public financing if he does not desire to. On the other hand, we have limited the effect ,of big contributions and have nmcle it so that only small contributed anaounts can be used in computing the triglgering :factor in determining whether a person wou/d be entitled to match the difference if he went the public funds route. We believe it is fairer, 'in that lashion, to a nonincumbent than to an incumbent, because it would give the challenger an opportunity to procure small contributions to get up to his triggerimg _nu)_mt on an equal basis with an incumbent who might not have any trouble going out and raising larger amounts, But we do not let the incumbent use those larger figures in determining eligibility. Much em_ be said on both sides of this issue. There is no special magic in many of the figtu-es we have used. Per example, in the limit on expendi= tares, the Senator from Alabama cotrectly pointed out yesterday that last year was 'the first time we limited expenditures and then only to a we portion of the ex_anditures. In thisas bill have tried to limit the overall expenditures. I must say frankly that I am certainly not wedded to the formula we trove used here. If Senatoz_ feel the figure is too high, we ought 'to have a vote on an amendment to reduce it. We used the figure somewhat at arbitrarily, I might in say, but by looking past experience trying to determine what expenditures had been made, and recognizing the fact that too much money has been spent in Federal campaigns., not _m}y in the congressional races, but most certainly in presidential and Vice-Presidential races. 348 RE(ORD _ SEb_AT:£ So we came up with _ formula of 10 cents per voter in a primary electior, for an eligible voter of votttqLg age, and; then 15 cents in a genexal eZtection. We _xsed a somewhat arbitra_ y figure of $90,.. 000 in the House races. Actually, I felt: and _[ am sure some other raembers of the committee felt, last year, that this !isa matter that the Houze itself ought te determine. So we used the arbitrary fig.. ure, as has been pointer out in the ar.. gument. Some .Member_, of the House-: used less than that figure; some used much more. So we used an arbitrary figure, hoping that the House would make a determina., tion sa; to what; the correct figure shoultl be. I am not wedded to Shy of these fig .... ures. I would he willing to go along with a reduction irt both the amount that could be spent in the ;)rimary or the amount we have in th. · bill, and the amount that c_uld be stent _Lnthe gen.. eraI election, if that is consistent with the wishes of a majority of this body. But we have seen,' as a result of the _'atergate hca:tings, the :nherent dange_ of large cent rations and the undue influence that is exertec., or at least is attempted to be exerted, by the makin_._; of tremendous contributions. Those are the sorts of things we _ant to do away with. I do not often quote from the New _Zork 'rimes. But I read an editorial it:,: the April 2 issue from which I shall rea(l! a part into the RrcoRr, because :it ex presses my views on this matter: Although small contributions are lmpor-. 1;ant, experience, has sho_l that they are easier tx>raise g_ the Presi([eutial level tharL in many _nat, o_ial and C>ngressional con.. tests. Even in Presidential race.% the candi., date whoMeGove::n appeals toora passionat_; minority, I_, George a G._orge Wallace, b; likely to have _n easier t:me of it than _ middle-of-the-road candidate, I may say tl_t in the d .scussion on this matter last year, the Senator .from South Dakota (Mr. 1Vk:GOWSN) on the floor of the.Senate adraitted tha'; he _aad, or ws_ forced, to take ,,;ome large contributions ,,;eed money--to get him:;elf into a post-, tion to make a [arge solicl tation for fund!; at a low level, because most of his money came from sm_dl contributors. I continue t_) read fro:n the editorial:: Even those with devoted follo'_ings do no_; escape the need for large g .frs or loans from wealthy individuals or interest groups to pay for campaign start-up costs, for direct mai]i ,';olicitatlon of small givers, and to tide cam.. paigns over rough spots, i:n short, if large contributions are not a wE olly :reliable sub.. _';titute, there has to be an alternate source of funds, and ?shat can only be public money. Theoa choice is money not betwe exclusivemoney, rell-, ,race private or ;n vn public _:n the best plm'alistic tracition, the SenaVn reform bill prove.des a mlx_i system in which small and medium sized contributors perform a critical function but in which public: money is available as the _teces,;ary alterna., 1;ire and supplement. It is a p:[an that de.. serves the suplx,rt of all those such as Sena-, _ors Weicker and Baker who genuinely farm! cleaner eteetionm Mr. President, I must _ay that I agree 'with the assessment of the importance of making some contributio_m available and providing access to public funds i:f 'we are going to do away with larger con-., April 3, 1974 _,ributkns. If we are going to rely on large e_ntributiorrs, as we Imve done in the pa_t, then we could very well forget _bout pttblic financing hecauae some people ,_(mld go out and raise large sums 0f mon_._y,and they will continue to do so hf we d<:,not have a limit. We t:ded to get at that to so,ne degree in S. 372 Iast year' by fixing the amount of expenditures in the campaign. We used roughly the same formula in the bfil in c_etermining, this year, the amount that ceuld be spent. Yesterday the distingu_;hed Senator I'nym Alabama pointed out that what we ought _o do is to try to shorten the c_ampaign. The Senate has already acted :m thab point. I hope that the House will act: on it. I am all for shortening the time of the campaign. That wilt do more I;o redr_ce the cost of a campai gu, per:haps, than any other one thing, other than p.coviding free time and free maili.ng pri_ffIeges, which would cer_dnly re duce the cost to the candidate aa the Senato:_: from Alabama suggested yesterday. But _:ven a former Member of the Senate, waom the distinguished Senator from Atabama quoted yestreday, pointed out that small contributions are the backbone of political fina_:ing. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The 5 L_[nutes of the Senator have expired. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield myself additional time. The PRESIDING OPPIC!.ER. The Senl_tor fr,_m Nevada is recognized. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I agree with that statement. That is why we redllced !;he matching amounts to $100 in congre_;sionaI races and i_) $250 in _a presidential race. However, we do permit contributions up to $360 limit per person SO that the person can get seed money and h_ve an opportunity to start his campaign which is so important, as pointe_t out in the editoria.t from which I have just quoted. One of the suggestions he made yesterday was to increase the tax credit or tax deduction and to make possible a _ft tax deduction for this purpose. We did not go that far on the gift tax. We did under title V, that has now been '_aken out of _he bill, and ! support the doublir, g of the tax deduction and/or the r_ax credit, and de_bling the checkoff. I might say the distingt_.shed Senator from At_bama has found some fault with the checkoff provision by saying that _n order r_ot to be--that you have to check !if you do not want the money used. I agree with him on that. I think it ought tO be _n affirmative action on the part 0f the taxpayer, so that il he wants his money used for that purpose, to go into the politieal fund, the $1, which I support increasing to $2 per person, then ! think he ought to have the aff_rmatlve obligation of making a check to go lndicate, a_ad have that money go into the fund. But :[ hope the Senate 'will not supoort tk,e Allen amendment on this par'hicular issue, even though ! find mysel_ in agreement with h_m tO a very high degree on the basic principles of what we are trying to do. We _ust differ on some c,f the procedural aspects, as to wl_at _ould get the job done, Aprit 3, 1974 CONGRESSIONALRECORDm SENATE Mr. President, I reserve the remainder 'of my time. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, how much time do I have remaining? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 6 minutes remaining, Mr. AT.T.EN. I yield myself 5 minutes, Mr. President, the distinguished Senafor from Nevada has not said one single thing that would detract from the wisdom of the amendment that is before the Senate. He speaks of cutting out large contributions, and that is just exactly what this amendment seeks to do. The question is, what is a large contribution? Well, I feel like a $3,000 contribution is a large contribution. Under the bill, a $6,000 contribution would be permitted for a couple.I think that is a tremendous contribution, and I think that campaigns can be run on $100 limits for the House of Representatives and the Senate, and $250 for the Presidency. If we do not limit all contributions in this fashion, we are going to have the incumbents able to get these $3,000 and $6,000 contributions, and the challengers will not be able to get them. The purpose of this amendment is to cut the size of the incumbent's advantage · down to where he would be on the same basis with the challenger, Even at that, the challenger will have a disadvantage, because the incumbent can get more in contributions, even small contributions, than can the challenger. The challenger would be way behind the incumbent in contributions of up to $100, because the incumbent would get those contributions, and then the Government would compound that advantage by doubling the amount that the incumbenthadreceived, This amendment would go a long way toward eliminating the influence of large conCributions. So ff what we want is to -limit the influence of large contributions---and the proponents say that is what it is--why not reduce drastically the amount of the contributions that can be made? That is ,all that can be matched, so what is the use of having this wide area between $250 and $3,000 or $6,000, as the case might be, and between $100 and $3,000 or $6,000, as the case might be? Why ,have that area where the incu_nbent would have this tremendous advantage of greater ability to obtain funds? · Mr. President, let us have true reform, Let us not just mouth a few pious platitudes, that this is the only way to reform the system and this is the way to get the influence of big money out of the campaigns, by turning the cost over to the taxpayers, I have been interested to note that five out of the seven Watergate Committee members--and the Watergate Committee was charged with making recommendations for campaign reform--are opposed to public financing. They do not t_ink it is such a good idea. I believe the answer is in the realm of private financing, where a person has the right to contribute to the candidate of his choice. He will not have that right under the public financing feature in the general elections, where the money is paid by the ta_xpayers through the Federal Government, S 5175 As I pointed out yesterday, in the State of California the nominees of the two parties will receive from the Federal Government to conduct their' general election'campaigns for the Senate, from the public treasury, to each of those two nominees, $2,121,000, which is more than nine times what a Senator would earn as a U.S. Senator in the entire 6 years of his term. If that is reform, I do not believe I know the meaning of the word, to just write a check, Mr. President, with no control over it whatsoever except postelection auditing, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired, Mr. ALr,_.N. I yield myself 1 additional minute, Mr. President, I do not believe that we ought to permit contributions of $6,000 to be made. T believe we should limit Presidential campaign contributions to $250, and House and Senate campaign contributions to $100. That is the amount that can be matched, and that is all that ought to be permitted to be contributed, That will get the influence of large contribtttions and large contributors out of the election process, So I hop_ the amendment will be agreed to. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada has 2 minutes remainlng. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield myself 2 minutes, The Senator has made one proposition that I think does not truly represent the situation, when he says that an incumbent would be able to get $1,000 or $3,000 contributions, and then go to the Federal Government and get the matching funds. That is simply net true. Whatever amount, Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield, the Senator from Alabama did not say that. I said he would have greater ability to get the eontributions up to $3,000. What I am trying to do is cut the permissible contributions down to what can be matched. The Senator must have misunderstood. The record will show. amendments such _Ls this one, which would make it impossible for a person to carry on a campaign without being able to get contributions of more than that ammmt, even according to Senator McGov_.RN'S own testimony, and he has had more experience than any other one person in raising tremendously large campaign funds from small contributers. Mr. :_IATHIAS. Mr. Presiden.t, will the distinguished chairman yield on that point for a brief comment? Mr. CANNON. I yield. Mr. MATHIAS. 'While I cannot claim to$ivai the scope cd. Senator McGovem"s experience, I have perhaps the most re-. cent experience. I announced earlier this year that I would take no contributions of over $100. I am speaking in support of the amend[-, ment. Since December 21, 1973, it is :in-. teresti:ag to note that more than 2,700 in-. dividuals have contributed to my cam-, palgn. No contributionhas exceeded$1O0. The total amount has been over $45,000. Thus, the total average contribution has been approximately $16.25. I could only say to the distinguished chairman that I have to be enormously encouraged by this kind of response. Mr. CANNON. Let me ask the Senator, that is a period of 4 months. Is the Senator saying, then, that if he collectk_ twice that amount in the next 4 mont_, which would be $90,000, and he adds that to the present $45,000, would that be enough to run his campaign, $135,0007 Mr. ]YIATHIAS. I wish I could say yes to that, but there is another rule here, that in the course of a campaign public in-. terest tends to rise, and the number cdl contributions, and perhaps the average size of the contribution, wmfld rise with the interest as we come closer to tile campaign. Mr. CANNON. I would simply say to the Senator, b_ased on his experience up to the present time, that ff it continues in that fashion up to the primary, he will not have raised much more than. half the amount that would be needecl in Maryland. Mr. MATHIAS. I thank the Senator Mr. CANNON. Perhaps I did. But I want to make it absolutely clear that the challenger and the incumbent would be on an equal footing with respect to the matching funds, the contributions which could be matched at the Federal level, If the candidate of either party receives funds in excess of the matching formula funds, those moneys then go to offset moneys that the Federal Government would not necessarily have to match, would not be able to match, as a matter of fact, and the overall expenditure limit would still be in effect. That would include moneys over and above the matchlng formula triggering funds, as well as those within those limits, for the purpose of the overall limitation, So I would simply suggest to my colleague that ff he supports this concept, we ought to have amendments to get the bill in the proper form. 'For example, if he feels that the amounts of expenditures permissible are too high, we ough_ to have amendments along that line, rather than try to add the type of from l_[evada for his comments. The pending' amendment would limit contributions from any individual to $100 for congressional _ces and $250 for Presidential races. This amendment would not affect the public financing provisions of this bill, and thus must be considered in the context of the entire bill. In such a context, the question is raised: Can candidates raise a sfibstanrial amount cd funds in congressional contests from contributions in amounts of $100 or less? Last December I announced on the Senate floor that I would make my reelection campaign tlfis year an experiment to test that proposition, as well as a number of other reforms which have been proposed, debated, passed by the Senate in some cases, but not yet enacted flute law. Although the fundraising efforts for my caxapaign have not yet really gotten underway in a subst_mtial way, the very early returns clearly show that the peo- 349 S 5176 CONGRESSIONAL REQDRI)-- SENATE April 3, 1974 pie will respond, and 'that sufficient funds can be obtained from small contlfibulions. Since December 2 I; 1973, more than 2,700 individuals have contribdted to my campaign organization. No contribution exceeded $100. The total amount donated in this time has been over $45,000. Thus, On this vote, the Sem,tor from Vermont (Mr. A_:EN) is paired with the Senator from r[linois (M:'. PERCY). If present and voting, the Senator from Vermont would vote "yea" and the Senator from ILlinois would vote "nay". The result was annoxlnced--yeas 19, nays 73, as follc,ws: Mr. '])OMINICK. Mr. President, i ask [or the :yeas and nays. The _ eas and nays were ordered. Mr. ]_ii,OBEI_T C. BYRD. Mr. President, ,;rill the Senator yield to mE; for a unan.mous consent request? ]Ylr. l'3OMINICK. I yield. Mr. B,OBERT C. BYR, D. Mr. President, the average contribution has been approximately $16.25. I am enormously encouraged by these totals. They result principally from voluntary, unsolicited contributions and from returns on a preliminary test maillng which was sent out just be/ore Christmas. The percentage of responses from this test mailing are more than double what is normally considered an excellent response. I am told that the percentage of responses may well exceed any other similar political mailing in our history. So, while the total number of persons solicited was small, the results clearly indicate that if the people believe in the candidate, know that their contribution is important, and feel that their small donation is significant, then they WiiI respond. I recognize, of course, that all candidates may not have the advantage of ineumbency that I enjoy, having served 5 years in the Senate and 8 years in the [y,o. 106 Leg ] [ s_sk u,_animous consent that upon the disposition of the amendment by Mr. DO_m_CK, Senator STEVENSON be recog:_ized to, call up his amendment No. 977, _,n.d that there be a time limitation .;hEn'eon of 40 minutes, to be equally dj_:ided and controlled i n accordance with i;he usual form. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. lVfr. DOMINICK. Mr. President, I yield :nyself 5 minutes, and I say to my col[leagues I think this is an interesting amendment. I talked a little about it last night. The purpose of the amendment is to i_ry to nmke Senator BELKMON'S _Mnend:Lent i;._operative insofar as criminal ::)enalties are concerned and eonstitu_:.ional i:asofar as the rest of it is con,:'.elTled. What the amendment does in _,ceomplishing this is to say that in every YEAS--19 Allen Fcng Baker Hart Bennett: Helms Biden HolUngs. Byrd, Mathias Cotton Robert C. McClellan Ervin Pastore NAYS--73 Abourezk Fannin Bartlett Goldwater Bayh GIifiln Beall Gullaey Bellmen Hlmsen Bentsen Hartke Bible H_,,skell Brooke Hatfield ]_uckley H_thaway Burdick Hiuska Byrd, Humphrey Harry F., Jr. Inouye Cannon Jackson Case Javits Chiles Johnston Church Kennedy Clark Lc_ng Cook Magnuson Cranston M_usfield Pel] Stennis Taft Thurmond Weicker Mondale Montoya Moas Mu,_kte Nel;_on Nunn rackwood Pearson Proxmire Randolph Ribicoff Roth Schweiker Scott, Hugh Sparkman. Stafford Stevens Stevenson Symington House. And so I would not favor to tmpose by law such severe restrictions on candidates unless there were a realistic state o/ equality among candidates or same sort of compensatory public funding available to make up part of the money whirl a candidate sacrifices by refusing large gifts. In the context of a biI1 such as-this, however, where significant pub- curtis Dole Domeniei Domir_lck Eagleton Eastland lie funds would be available, I believe we should all seriously con_ider whether lvo_ exl_nditures cannot be curtailed and therefore whether all contributions cannot be. limited to the amounts suggest_d in the amendment of the Senator _rom Alabama. The PRESIDING OFFICER. (Mr. Hasx_). At this time, the hour of 12 o'clock having arrived, under the previous order, the Senate will proceed to vote on the amendment of the Senator from Alabama (Mr. ALLEN) NO. 1059. So Mr. ALLEN'S amendment (No. 1059) was rejected. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment wasrejected. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRE. I move to lay that motion on +,he table. The motion. 'z) Iay on the table was agreed to. On this question the yeas and nays have been ordered, and the clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk called the rolI. A1ViEND:5/iENT l_O. 1124 Mr. DOMINICK. Mr. President, up my lunendment No. 11_4. The PRESIDING O?FICEI_. amenchnent will be stated. i_r. ROlgERTr C. BYl%D. I announce that the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. _IILBRIGHT), the Senator from Alaska (Mr. GRAVEL), and the Senator from Iowa (Mr. HUGHES), are necessarily absent, Aiken _rock Pulbrigh_ McGlure Tal:madge M,:Gee Tower McOovern Tunney McIntyre Wihiams Metcalf Young Metzenbaum NOT VOTING---8 Gravel Percy Huddleston Scott, Hughes William L. The PRESIDIZqG OF]_CER. the previous order, the Senator Colorado is recognized. Under from I call The The a_sistant legislativ,_ clerk rc_d as ' follows: TITLE V--POLL CLO_CING TIME SEC. 501. SIMULTANEOUS POLL CLOSING TIME.----On every national et_ction day cornmencing on the date of the rational elections i:_ 1976, the closir_g time of tae pelling places I further announce that the Senator m the several States for the election of elecfrom Kentucky (Mr. I-IuDDLESTON), is tors for President: and Vfce President of the absent on official business. United States and the election of United Mr. GRIF__'IN. I announce that the Szates Senators and Represeatatives shall be a_ follows: 11 pvstmeridiar, st a:adard time Senator from Tennessee (Mr. BROCK), in the eastern t:.me zone; 10 p(_stmeridian and the Senator from Illinois (Mr. standard time ir. the central time zone; 9 P_RCY), are, necessarily absent.. !_stmeridian standard time in the Pacific I also armounce that the Senator from time zone; _ p(_tmeridian standard time Virginia CitE. WILLIAM L. SCOTT), iS tn the Yukon time zone; 6 postmeridian absent onofficialbusiness, standard time in the Alaska-Hawaii time z_me; and 5 postmeridian s_andard time in I further announce that the Senator the Bering time zone: Pro_ided, That the tro_ Vermont (Mr. AIKEN), is absent due polling places in each of th,; States shall be to illness in the family, open for at least twelve hoars. 350 :,imethatzone, will he staggered, ;i;O all the the polling polls throughout the en;;ire UnJ.ted States, including the Bering Straits area and Hawaii, will close at the ;!;ame t_:ne. lin order to do that, and in order to be able to give everybody a proper chance '(0 vote, 'we have a provision in the 'amendntent that att the polls in each i:.inle zone must be Open for 12 hours. So that on the eastern seaboard, with eastern standard time, for example, it ,:.poetries that. the polls would open at 11 in the n,torning and close at 11 at night. l!ly the time you get to the Bering Straits, 1,he_ wo_lld open at. 6 in the 'morning and _7ould c}ese at 6 at night. The ei_ect of this is to say to the media (3r television, or whatever it _igbt he, that th,:_re is no wa_ by which you cam predict ,_,hat the results _:_.,i]lnot know what the _he, clo_ing time in any _:verybo, ly has ¥oted in i :!o()n. I suppose they can basis, but that is pretty t:y so doing there would _dous o]_portunity, that .are, because you results are umtil precinct, unless one. precinct by predict on that unreliable, and not. be the obthere would be J:a the t_ellmon amendment, of someone droppini_ off a sheet somewhere for rn_nt_y or o_herwise, and have someone ge ,.hc_d and publish it and; then have i;onleon_ try to enforce the law With c rimina penalties. I voted against the ]!:Je]llnoE: amendment beacuse I thought ig was unenforceable and that it was not ill keep:ing with the rights of the news !:_ledia under the first amendment. This _mendment means that the in!ormation will not be available, not by ]aw but by circumstance. Ail polling i:,laces will be closing at the same time Rnd no _ne will know the results in any time zo]_e until all Dolls are closed. They v:ill be (pen from 11 until 11 in the easti:_rn, standard time zone, from 10 to 10 Jn the central standard zone, from 9 '[o 9 in ihs Rocky Mountain area, where April 3, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL I come from, from 8 until 8 in the Pacific zone, and so on through Hawaii and the Bering Straits. In order to make this effective it seems to me we should concentrate, first, prob' ably on the presidential election of 1976 rather than trying to do it in the senatorial and congressional elections of 1974. I say this because although predictions are made in senatorial and congressional races, those races do not influence as many voters as the presidential election_ It would be effective in every national election starting with the national election in 1976. Last night the distinguished Senator from Nevada, my good friend Howard Cannon, brought up the question of expense. Frankly, most of the States that lie in a specific time zone have 12 hours of polling time, anyway. This happens in Colorado, it happens in I_msas, and in New York. ! have been a watcher in many of these places on various occasions in the past, and unless they have changed the laws recently there are still 12 hours ayailable and so there will be no additional expense, and ff there is additional expense, it will be minimum, It is interesting that in our election process, for reasons I am not sure of, we probably have less people voting that in any other affluent and economically viable free state in the world. Our average is extraordinarily Iow. I wish to give some fi gBr_ in that regard: In 1964, the year Senator C,OtDWAT_.a ran for the presidency, only 62 percent ofeligible Americans cast a ballot for one of the presidentlal candidates_ that is, either LYndon Johnson or BARRY GOLDWATEI_ In the off year congressional electioaxs, the record is even worse. Less than 50 percent of Americans over 21 voted. On the other hand, in Europe, where uniform, nationwide votiug hours are cornmon practice--and granted_ in most of those countries there is a much smaller pePulation_the percentages range from 87 percent in Denmark, which is quite small, to 72 percent in France, a country with which, as everyone knows, we are having some difficulty at the moment.. . This might increase the number of people who feel they have the opportunity and privfiege of going to vote when the horserace has not been decided by the electronic news media after the results are in from precincts, The other day during the debate on the Bellmon amendment, the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. HUSHIng'Y) said that he felt the predictions made afte. r po!.'ing places in the eastern tame zone had closed affected his election for Presid_t in 1968. The Senator from Arizona (Mr. GOT.DWATER) said that the news media had predicted after three preclncts were in in the eastern time zone that he was going to be clobbered, and he said they were right, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator has expired. Mr. DO--CK. Mr. President. I yield myself 2 additional minutes, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Colorado may proceed, Mr, DO_rrNICK. Nevertheless, what ! RECORD-- SENATE am saying in general is that we have a provision which, in nay opinion, is a very bad provision. Second, we will not need that provision in force and we can get away from all enforcement problems if this amendment As agrged to. Third, it will not cost any more money. Fourth, we might get away from the problem of what is going to happen, As the Senator from Rhode Island said in previous colloquy, some years ago the National Governors Conference recommended this provision in 1966. Lq addition, the chairman of the board of ABC, surprisingly enough, also has come out in favor of this type resolution of the problem, Mr. President, when the National Governors' Conference favors this provision, when the chairman of the board of ABC favors the provision, and we have the criticism of people throughout the courttry who do not know whether it is worthwhile to vote after there have been electronic predictions, it seems to me that here we have an inexpensive way to take care of the problem, Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. _K. Mr. President, I yield my-' self 2 minutes, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky is recognized. Mr, COOK. Mr. I_resident, in the absence of the chairman of the conuulttee, speaking of the ranking minority member of the committee, and speaking with respect to the amendment, it was interesting that last night on ABC News Mr. Reasoner and Mr. Howard K. Smith discussed this matter. Mr. President, will the Senator from Nevada yield to me 3 minutes of his time? Mr. CANNON. I yield. Mr. COOK. I was amazed because they went back to the election of 1972 to sustain their point. At'no time during the discussion between Mr. Reasoner and Mr. Smith did they give actual votlng figures. They talked about the fact that "based on our predictions we have predicted so and so will carry such and such a State." This is the very point we got into in a discussion with the Senator from iVlinnesota (Mr. HUMPHREY) and the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. BELLMON) the other day. Mr. Howard K. Smith proceeded to say that their studies showed there was no problem. I thought to myself what a lacing we would get if we stated that based on a study we had made it was shown that it does have an effect. It reminds me that they would have their own fox in their own chickenhouse, I must say to the Senator from Colorado that one of the things they did say at the conclusion of their remarks blastLug the Bellmon amendment and giving them right, not to make any fiat figures, but, to make l_redictions, and the president of ABC now is on the side of the Senator from Colorado, because he said if they wanted to resolve that problem they would stagger the voting hours so ail returns would come in at the same time. So I do not know whether the Senator from Colorado wants a major net- S: 5177 work on his side in regard to his amendment, but I would have to say, in all fairness, he now has one. Mr. ,CANNON. Mr. President, I yield myself 3 minutes. I sort of have mixed emotions about this araendment, because ! agree with the author of the amendment tn principle as to what he is trying to do. ! just have some reluctance about imposlng these restrictions on the States_ Again, I voted the same way he did on the Bellmon amendment. I think It was bad legislation, 'but the majority of our colleagues did not agree with us, even though some of them agreed with us last year, and some of them changed their positions, because it was defeated last Fear two to one, but it was passed a few days ago. I cannot help but refer back to section 4 of article I of the Constitution, which says: The time, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives shan b_ prescribed itl each State by the legislature thereof. It is true that the section goes on to say: But t:he Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as the pla_;es of choosing Senators. I hearken back to the ihttiai statement there, where it was quite clear that it was the intent of the framers of the Constitution to leave it to the States to make their own determination as to the times of Iholding elections. personally do not find any fault with the S_nator's amendment with respect to my own State, because it coincides somewhat with the times that we use, but I am thinking about the eastern part of the United States, where the polls could not open until 11 o'clock in the morning, in the State of Maryland, for example_ unless Maryland decided it wanted to open tZaem more th_m 12 hours a day, and, if it did that, it would have the problem of having to have another shift of workers or paying overtime to the people who were working. So my basis of opposition to this amendment solely is that it ought to be left to the States to make the deterrnination as to what hours will be set for holding the election, a time best suited to their nceda ! am fully cognizant of the fact that I did not support the. Belimon amendment, which precluded making any of that information public, and making it a criraJnal offense to do so. I can lmagine someone being prosecuted because he calledanda friend on that the phone in California told him the results of the elevation are such and such, There is a worse penalty for violation of that law than for transmitti2g illegal gambling' information, I may say. Mr. President, I am prepared to yle]d back the remainder of my time. Mr. DOMINICK. Mr. President, I yield myself 30 seconds. I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from Arizona (Mr. GoT.rwax-t_) be added as a cosponsor of the amendment, 351 S 5178 CONGRESSIONAL RE([ORD -- SENATB April 3, 19 74 along with. the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. B_Csl0. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. DOMINICK. 3[yield, Mr GOLDWATER. This is a subject to which, naturally, I have given quite a bit of thought. I would go further than the Senator's amendment; however, I am happy and honored to be a cosponsor. I had thought of making election day a national holiday, which we did at one time, and making the day 20 hours long, starting at 6 one morning and ending at 6 another morning, and having the whole country on central time for that I day. That wouht eliminate all of the problems that seemingly would have come up tn the reporting of early results from the East. I think anything we can do to point up the of about electionit, day, regardless importance of hOW we go is really the important thing. If we can get only a bare majority of Mr. ROBERT C. B_'_D. ][ announce that the Sens,tor from Arkansas (lVrr. ]._nULBRIGHT), the Senator from Alaska (Mr. GRAVEL), the SemPer from Iowa (Mr. HUGHES), the Senator from Arkan._ _,;as (Mr. 1VXcCI,_:LLAN), and the Senatcq' from New Hampshire (lJr. ]YIclN_zs_.) are necessarily absent. I further arnounce that the Senato:r' from Kentucky (Mr. I[UDDLESTON), is absent on official busines,. Mr. GRIFFIlq. I announce that th_ Senator from Tennesse_ (Mr. BROCK], and the Senator the Ill:mots (Mr_ PrRCY) are necessarily absent. I also annotmce that tile Senator fr0nl Virginia (Mr. _*ILLIAM I_. SCOTT), is ab.sent on official ]ousiness. I further announce tLat the Senator from Vermont (Mr. AX:_EN) is absent due to illness in the fanily. The result was announced--yeas 48_ nays _.[2,as follows: [:_1o.107 Le_:.] YEAS--4S _kllen Eastland MeGovern Baker Fannin Nelson FEDEf;_L ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1974 The Senate continued with the consideratJon of the bill (S. 3044) to amend _he Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 tc provide for public financing of primary and general election campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend _ertain other provisions of law relating to the financing and conduct of such campaigns. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senator from Illinois ).s recoliimized to offer an amendment. AME_r_ME_rr NO._ 977 :Mr. _!;TEVENSON. Mr. President, I call· up amendment No. 977, and ask for J.ts my imnLediate consideration, our peopleWhich to vote,have it would be well. nations, holidays on Other their election days, get 75 or sometimes 95 percent the vote. That is reflectionof on theof state of apathy anda sad disinterest the citizens of this country. Frankly, we Bayh Fong Bean OoldWater Bennett Griffin Biden Hansen Buckley Byrd, Robert C. Bart Haskell case Hatfield Church Helms Cook Boilings cotton Hruska cranston Humphrey Curtis Javits li_menicl l_[athias l)omintek iqlcOee NAYS--42 Nunn Pa_kwood Pastore Pearson Randolph Roth Sc:aweiker Sparkman Stafford St,ranis Stevens Taft Thurmond Tunney The PRESIDING OFIHCER. The amendment will be stated. The assistance legislative clerk proce_ded to read the amendment. Mr. _i:TEVENSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that f_rther reading of the :;_mendment be dispensed with. 'The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. c_',TEVENSON'S amendment (No. 971) :is .as follows: On l_ge 79, strike lines 6 and ? and insert Abourezk Bartlett Bellmen Bentsen Bible Gurney Hartke Hathaway Inouye J:_ckson Moss Muskie Pe'.[1 Proxmire RllOlcoff the foll(:_wlng in lieu thereof: "SEC. _t01. (a) AnY candidate 5ion for or election to Federal On p_ge _9, following line Brooke Johnston Scott, Hugh following new subparagraph Burdick Kennedy Stevenson ;subsequ,ent Long Symington lg, ietcalf i_.[etzenbaum l_:ondale Montoya Williams Young in caused a lotweofcan that,to but we politics have toihave do everything revitalize the interest of the people in the subject of politics, I am very hopeful the amendment be agreed to. I am happy the Senator offered it. I might .,_ay, by way of information will has for ever colleagues, the only study I have on the subject of the influence of Eastern election results on Western vetlng Was a doctor's thesis that was done a_ the University of Colorado. I long ago nly seen lost paper, but he came that out with ratherthe surprising results are some contra ry to what we in politics believe to be the truth. He found it had very little elfect, but I frankly believe it has a lot of effect. I think when people begin to hear how New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio are voting, the people out in the boondocks of Arizona, Colorado, and Callfornia are likely to be influenced by that. I do notlike to believe that Eastern thinking has that effect on the West, but, with all due respect, I think that is what happens, Mr. DOMINICK. Mr. President, I thank the Senator, and I yield myself 1 minute, ]_yrd, Harry Cannon Chiles F., Jr. Clark Dole Eagleton r'.rvin l_[agnuson Ma2_field McClure NOT Talmadge Tower weicker VOTING--10 Aiken Huddleston PercY_ Brock Fulbrlght Hughes _cClellan Scott. WilliamL. Gravel _icIntyre for nomlnaoffice who,". 21, insert the and renumber subparagraphs accordingly: "(1) 'i,he amount of each 'tax paid by the intllvtd_al, or by the individual and the individua] 's spo]_se filing Jointly, for the pre- ceding year: Provided, purposes elcalendar this subparagraph 'tax'That shallformean l_deral, State, or local income tax and any any Feceral, State, or' local property tax; ". On p_ge 81, llne 9, strike the words "of political parties" and insert the following in lieu thereof: "for nomination for or election '._Pederal office". On p_ge 84, strike inlines 'through 5 and i.nsert the following lieu 3t_ereof: So MI'. DOMINICK'S amendment wm_; "(l) '.fihe first report required under this agreed to. _ection shall be due thirty days after the Mr. DOMI_ICK. Mr. President, I move date of _mactment and shall be filed with the to reconsider the vote by which the Comptroller General of tho United States, amendment was agreed t,). who shl_,ll, for purposes of this subsection, lxa've tho powers and duties conferred upon JAVITS. _ move to lay that motion 3he Con:imisston by this section.'\ onMr. thetable. · This amendment wouldnot restrict the The motion to lay on the table ws_ polling hours to 12 hours. Any Stat'e can agreed to. make it 24 hours or whatever amount it __ wants to. All it provides is that each THE PP_ESIDENT'S Tz_X RETLYRNS time zone has to closeat the same time. That is all it says. Mr. LONG. Mr. President, I ask unan.. I yield back the remainder of my imous consent to file wiih the Senate a report of the Joint Coramittee on In.. time. ternal Revenue Taxation. transmitting _t The PRESIDING OFFICER. Ali time report of the committee staff to the com-. having been yielded, back, the question mittee. is on agreeing to the amendment of the The PRESII)ING CFFICER (Mr. Senator from Colorado (Mr. DOMINICK). ]-IASEELL). Without objection, it is so The yeas and nays have been ordered, ordered, and the clerk will call the roll. Mr. LONG. I might adr, Mr. President, The second assistant legislative clerk that the document I haw_ just submitted called the roll. is a staff analysis of the Pre.qdent's tax 3,52 returns:, as requested of the committee by the President. This document is' not :Fully available to the press at this point. We believe tha_ it will be available at 2 o'clock and that there will be copies nzade _tvaflable in the caucus room of the Senate Office Building at that time. :Mx. STEVENSON. I ask unanimous conseni that Mr. Basil Condos of my staff t:)e grin:ted the privilege of the floor duri.ng the debate and the vote on this amendraent. The 2RESIDING OFFICER. Without 0bjecti(:.n, it is so ordered. [Mr. _iTEVENSON. Mr. President, I ask :::orthe yeas and nays on the amendment, The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. [!;TEVENSON.Mr. President, title IV of S. 3044 requires financial dis,ftc,sure by all elected Federal officials, highl paid Federal employees, and candidates for Congress in general elections. Its provisions are a vast improvement ,::,ver existing law, and I commend the April 3, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL Committee on Rules and Administration for reporting them ou_ _ amendment would strengthen disclosure requirements in three important respect& First, and perhaps most important, my amendment requires disclosure of the amounts of all income and property taxes paid. Recent revelations about the tax affairs of the President and former Vice President have created the impression that there are two sets of tax laws, one for the politicians and one for everybody else. There is only one way to convince the public that Federal officials Pay thair fail share of taxes, and that is by disclosing the amount ,of taxes they pay. Second, this amendment expands the dislcosure requirements to include nonincumbent candidates for President and primary candidates for all Federal elective office. This will discourage persons with questionable financial backgrounds from seeking Federal office and will make available to the electorate information about the finances of all--not just some-candidates in Federal primary and general elections. It would place all candidates fc_r Federal o.fiqce on the same footing, Finally, the amendment advances the effective date of the first disclosure from May 15, 19_5, to 30 days after enactmont. This maximizes the chances that financial disclosure will occur prior to the November elections. This amendment strikes a fair balance between the public's right to know and the candidate's right to privacy. It does not require disclosure of each charity to which every candidate makes a contribution or his tax return. It requires disclosure of the amounts of taxes; and that is all. And that, Mr. President, ought to be enough to assure the public that the candfdate has in fact paid his share of State and Federal taxes, Financial disclosure is needed not so much, because of the wrongdoing it may expose or prevent, but because of the doubts it will lay to rest. The overwhelming majority of public officials abide by the laws they make and administer. The primary_ purpose of financial disclosure to convince' the public that it can trust elected There is no itsother way. representatives, Trust must be earned with facts; it cannot be elicited with empty words. Watergate and other sordid events of recent months have shown us politics at its worst. In the actions of Judge Sirica, Elliot Richardson, Archibald Cox, and Leon Jaworski, it has also shown us public service at its best. Watergate could have occurred anywhere in the world, but only in a great and good uation could the subsequent effort to find tho truth and do justice have been made. The legacy of Watergate can be either lingering public cynicism and governmental drift, or more open and effective self-government. I believe we have the will and the vision to make the right choice, and that the enactment Of financial disclosure legislation is an important part of that choice, Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time? RECORD-- SENATE Mr. CANNON. Mx. President, I yield m_elf 3 minutes. I have sort of mixed emotions about this amendment. The full disclosure provision that is in the bill now before us was my amendment, and I thought it was quite comprehensive. It 'related, I thought, to every item that would reflect on a person's public life, that is, the source of each item of income, of rolmbursement, of any gift that they might receive outside of the immediate family, the identity of assets held, the amount of liabilities, all transactions in securities, all transactions in commodities, and the .purchase or sale of homes, and I thought ' we did everything in there that was necessary to have a full and complete disclosure. I did stop short of an amendment requiring them to file the income tax return which would carry with it the items the Senator from Illinois has suggested. I did that because many people have felt and still feel that everyone is entitled to some privacy and perhaps the only privacy left is that which is coyered on the income tax return. But I may say, if this amendment is adopted, then the only thing that would be omitted would be contributions to charity. That would be the only thing I can think of that would not be covered under this disclosure feature, I do not feel very strongly abo_it it but I think it is a question of whether Congross wants to include all these people--not simply Congress--but to include civil servants with grade 16 and above, to include the military, and to include all members of th_ judiciary, So I am prepared to yield back the remainder of my time and, at such time as it is appropriate, I intend to move to table the amendment, because it is just a straight up and down issue of whether we want to have complete disclo_ure to include the income tax return, or whether we do not, because, as I see it, the only thing remaining after we have this, is contributions to charity. I can well understand the reasons for the amendmerit. It arises out of the publicity given to the report filed here a few minutes ago. fy ORDER FO _ ADJOURNME NT Mr. ROBERT :. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimou,, consent that, when the Senate complet_ its business today, it stand in adjouJ _ment until 12 o'clock . noon tomorrow, The PRESII iNG OFFICER (Mr. HATI-IAWAY).Wi h0ut objection, it is so ordered. ORDER FOR Ri COGNITION ATOR PROIq _IIRE ON APRIL 5, 197' OF SENFRIDAY, Mr. ROBERT _. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that on Friday next, the distir _ished Senator from Wisconsin (Mr. P IOXMIRE)may be recognized for 15 min_ tes, after the two leaders or their desi noes have been recognized under the sanding order, Mr. GRIFFIN. _Ir. President, reserving the right to obje_ _---may I inquire of the distinguished ma ority whip, is it the in- tention S 5179 at that ti: _e that the vote on Mr. ROBERT The vote on cloture will occur Ca; BYRD. 1 o'clock? cloture will occur s !ter the call to establish a quorum, wb ch would begin at 1 o'clock. Mr. GRIFFIN. I hank the Chair. The PRESIDIN( OFFICE. Without object,ion, it is so_ _,ed. FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN A(,_._ AMENDMENTS OF 1974 The Senate continued with the considera_ion of the bill (S. 3044) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing of prima:fy and general election campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating to the financing and conduct of such camp_igns. Mr. HUGH SCOTT. Mr. President, an excellent, comprehensive editorial in today's Christian Science Monitor wraps up th,_ entire campaign finance relearn picture. In view of our continuing debate on this subject, I offer this outstanding article for the review of my colleagues. I ask unanimous consent that this editorial be printed in the RrCORD. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Rrco_r, as follows: Tn_ _om_roR's V_w: Cs_rsxcN FinaNcE REFORM Campaign reform, made dally more iraperatlve by the continuing _ood of disclosures of massive abuses during the 197_ campalgn, is not moving ahead through the Congress as fastas we would like. But it. is moving. And. prospects are reasonably g¢_od for a healthy reform bill. The legislative situation is as follows: The Senate has before it a comprehensive reform bill which was approved by the Rules Comm_:ttee last month. It has been on the floor of the Senate for the last week. Sen. James Allen of Alabama, who was outvoted by the Rules Committee 7-to-l, is running a sophisticated filibuster effort on the floor. The first stage of bas deIay campaign was to offer a series of amendments. Fortunately these were defeated. He may next try to proyoke a series of cloture votes and delay action long enough so the senators may feel compelled to move on to something eIse. The public should support a cloture r_ove to the cut bill shorton its delay and let the Senate vote on merlts. In the House, too, public backing is needed to keep campaign reform action going. The House is considering two bflls. The first, the Anderson-Udall bill which w_s _ubmitt_ed to the House last year, embraces most of the Senate bill's desirable campaign reforms. _e second bill is that emerging from the House Admln:Lstra_ion Committee under Chairman Wayne Hays. _'ne Hays bill appears to be shaping up as a version asking the least change--but unfortunately it, not the Anderson-Udall bill, will be the basis for House action. Thus the task in the House will be to beef up the eventual Hays bill in the three areas it appears likely to be weak-in providing for a strong enforcement arm under an independent Federal Election Cornmission; in making s_re campaign spending limits are set high enough so that rivals will have a fair chance to unseat incumbents; and in providing public financing for congressio:nal as weU as presidential Representative Hays only a coupleraces. of weeks ago seemed determined to clamp procedural restrict.lens on his bill so the House would have t_ pass it or reject it, wlt_hout demo- 353 S 5180 CONGRESSIONAL R ECORD -- SEB " A FE cratic debate and amendment. Fortunately, Reducing the amount aa interest 'group after a stiff public rebuke catalyzed by a . can give any ofificeseeker tc, say.. $2,500 in a full-page Common Cause ad, toRepresentative $100,000 campaign keepgivers. politicians Hays has reportedly decided let his corn- .%_om being pocketed should by big Wherl re:tree's bill get the review by the House contributors can give as m'leh _m $20,000 Olr that it needs, r.aore a.,_they do now, it is much harder fo_ 1TS SHAPE C.f_ce holders to ignore tlleir wishes. What are the campaign finance reforms The :purpose of campaiglx fin:nice reform it is now h_q_,d Watergate will bring? is not to do away with _nfiuence groups, Reform advocates put them Into four main however. Lobbies presenting the views o_! gq_ups: business or labor or of the _nvironmentalists 1. An independen_ enforcement body. Both should have the :right to petition congress-. the Senate bill and the Anderson-Udall bill 10_en openly and to present _heir cases to the would create a Federal Election Commission public This is democratic procedure. Nor is the purpose of carlpaign reform to (FEC) with its own power to prosecute ofthe present politzcal :svstern and fenders. The Hays bill would omit the FEC weaken and would leave enforcement in the Justice eliminate entirely such rites as the fund-. raising shc,uld be stopped. Department. The Nix-on proposal would ]_:aterest dinner. gToups Abuses slhould not be able to buy create an i_EC, but would follow the Hays v,p sea_s at party dinners or earmark gifts for bill tn leaving enforcement to the Justice specific candidates. Functi. 3ns like dinners Department. A conflict is posed by having help Ill rallying the faithful. But with such the Justice I_partment--a Cabinet departevents as the $1,000-a-plate Republican and: ment within the executive br_nch shown $500-a-plate Democratic fund-raising bashes vulnerable iD polittca_[ pressure by Waterin recent days; with mos; giving coming gate--police election finances. Reform adf:tom interest groups, railing the voters vocates think the Sen_te/Anderson-Udall seems less the goal than rsklng in the dollars. provision for independent enforcement will Nor need parth;sbeweakeued r_cause canlikely be para-Jel, al:dates would be less del_ndent on them. 2. Limits on contributions. The amount for financial support. The t_zo major parties individuals or interest groups could conhave been losing voter all_giance as it is:, tribute to campaigns varies in the Senate, under the present system. They could perAnderson-'Udall, Hays, and Nlxon versions, haps regain in_'uence among thoughtful BUt limits _ppeax likely to pass. The Senvoters if the p_mbies stressed platform and ate bill would allow individuals to give a policies more, and financial power less. candidate $3,000 for a election, primary race, Again, is the purpose c_mpaignof moneyfinance. $3,000 for the general for a another total of reform to hold the ofinfluence $6,000 per (_andtdate. An individual could giving to 'tolerable limits. _ghen 90 percent: give no more than $25,000 for all campaigns of campaign con_:rlbutions tome from only 1 he wanted to cover. In the various versions, percent of the p¢_)ple, as :s now the case, interest groups--such as the political act(_o much influx,rice is clearly in t_> few tion interest conmaittees of business, labor, beandlimited pubtrends. lie organizations---could April 3, iD7/, ::_bout tie institutions of this country, in13Il:id:nv .its tax system. ]._J_r.CANNON. On the matter of prop:!_rty taxes, that is already a matter of :)ublic record so the Senator has not _,.sked f)r anything that is not a matter :>f public record. The only thing the !3eltxatoi is asking for is the amount of !:he ins)me tax they file. The question is, does the Senator want to require ev!!ryone to make public the amount of 'lis inc,,me tax? If the Senator does, he :night .ust as well have them file the _nlsire income tax return and make it !mblic ,4_Ofa :' as I am concerned, I would just 'a_ SO0r make everyone's public and I :.::clay offer an amendment to that effect. Mr. _;TEVENSON. If it is true that property taxes are a matter of public :ecord, then there should not be any ,:J.b:iecticn to that portion of the amend:'lsent. ']_he fact is that information on i_r_pert;_ taxes is very difficult to ob':_tirl_ In some States it is r.uore difficult ;ban ir other States. This amendment :could ,:olleCt that information in one _entral place and make it easily avail,_bIe to _,he public. ()n tlze other point, I feel strongly that public officials do have a rig]it to privacy, :_.nd theft their privacy should be prol;ected. :Disclosure of the income tax re':urn _ould invade that right. This amendr_ent is intended to strike the ball_,nce be;ween the right of privacy on the _:,ne ha:_d and the American public's to a ceiling _maaging from $2,500 to $0,000 in contributions te single candidates. But they could give l_ _11 Ho_se and Senate as well as presidential contests, without the $25,090 aggregate llmait individuals would face. 3. Limits on campaign spending. The Nlxon _,q_*_aistratlon fs against limits on c_mpaign s_ndtug; the Hays and Senate versions include them, using different formulas. The Hays bill would set a $20 million limit on a lo,residential race, whioh appears Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask _manimous consen; that on each of the two amendments t6 be offered by tlae Senator from T_mne.,_ee (Mr. _;AKER), NO. 1126 and No 1075, there be a time limitation of 1 hoer, to be equally divided, and cantrolled in accordance with the usual form. right to know. ]_[r. rresident, I am prepared to yield t:,ack th_ remainder of my time. Ma'. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield back th_: remainder of'my time. M:r. HT_:VENSON. Mr. President, I _deld back the remainderof my time. Mx. C._NNON. Mr. President, ! move to The PRESIDING OFF [CEtt. objection, it is so ordered. a sufficient sum. But it would set a low House ceiling,rec_nt say oftight $50,000House or $60,000. Stnc_ race in most races spending pa_sed the $100,000 mark, the low ceiling has l_en dubbed an "incumbents proSection act" by reform advocates. Ironically, then, reforlqaers want to keep campaign spending hi/_ enough so that incumbents don't swap :;he 2-to-1 advantage they now hold in attractinqg funds, for a law that would keep challengers from mounting _ viable cam!_)Agn. 4. Public bq_bsldies for primary and genoral elections. Emerging proposals vary on · this i_ue. 7_e administration opposes any mandatory (_r voluntary public fin.ancing for any eleCtion. The Hays bill would make pu_ltc financing of presidential general elsetions mandatory, the revenue to come from the existing tax financing checkoff system; but it would skip public for presidential prhnaries or :for congressional races. The Sen_te bill would allow full public funding for presidential _nd congressional general elec- Mr. STEVENSON. Mr. Presidenf, the l_endirq; amendment No. 977, does not rc_lulre the disclosure of Income tax returns. As the Senator frora Nevada mentioned, it does not requlle di.,_closure of clharitable deductions. It c.oes not require dtisclosure of any other deductions;' it requires only the disclosure of the amount 0:_ income taxes and property taxes. 14_ble th_ amendment of the _'_enator from :]linois (Mr. _TEVENSON). Mr. _ rEVEI_SON. Mr. President I ask :,ar the :'ess and nays. qThere was not a sufficient second. Mr. 13TEVETffSON. Mr. President, I _uggest the absence of a qnormn. S_e r'RESIDING O_'_,.C_,2ct. The clerk -irill call the roll. The 1,;;gislative clerk proceeded to call 1;]he roll. The reason for the disclosure requirement should be :painfully (,bvious to every Member of the Senate. The reason is that tile public wants to make sure of the integrity of its tax system, it wants to make sure of the intf,_rity of t[ae political institutions in this country, and of its pubIfc men and women. Doub ks in the public mind about'whether all l_ederal officials are really paying their fair share of taxes are understandable; and the American people have a right to be re- Mr. ,ANNON. Mr. President, I ask _manimms consent that the order for !.he quorum call be rescinded. q_he .I'RESIDING OFFICER. Without objectkm, it is so ordered. Mr. C/LNNON. Mr. President, I ask for llhe yeai:; and nays. _e _eas and nays were t_rdered. _he I: RESIDING O_-'ICEI_ The quos!.!on is _,n agreeing to the motion of the _ilens.tor from Nevada to, table the :_,mendn,.ent of the Senator from Illinois 'Mr. ST_VENSO'N). tlons, plu_ public funds in pri_narles on a matching bells. Some c(mapromise is likely to develop, The healthy inflow (yf tax-checkoff money o_ federal income tax returns now indicates there would 'be plenty in the Treasury to pay for a presidential primary and general elections in 197t]. Raising the money for public funding of all federal eleetlon,s thus should be no proble_n. AND PURPOSE The purpose of campaig n finance reform is to reduce the Influence of special interest money-give_a to tolerable limit& assured on that score. I dc not expect the amendment will prevent wrollgdOiIlg or expose wrongdoing. I am sure that most public officials pay their t_xes. This is for the benefit of the vast m _jority of public officials who are law abiding and who do abide by the laws which _;hey make ]:_avebe_n ordered, and the clerk will call ii_le roll. The bt:slat:ye clerk called the roll. Mr. ]_DBEItT C. BYRD. I announce t:aat th_ Senator from Arkansas (Mr. a:ad administer, as well ss for the pubIic's benefit. Its primary purpose is to put to rest tht_e suspicions and those doubts about not only the integrity of men and women in public 0fficc, and candidates running for public office, but ]_D'LBB][G_T), the Senator -from Alaska ,:Mir. GI_AVEL), t_le Senator from Iowa ,:Mir. H'JGHES), and _le _mator fi_m ':['exas , Mr. BENrSrN) are necessarily _bsent. I further announce that the Senator 354 Without On t]_is question the yeas and nays April 3, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL from Kentucky (Mr. HUDDLESTON)is 9Jbsent on omcialbusineSs, Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. BROCK), the Senator from Maryland (Mr. MaX_L_S), the Senator from Illinois (Mr. PERCY), and the Senator from Texas (Mr. Towrg) arenecessarily absent. I also aunounce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. WILLIAM L. SCOTT) is absent on official business, ! further announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. AIKEN) is absent due to illness in the family, I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Illinois (Mr. PERCY) wouldvote "nay." The result was announced--yeas 34, nays 55, as follows: [No. 108 Leg.] YEAS---34 Baker Eastland McCIure Bennett Ervin McGee Bible Fannln Moss Buckley Fong Nunn Byrd, Goldwater Pell Harry F., Jr. Hansen Sparkman cannon Hart Stennls Church Hartke Taft Cotton Helms Talmadge curtis Hruska Tunney , Domenlcl Long Young Domtnlck McClellan NAYS---55 Abourezk Haskell Nelson AllenBartlett HathawayHatfieldPastorePaCkwood Bayh /-lollings Pearson Beall Humphrey Proxmire Bellmon Inouye Randolph Blden Jackson Riblcoff Brooke Javlts Roth Burdick Johnston 8chwelker Byrd, Scott, Hugh case Robert C. Kennedy Magnuson Stafford Chiles Mansfield Stevens Clark McGovern Stevenson cook Mclntyre Symington Cranston Metcalf Thurmond Dole Metzenbaum Welcker Eagleton Mondale Williams Griffin Montoya Gurney Muskle NOTVOTING--II Aiken Gravel Percy Bentssn Huddleston Scott, Brock Hughes William L. Fulbrlght Mathlas Tower So the motion to table was rejected, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment, Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, does the distinguished Senator from Illinois ask for a roilcall vote? Mr. STEVENSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous that the order for the yeas and consent nays be vacated, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is so ordered, The question As on agreeing to the amendment. The amendment was agreed to. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill is open to further amendment. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, ! suggest the absence of a quonam The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roil ' The legislative clerk proceeded to cai1 the roll. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, ! ask unantmous consent that the order for the quorum call be resoinded, The PRESIDING OFFICER, WithoUt objection, it is so ordered, RECORD-- SENATE Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 1052 and ask that it be stated by the clerk, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will state the amendment, The legislative clerk lyroceeded to read the amendment, Amendment No. 1052 is as follows: SEC. 402. NOMember of Co.ngress shall accept or receive any honorarium, fee, payment, or expense allowance other than for actual out-of-pocket travel and lodging expenses source discussion, whataoever message, for any speech, from article,anywriting, or apearance other than in payment of his omcial salary and for official reimbursements or allowances from the United States Treaso ury. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, willthe Senator yield? Mr. ALLEN. Yes; I am delighted to yield, Mr. ROBERT C. BYR D. It is my uI1derstanding the Senator would want the yeas and nays on this amendment, Mr. ALLEN. Yes. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Having discussed this amendment with the distinguished Senator, I understand it is agreeable with him ff we get consent to vote Oil the amendment at the hour of 2:30 p.m. today, Mr. ALLEN. That would be entirely satisfactory to me. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I propose a unanimous-consent request, without any division of time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. ALLEN. I yield. Mr. COOK. Does the Senator have any idea how long he wishes to take on this amendment? Mr..AI,I.I_.N. Well, I Will speak all the time that another Senator does not wish to speak. If the Senator would wish to use the entire time, it would be satisfactory to the Senator from Alabama. I will yield any time the Senator desires to speak, Mr. COOK. All I wish to do is clear uPthe time situation. I have no objection to the amendment. From my standpoint, I would be perfectly willing to accept the amendment. I was wondering, with the vote not occurring until 2:30, whether the Senator would wish to dwell on this subject until 2:30, or recess until a convenient time. Mr. ALLEN. No, I do not think we ought to recess. I think this is a very important matter, which should be fully debated. I do not think we should recess, I think it would be well if the Senator could encourage other Senators to come in and listen to this discussion. Mr. COOK. I would suggest that this is his amendment. I appreciate the surgestion that I encourage other Senators to come in and hear the debate, but it is his amendment, and I am sure he would want other Senators to come here. ; Mr. ALLEN. I appreciate the distingulshed Senator from Kentucky's sitting through the discussiom I hope he will lend his approving voice to the amendmerit. I understood him to say he was for the amendment, S 5181 Mr. COOK. That is right. Mr. zqJ_J_EN.I apppreciate that position of the distinguished Senator. I believe It would be about the first amendment that we have agreed upon since this bill has been under discussion for the last 7 or 8 days. Mr. COOK. I am not sure Whether it is or not. Mr. ALLEN. The Senator is for public financing, and the ,Senator from Alabama is not; ninny of the amendments have had thai context in them. Mr. COOK. I am not here to get into a colloquy with the distinguished Senator about the rest of the bill; it was just about this amendment. Mr. ALLEN. I thank the Senator. Mr. YTesident,I think it might be well, in accordance with the custom, inasmuch as the clerkdid not read the amendment except by title, to read what is in the amendraent. The amendment proposed by the junior Senator from Alabama would add a new section to the bill, section 402, which is to be inserted on page 85, between lines 5 and 6. The following new section would be added: No Member of Congress shall accept or receive any honorarium, fee, payment, or expense allowance other than for actual out-ofpocket travel and. lodging expenses from any source whatsoever for any speech, article, writing, discussion, message, or appearance other than in payment of hls official salary _nd for official reimbursements or allowances from tho United States Treasury. That would include a Member of the House of Representatives or a Member of the Senate. The figures that I noticed in a memorandum just the other day--I do not have the memorandum with me at the time, bat this would be an important point---JLndicated that in 1972, Members of the Senat_ r_eived more than $600,000 in honoraria or payraents for speeches or appearances. , I have no hesitancy in offering this amendment, because the Senator from Alabama, since he first entered politics as a member of _he Alabama State Legislature in 1939, has never accepted any fee, Payment, honorarimn, expense payment, or anything else of value whatsoever for any appearance or speech that the Senator from Alabama has ever made. The Senator from Alabama takes the position that if he fez;Is that it is a part of his duty and responsibility asa Mem.bet of the U.S. Senate, to accept an invi.ration ta speak or appear on a program, that appearance should be at the expense of the ISenator from Alabama. That is the inw_riable custom the Senator from Alabama has followed for some 35 years, and he expects to continue that custom. Much more important, though, than this amendment, which I anticipate will get a fairly gc the _17.5 million that the candidate collects. Another danger that I foresee, Mr. :_'reside_t, in this tremendous subsidy giwm to Presidential candidates, is in the i_mt that they do not have to go into _mse Presidential preference primaries. All they have to do is receive contrlbulions and get them matched by the Feder'al Government, matched by the tax:payers. They could refrain from going :iy_to the primaries, conserve these rte:mendou,,_ sums of money, and go to the rational conventions of the parties with a campaign fund for expenditures at the convention of up to $15 million. Well, I do not say that anything iimproper would take place with a candidate m' two candidates or three candidates bei.ng in Chicago or Miami at the .4p_7_ 3, 2974 CONGRESSIONAL national convez_tion armed with $15 million in cash. That is possible under this bill. I do not know that a sinister use would be made of that $15 million. But I do not see that the Federal Government, the taxpayers of the country, should be called on to put up a subsidy of $7.5 million to everyone who wants to run for President and who can get out and raise a quartey of a million dollars. That is the requirement, I guess you have to be 35 years old to get this money, but that would be the only requirement--that and getting $250,000 in contributions of not more than $250. So it could all be raised in one _State; it could all be raised in one county, or it could all be raised in one city. It could all be raised by members of a pressure group, and once they raise the $250,000, they apply to the Federal Gevernment to match them. It backs up and takes that in, and acts prospectively and retrostaectively. It takes them all in, everything they have collected and everything they will collect in the future, on matching. I believe that that amendment, if properly presented to the country, would receive the support of the American peopie, not making that money available to Members of Congress to set up the subsidy plan. There has been talk about the danger of big contributions. Well, if Senators have any worry about big contributions, they ought to support the amendment I introduced earlier today--to limit the contribution to $250 to a Presidential fund for House and Senate. They are not worried so much about that. It seems to me that they are worried about wanting tremendous sums on which to run. That is what they want. A time or two I have used the example of the State of California. I use that because that is a large State. Not only do they provide for matching half the contributions in the Senate race up to a $100 contribution, not only do they provide for matching all those contributions up to a total of $1,400,000 in a Senate race, which would be, potentially, possibly $700,000 from the Federal Government and $700,000 from the candidate--that is, in the primary--but once they get to the gerteral election, what do they do? The Federal Government writes them a check for each one of the candidates in the major parties. They may have financed half a dozen or a dozen candidates in the two primaries, but once that shapes down and it gets down to one on each party, they write each one of those candidates a check for $2,121.900. That is a pretty nice little "kitty" to be paid OUt of the taxpayers _ pockets, Mr. President, earlier this year, the Senate, when a proposal was submitted to it of raising the salaries of Members of Congress, House and Senate, by some $2,500--and the Senator from Alabama voted against that--the Senate by a topheavy vote, as a result of strong public opinion against it, voted down that pay raise, even though it provided for only a $2_500-a-year raise for Members of the House and Senate. Mr. President, what is the public going to think if they are ever advised, and RECORD mSENATE of course the news media are not going to do agrea$ deal about advising the public--when they find out that we are setting up a fund of up to $7.5 million for each Member of the House and Senate that wants to run for President---t7.5 million, up to that amount? I do not believe that the public will look with much favor on that. I do not believe the public, and I do not believe the citizens of California, would favor it for every candidate in both primaries out there running for the Senate, and then $2,121,000 for each candidate for the Senate in the general election, If they balk at raising a Senator's salary by some $2,500, do you not think, Mr. President, they would choke on a $7.5 million fund for a Presidential candidate who is a Member of Congress? I believe that they would. Do you not think, Mr. President, that they would look with disfavor on setting up a general election campaign financed to the extent of $2,121,000 for_ each party candidate for the Senate? Why should such tremendous sums be spent, Mr. President, in taking the election process and removing it far from the grassroots, far from the people back home, at a time when we need to take more interest in our campaigns, when we need more veluntary participation, and not this mandatory conti_ibution by the taxpayers? Mr. President, on the general election subsidy, it would require the taxpayer-as a member of the great body of taxpayers throughou_ the country to help finance, because every taxpayer and every citizen has an interest inthe condition of the Treasury and where the tax money goes--to pay for the campaign expenses of a candidate with whose views and political philosophy he is in strong disagreement, Is that democracy? Is that reform, to put that burden on the taxpayer and say; "Whether you like it or not, your funds will be used to support a candidate whether you agree with his views or not"? A dyed-in-the-wool conservative would be paying the campaign expenses, or helping to pay them, o[' an ultraliberal taxpayer would be required to help pay the expenses of an ultraconservatire candidate, I would much Prefer the approach of the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. ERVIN) and the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. BAK_.R). Later on today, as I understand it, they will propose an amendment to knock out title I and substitute a provision giving the taxpayer a credit of half his contribution up to $300. In other words, that would be in effect a rebate of $150. That would let the taxpayer make contributions to anyone he saw fit, someone whose views more nearly coincided with his own, So that sort of approach appeals to the Senator from Alabama. Certainly he would support that amendment. Mr. President, getting back to the case of the situation in California--and it is the same picture throughout the country, although to a lesser degree, but naturally the figures are higher in Callfornia--the subsidy that the taxpayer S, 5183 would be giving each of the candidates for the Senate ii1 the general election, this subsidy of $2,121,000---and I get that figure from information prepared by the CommRtee on Rules and Administration I did not furnish it myself--after consulting the information, I see that my memory was right on it---the figure is $2,121,000. Let us compare that with the salary of a U.8. Senator. There should be some relationship, [ would assume, between the compensation paid to the holder of an offioe and the amomat of his campaign funds. Let us see how that compares with the Government paying each of the Senate candidates $2,121,000. There is no provision about; prudent management of this money. It is turned over to him, apparently, just in one big check. He can go out and hire his brother-inlaw to be his campaign manager, at a big salary. He can give some cousin in the advertising business an override on his expenditures. He can set up a highsalaried campaign staff. The Governmerit is paying it all, every dime of ii;. There is no requirement whatsoever for prudent; management of this inoney. It just hands it over to him. According to my arithmetic, a U.S. Senator would make, during his 6-yea_ term, in the neighborhood of a quarter of a rc_Lllion dollars, slightly more. But the Government, the taxpayer--the regimented taxpayers, I might say, not the voluntary taxpayers--would be paying for his campaign fund 9 times as much as the l_enator would earn in his entire 0-year term. There is something wrong somewhere with a situation such as this. That is what this bill provides. I am not making this up; I am not advocating it; as a matter of fact;, I am condemning it. The Government would pay 9 times as much money to the Senator as he would earn in 0 years of service in the U.S. Senate, with not a single bit of control over that money, except that it is required to go for campaign expenses. MR. TOWER,. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question? Mr. AIJ,_.N. Iyield. Mr. TOWER. I agrc_ with the Senator and his argument against public finanelng. I mn strongly opI_ased to it. I do not quite s(_ the relationship between the amendment the Senator has offered now to the issue of public financing, and I am wandering whether the Senator would accept an amendment in this form. At the end of line 7, strike the period and insert in lieu t_ereof a comma anti the following language: nor sha:[l he accept any _ubsidy payment from tho U.S. Trea_;ury. nor shall he accept any income from any enterprise that is regulated or financed either wholly or in part by the government of the United States. Mr. ALLEN. I am sorry; I did not hear the first two words. Would the Senator read it again or let me have a copy? Mr. TOWER. I will be glad to provide the Senator with a copy. At the end of line 'l, strike the period and insert a comma and the following: nor shall he accept any subsidy payment from the U.S. Tree,tory. nor shall he accept any income from any enterprise that is regu- 357 S 5184 CONGRESSIONAL lated or financed either wholly or in part by the government of the United States. .Mr. ALLEN. I would suggest to the Senator that I would like to have a vote up and down on the amendment I have offered. If the Senator would like to offer it as all amendment, he would certainly have a right to do so; and I would be willing at this-time, inasmuch as we have a vote scheduled at 2:30, to yield to him, if we can get unanimous consent, so much of that time as he would like to have in order to advocate his amendmerit. Mr. TOWER. If I might ask the Senator a further question, Mr. ALLF.N. I would not want to dilute the amendment I have offered. Mr. TOWER. This would not dilute it; it would strengthen it. Mr. ALLEN. If the Senator feels that way about it, he is at liberty to offer an amendment, Mr. TOWER. Does not the Senator feel that this is consistent with the amendment he is offering? Mr. ALLEN. What the Senator from Alabama. is seeking to reach is one thing. If the Senator from Texas wishes to reach something else, he has a right to offer an amendment. Mr. TOWER. It is my understanding of the thrust of the Senator from Alabama's amendment that a Senator should not use his office to make additional money. What about a Senator who votes ¢m an_agricultural subsidy and yet receive.,_that subsidy? What about a Senator who votes on the regulation of the securities industry and has income from securities? Mr. AL][_EN. Is the Senator talking about a Senator using his office to obrain additional funds? The Senator is talking about a Senator using his vote. Mr. TOWER. Is he using his office to lecture, if fperhaps it is a professional lecture? Why is it necessary that he use his officefor a lecture fee? Mr. ALLEN. I ask the Senator ff he thinks that a Senator is as much in demaud for lectures after leaving the U.S. Senate as he is while he is a Member of the Senate? Mr. TOWER. It is very probable that membership in the - Senate enhances one's ability to be invited to speak for honoraria. But it also occurs to me that a Senator does have the opportunity to vote on matters from which he may derive income. That is the thrust of this amendment, Mr. ALLEN. I suggest to the Senator 'that he offer his own amendment. The Senator from Alabama has offered his. It would be up to the Senator from Texas to offer his amendment, if he thinks well of it. RECORI) -- SENATE Mr. TOWER. All right. Mr. President, I send :o the desk an amendment anti ask that it be stated. Mr. ALLEN. l-Iow muctt time does the Senator wish? Mr. 'COWER. 3 minutes. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may yield 3 minutes to the distingltished Senator from Texas. The PRESIDING oFFICER. The Chair advises the Senatm from Alabama tlhat he has no time under his control. The amendment willbe stated. The assistant legislative clerk read as follows: On page 1, line 7, strike the period and in I!Leuthereof insert a comrn_ and the followlng: nor shall he accept any _ubsidy payment; from the U.S. T]_easury, no;' shall he accept any Income from any enter)rise that is regulated or financed either v,holly or in part, by the Government of the Unit,_d States. Mr. TOWER. Mr. Pres[dent, a parliar.aentary inquirg. The PRESIDING OFF] CER,. The Sen- ' _tor wfil state it. Mr. TOWER. Inasmuch as this is an e,mendment to the amendment of the: Senator from Alabama, on which the: yeas and nays have bee:x ordered, is it; necessary to get the yeas arLd nays on this amendment, specific_,lly? The PRESIDING OFYICER. The an-. swer is "Yes." Mr. COOK. Mr. Presifient, a parlia-, mentary inquiry, The PRESIDING OFFYCElq;. The Sen-. _tor will state it. Mr. COOK. If the Senator asks for the yeas and nays, he may hsve the yeas and nays. The PRESIDING OFF]:CER. The Sen-. ator is correct, Mr. COOK. But am I n _t correct, from _LparliamentaIy point ol view, that the yeas and nays on his amendment can-. not take place until 2:30? The PRESIDING OFF[CEIL The vote on the amendraent of the Senator from Texas can come right now, if he has fin-, ished speaking. Mr. TOWER. Mr. President I ask for the yeas and :nays on my amendment. I will ask for them as _oon as we get E;nough Senators in the Chamber to pro-. vide a second. Mr. President, while other Senators are coming to the floor, 1_t me say that if we are going to bar one [orm of outside income :from Members of Congress, ][ think we should bar other forms. I do not believe that anybody I know in the U.S. Senate uses his office in an unto-. ward or uneth:tcal or illegal way to line his pockets. I believe there are a hundred honorable men here. But if the intent of this amendment is to remove any sus-. Mr. TOWER. I am sorry; I did not picion from Members oi the Senate, it hear the Senator. seems to me tlhat we should go all the Mr. ALLEN. Did the Senator offer an way. amendment? It appears to me that ;he s_mendment Mr. TOWER. I will offer it as an ]: offer is entirely consistent with the let-. amendment when the time of the Senter and the spirit of the amendment of-. ator from Alabama has expired, fered by the Senator front Alabama. Mr. ALLEN. As I told the Senator, if Mr. COOK. Mr. Presiden'_, will the he wishes time, the Senator from AlaSenator yield so we may ;_sk for the yea_; bama will yield him such time as he _mdnays? wishes, in order that he might offer his Mr. TOWER. Mr. Preriden'_, I ask for amendment and discuss it, the yeas and nays on my amendment. 358 April, .3, 1974 _The }'RESIDING OFFICER. Is there a .mfficicr,t second? There is a sufficient ,_econd. The yeas and nays are ordered. lVlr. PELL. Mr. President, will the Sen;_tor yield for a question? Mr. TOWER. I yield for a question? Mr: PELL. In the Senator's amendment when it is stated that no Senator may _ccept :t subsidy, would tha'b include the ,mbsidy of public financing? lVlr. TOWER. It would not include 0ublic I:inancing, and that is explicit, in _h:zt public financing is expressly auth)rized. The subsidy would be such mat_ers as agricultural subsidies, and other fm_ds t:he Government offers as an in_;luceme'at to do or not to do something, 3r to p_lrsue or not to pursue a certain ,mterprise. ]Vlr. ]?ELL. I thank the Senator. ].Vlr. COOK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. TOWER. I yield. Mr. COOK. In other words let us take Lhis example. This Senator voted in I!avorof the so-called Lockheed bill. I nave nc stock in any airline, any airline -_ompany,or anywhere else but if he had had voted in favor of such a thing that ,;gould be in the nature of receiving a _mbsidyfram the United States. Is that (3orrect':' Mr. 2!'OWER. In connection with that tegislation I was the minority floor man:_ger. I maintained that was not a sub_idy bu_i;that it was a Government guarantes to them. But had someone here b_m a stockholder in Lockheed he could have been a beneficiary in that the Government guaranteed loans mad keep the compar_y from falling to its knees. Mr. COOK. If we take tlhat situation lo be in the category of a loan guarantee, which ][ am willing to accept, let us take bhe receipt of a direct benefit. Take the ._o--called farm pond programs where _,hey build ponds all over the United St._tes. .Mr. q?oWER. That Would be included [n the purview of my amendment. In _ddition, the interstate sales of securities [n this country is restricted by the Securities and Exchange Commission, which would deal with any money from .securities. :Mr. COOK. I know there are many wpes of direct agricultural subsidies. Would the Senator say tt_is would be _ncluded in parities? As long as he sold his goods on the open market it would not be i:ncinded. Mr. TOWER. It would not be included, _f he took the market regulated price. But if he took the subsidy, this would bar _aklng the subsidy, and he would have to go to the open market. Mr. ]_,ELL. Mr. President, will the Sen_)r yield further? Mr. TOWER. I yield. :Mr. PELL. So that I can understan}t what the amendment provides, would this mean that if a Senator were a stockholder in a corporation and that corporation received a direct benefit of one sort of another from the Federal Oovernme_t he would be prohibited by law .l'rom being in that position? Mr. _:I?OWER. He would not, provided _t the corporation was not regulated or finm:med by the U.S. Government. :Mr. :l'_:Er,_,.This really provides that April 3, 19 75 CONGRESSIONAL all Senators must be sure that their investment portf_lio_ do not include any industry affected by actions of the Federal Government, and that is every industry. Mr. TOWER. I specify directly affected, through regulation or l_nancing. I assume it would not apply to some business that is wholly without Government regulations, loans, financing, or funding, Mr. HART. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. TOWER. I yield, Mr. HART Would a Senator who had on deposit funds in a savings account in a federally insured bank be subject to this provision? Mr. TOWER. He would be subject to it because banks are regulated by the Federal Reserve System. Mr. HART. Does the Senator think that that reaches a little broader than is needed or that is required in order that the people have confidence that we are not being influenced in our role here? Mr. TOWER. I admit it is extreme, but Where does one start? What should be considered legitimatelegitimate. and what should not be considered To obviate doubt in anyone's mind we should go all the way. Mr. PELL. Mr. President, will the Senator yield at that point? Mr. TOWER. I yield, Mr. PELL If the Senator goes all the way, as this amendment would do, it would mean that a Senator who has 100 shares in the XYZ corporation is not going to benefit; it would be impossible to count up the benefit to the infinitesireal part of a penny and he would be hard put, if he were lucky enough to have money, to know where to invest it. Mr. TOWER. That is true. We make it difficult for people we confirm for the executive departments and agencies. We require them to put everything in a blind trust that might result in a conflict of interest. We virtually made Mr. David Packard take an oath of poverty befqre confirming him. I do not know why we cannot use that standard ourselves, Mr. President, I am prepared to yield the floor. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? I yield. Mr. TOWER. Mr. COOK. Would the Senator accept an amendment to his amendment, in the last sentence, which would say that the purchase of Government bonds and securlties would be exempt from the amendment? I am a great believer in the purchase of Government bonds. I have bought them almost all my adult life and during a great deal of my young life. I try the best I can to get all the employees in my office to purchase them, to the best of their ability. I am wondering because I feel strongly about making an investment in one's country and Government. Mr. TOWER. I think the Senator has made an excellent point. I would be prepared to modify my amendment to that extent. If the Senator will frame such an amendment for me I would accept it. Mr. President, in the interim, I suggest the absence of a quorum. RECORD--SENATE The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the Senator modifying his amendment? Mr. TOWER. We have to draft it first. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may modify my amendment by adding a comma after the words "United States" and the words ' Provided that any income from U.S. Government securities shall be exempt from this provision. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is so ordered, Mr. TOWES'S amendment, as modified, to Mr. ALLEN'Samendment is as follows: Nor shall he accept any subsidy payment from the U.S. Treasury, nor shall he accept any income from any enterprise that is regulated or financed either wholly or in part by the Government of the United States, provialed that any income from U.S. Government securities shall be exempt from this provision. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I move to table the amendment offered by the Senator from Texas. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion to table the Tower amendment, as modified, to the Allen amendment. The yeas and nays 'have been ordered, and the clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. FULERXGHT), the Senator from Alaska (Mr. GRAVEL), and the Snator from Iowa (Mr. HUGHES) are necessarily absent. I further announce that the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. HUDDLESTON) IS absent on official business. Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the Senator from nlinois (Mr. PERCY) iS necessarlly absent. I also announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. WILLIAM L. SCOTT) J,q absent on official business. I further announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. AIXEN) Lqabsent due to Illness in the family. The result was announced--yeas 44, nays 49, as follows: Allen Bartlett Bellmon [No. 109 Leg.] YEAS--44 Cannon Hartke Case Haskell Chiles Helms Bennett Cranston Bentsen Eagleton Bible Eastland Brooke Ervln Byrd, Robert C. Font Hollings Humphrey lnouye Johnston Kennedy S 5185 Long Magnuson Mathiae Mcclell_n McGee Monteya Moss Muskle Stafford Nun_ Stennls Packwo_l Symington Pell Taft Pro,alEe Talmadge Randolph Young Sparkman NAYS--4§ Abourezk Dominic,: Metzenbaum Baker Fannin Mondale Bayh Goldwater Nelson .Beall Griffin Pastore Biden Gurney Pearson Brock Hansen Rinicoff Buckley Hart. Roth Burdick Hatileld Schwelker Byrd, Hathaway Scott, Hugh Harry F., Jr. Hruska Stevens Church Jackson Stevenson Clark Javlts Thurmond Cook Mansfield Tower cotton McCLure Tunney curtis McOovern Weicker Dole McIntyre Williams Domenici Metcalf NOT VOTING_7 Aiken Hudd.teston Scott, Fulbright Hughes William L. Gravel Percy So iq_r. ALLEn'S motion to lay on the table M_r. TOWEa'S amendment, as modifled, to Mr. ALLEN'S amendment was rejected. The PRESIDING O_'_'ICER. The question recurs on the amendment of the Senator from Texas, as modified, to the amendment of the Senator from Alabama. On this question the yeas and nays have been ordered. Mr. TOWER. Mr_ President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the yeaspermitted and nays to behave vacated that we be a voiceandvote. Mr. _,T.T,_. I object. The PRE.qrniNG OFFICER. Objection is heard. On this question the yeas and nays have been ordered, and the Clerk will call the roB. The second assistant legislative clerk called t3ae roll. Mr. ROBERT C. t_YRD. I announce that the Senator from Arkan,_as (Mr. FULBRIGHT), the Senator frm_a Alaska Mr. GIU,VEL), arid the Senator from Iowa (Mr. HUGH,.S) are necessarily absent. I further announce that the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. HUDDLESTON)is absent on official business. Mr. GRJ. o'_'_. I announce that the Senator from nlinois ( Mr. Prsc_) t._ necessm.qly absent. I also announce that the Senator from Virginia. (Mr. WH,LIaM L. SCOTT) is ab.sent on official business. I further announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. ArisEN) is absent due to illness in the family. The result was arraouneed--yeas 56, nays 37, as follows: [No. Il0 Leg.] Y_.AS---6_ Abourezk Cotton Jackson Baker Curtis Johnston Bayh Dore Kennedy Beall Domenicl Long Benmon Dominick Magnuson Biden Fannin Mansfield Brock Goldwater McGee Buckley G_rney McGover_ Burdick Hansen McIntyre Byrd, Robert C. Hart Metze_baum Cannon Hartk® Mondale Church Hatfield Moss Clark Hathaway Muskie Cook Hruska Nelson 359 S 5186 Pastore Pearson Randolph Riblcoff Roth CONGRESSIONAL Schwelker scott, Hugh Stevens Symington Thurmond NAYS--37 Tower Tunney Weicker Williams Allen Bartlett Bennett Bentsen Bible Brooke Byrd, Harry F., Jr. case Chiles Cranston Eagleton Eastland Ervin Montoya Pong Nunn Grimn Packwood Haskell Pell Helms Proxrnire Hollings Sparkman Humphrey Stafford Inouye Stennis JavltS stevenson Mathlas Taft McClellan Talmadge MeClure Young Metcalf NOT VOTING--7 Alken Huddleston Scott. Fulbright Hughes WilliamL. Gravel Percy So Mr. TOWER'S amendment, as modifled, was agreed to. Mr. ABOUREZK. Mr. President, I have an amendment to the Allen amendment at the desk which I ask be stated. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment to the Allen amendment will be stated, The assistant legislative clerk read as follows: on line 5, following "appearance", insert the words: "or any other compensation including but not limited to income _rom a law practice, stock and bond dividends and rentals, Mr. ABOUREZK. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays. ' The yeas and nays were ordered. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment of the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. ABOUREZK) to the Allen amendment, On this question the yeas and nays have been ordered and the clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. FULBRIGHT), the Senator from Alaska (Mr. GRAVEL), the Senator from Iowa (Mr. HUOHES), and the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. JOHNSTON) are necessarlly absent, I further announce that the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. HUDDLESTON) is absent on official business, Mr. GRI_-_FIN. I announce that the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. HRVSKa) and the ;Senator from Illinois (Mr, PERCY) necessarily absent. I also are, armounce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. WILLIAM L. SCOTT) is absent on official business, I further announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. An_rN) is absent due to illness in the famliy. The result was announced--yeas 24, nays 67, as follows: [No. 111 Leg.] YEAS--24 Abourezk Clark Baker Dole Bellmen Domentci Bider Gurney Brooke Hart Buckley Byrd, Robert C. Hartke Hatfield Church Hathaway 360 Mansfield Mc_overn McIntyre Moss Pearson Stevens Tower Tunney RECORD--. SEN'ATE April 3, 19 74 NAYS--67 Fong Nelson Goldwater Nunn Oriifin Packwood B:ansen Psstore Haskell Pell Helms Proxmire B:ollings Randolph B:umphrey Ribicoff Inouye Roth J_ckson Schweiker Jwits Scott, Hugh Kennedy Sparkrnan Long Stafford Iv[agnuson Stennls lV[athtas Stevenson McClellan Symington Iv[cClur_ Taft McGee T_Llmadge IV£etcalf Thurmond Metzenbaum Weicker l_[ondale Williams lV[ontoya Young IV[uskie NC)T VOTIN(I--9 Aiken Y.':uddleston Sc:ott, Fulbright Y.'_ughes William L.' Gravel Johnston Hruska Percy So ]Jr. ABO_'EEZK'S arr enchnent to th6 _ Allen amendment was rejected, vtnced will do profound harm to our l_)litic d system, I _11 gladly cooperate. Mr. UANNON. Mr. President, now that the folly of the last few minutes has had all opportunity to sink into my CO1leagues_ may I pose a parliamentary in- Mr. McCLU'RE. Mr. President, few people question the conclusion of publ!ic opinion polls which show that the cit:i_ zens of this cotmtry do not :have a veiny high regard for the Cor gress, as an in.stitution. We .._re all aware that recent There:!'ore, a moti °n to table is not in order. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, was the unanimous-consent agreement to vote on tile Allen amendment a_ modified, as amen(_ed and modified? Allen t3artle_t _[_ayh BeaI1 Bennett, Bentsen Bible Brock Burdick Byrd, Harry F., Jr. Cannon. Case Chiles Cook Cotton Cranston Curtis Dominick Eagleton Eastland Ervin Fannin quiry? The HELMS). PRESIDING The Senator O_ICER will state (Mr. it. Mr. CANNON. Does the question now OllCUr :m the Allen amendment as modifled, as amended by the Tower amendI_Lent_Lsmodified? The PI%ESIDING OFFICER. That is correct;. Mr. CANNON. And would the Chair advise whether a motion to table would now b:._ in order? The PRESIDING OFFICER. It would not be in order. Mr. CANNON. Would the Chair state the re_son why the motion to table would not be in order? The PRESIDING OFFICER. A unan]rnous-_onsent agreement was entered into to vote on the Allen amendment. ratings show the Congress in less favor The PRESIDING OFFIC!ER. The Chair than the Pres:Ldent, despite his massive is; advised that the answer is "No," but difficulties. I suggest that cynical politD, tile precedent prevails since there was ca1 maneuvers such as _he one we jus'_ unanimous consent on the Allen amendwitnessed do little to dispel1 this attitude, ment, regardless of whether it was modiThe people of this countly are not stupid, fled or not. Mr. President. :['hey demand a degree c,:¢ Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I ask candor in our public dealings which [s unanhnous consent that ii, be in order to uot met by political posturing. I do not move to table the Allen amendment as mean to quest!,.on the motives of any in,modified, as amended by the Tower dividual Senator, but the effort to load amendment, as modified. the amerldment of the S,nator from Als.The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there bama (Mr. AmLEN) in order to kill it objection? should be too evident to pass notice. I Mr. ALLEN. I object. am opposed to the Al: en amendment, Mr. PASTOR_. Mr. President, a parbut I am not going to hi_e that behind a liamentary inquiry. motion to table. Let tho_e who voted for The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen_he substitute of the Sen ator from Texas ator will state it. (Mr. TOWER) now reveal their motive by Mr. PASTORE. What is the ruling of voting on adoption of the amendment a_ the Chair? amended. Let no one be misled by lookThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection ling only at one, vote or the other by itsel:L is :heaxd. Mr. PASTORE. No; I :mean with reMr. President, this kind of silly school!spect _o the question of laying it on the boy activity does not 1,md great crediit table. to our institutkms which are under such The PRESIDING OFFICER. The moconstant attack today. I am sorry we tion t,,tableisnot in order. sometimes act in a way which justifi,as Mr. PASTORE. I make an appeal from 1;he accusations of our critics, t:ae ruling of the Chair. I appeal the PulMr. BUCKLE_r. Mr. _resident, I want the record to be clear :_s do why I am supporting the Allen s mendment, and the amendments thereto, that would out.~ )[aw honora_qa and other sources of Outside income. I personally see no reason why a Senator should not supplement :his income in ;such spare time as he msq7 ;have. It is no secret that many of us need supplementa,_ income to cover the fu:ll cost of servic:[Ilg our constituents. Ex.- lng of the Chair. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I call for the y_as and nays. The PRESIDING OI_'ICER. Is there a suflicient second? There is a sufficient second. The yeas and nays are ordered. The question is, Shall the ruling of the Chair stand? pense allowances for larger Stat_s simply are inadequat_ to cover all expe_mes. But if It takes adoption of this kind of pious and hypocritical ][lonseTlse to scuttle a bill that I am con.- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Th e Senator will state it. Mr. MANSFIELD. _ a Senator wishes to uphold the ruling of t:he Chair, does he vote yea or nay? Mr. MANSFIELD. parliamentary inquiry. Mr.. President, a April 3, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL The PRESIDING OFFICER. He would vote "Yea." Mr. MANSFIELD. And if he does not, he votes "Nay," The PRESIDING O_'_'.CER. The Senator is correct, Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, the Chair is correct in its ruling. The unanimous-consent request earlier was to vote on the Allen amendment at the hour of 2: 30 p.m. By virtue of that order, a tabling motion would not be in order, I hope, with all due deference to my distinguished friend from Rhode Island, that the Senate will not now vote to overrule the ruling of the Chair because if we do that we are going to overrule precedents going back a long way, and I think it is a very dangerous thing for the Senate to do. Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I yield, Mr. PASTORE. We had a unanimousconsent agreement to vote at 2:30 p.m. Why have we waited until 3:20 p.m. to do it? Mr. ROBERT. C. BYRD. Because amendments were offered to the amendneut. Mr. PASTORE. Why were they in order? Mr .ROBERT C. BYRD. Because under the precedents, even though a vote is to occur at a given time on an amendmerit, any Senator is entitled to offer an amendment when the time has expired and have a vote on his amendment without debate, Mr. PASTORE. Did the distinguished majority whip agree with the Senator from Alabama that this would be the situation on the unanimous-consent agreement ? Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. The whip, and I am sure the Senator from Alabama, did not foresee all the amendments, but in accordance with precedent, may I say to my distinguished friend that I hope we do not overrule the ruling of the Chair. Mr. PASTORE. Would it please my distingulshed friend the whip if the Senator from Rhode Island were to withdraw his motion? Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I wish the distinguished Senator would do that. Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, in order to accommodate the distinguished whip, I withdraw my motion, Mr. COOK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. ROBERT'C. BYRD. I yield, Mr. COOK. Mr. President, I would suggest that the Senator ask unanimous consent to do so because he asked for the yeas and nays_ The PRESIDING OFFICER. It will take unanimous consent, Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to do so. The PRESIDING objection? Without OFFICER. objection, Is it there is so ordered. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, ! wonder if the distinguished Senator from Alabama would now allow the Senator from Nevada (Mr. CANNON)to propound anew his unanimous-consent request that a tabling motion be in order, RECORD-- SENATE Mr. tILRb_HREY. 'Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a parliamentary inquiry? Mr, ROBERT C. BYRD. I yield, Mr. HUB/IPHREY. I think that while we are discussing rules we should go a little further.' The unanimous consent agreement was to vote on the Allen amendment on an hour certain. There was not a unanimous consent to vote on the Allen amendment, as amended and as modifled. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. No, because no Senator could foresee that the amendmerit would be amended. When consent of the Senate is given to vote on a designated amendment at a designated time any Senator can offer an amendment, when time has expired, without debate and get a vote on it; but when the Senate gives consent to vote on an amendmerit at a given time, there has to be a vote on the amendment up and down, and there can be no motion to table, Mr. HUMI_HREY. Just to develop the record further because the rules are tmportant, there was unanimous consent to vote on the Allen amendment, Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. That is correct. Mr. HUMPHREY. Not the Allen amendment, as modified, as amended by the Tower amendment, as modified, Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. That is correct. Mr. HUMPHREY. :Iwonder if we might not develop some record for future guidanco: that when you get unanimous consent like this, it includes anything that might happen along the way. I do not think the unanimous-consent agreement prevails in light of all that has happened here. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. If we did not follow the precedents, it would mean that in the future, if we got an agreemerit to vote on the Allen amendment at a certain hour, we would have a vote on it, and if the Senator from Minnesota came in at the last minute and wanted to offer an amendment to the Allen amendment he would be deprived of offering the amendment. Under the precedent he can now offer an amendment, even though without time to debate it. There is one way to meet the situation the Senator is talking about. We could get unanimous consent to vote on the Allen amendment at 2:30, with the understanding that no amendments to that amendment be in order, Mr. HUMPHREY. The only other point, I would say, is that it is also understood at the time you get the unanimous consent to vote on the Allen amendment, that it be as it may be modified because otherwise you are not establishing a clear line. Mr. PASTORE. Is the Senator saying the unanimous consent agreement on the Allen amendment was made on the Allen amendment as introduced? Mr. HUMPHREY.Exactly. Mr. PASTORE. And now the Alien amendment has been changed; it is no longer the amendment agreed to. Something has been added. Does not that break the unanimous consent agreement? S 5187 Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. No, because the Senator from RhOde Island, if he wished, would be entftled at 2:_ p.m., after all time ha,q, expired on the Allen amendment, to offer an amendment. He has that right. I wonder if the Senator from Alabama would- allow the Senator from Nevada (Mr. CANNON)---now that the Senator from Rhode Island has yielded on his point, which was very gracious of him-to make a motion to table? Mr. _LEN. Mr. President, reserving the right to object and I shall not object, in view of the request of the assistant majority leader, It occurs to me that two things evoke the most interest in the Senate in addition to public financing: Matters having to do with the pay of Senators and something having to do with the/_onorari:um system. So I have no illusions that this amendment is gong anywhere. Whether it is voted up or down, or up or down on a motion to table is not of too much concern, so I withdra, w my objection. Mr. 1%[cCLELL_N. Mr. President, I ask that the amendment that we are to vote on now be stated so that we may 'understand what it is. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated. The legislative clerk res_ as follows: on p_ge 85 between lines 5 and 6 add the following new sectk_n 4O2, as follows: SEC. 402. NO Member of Congress shall acceptexpense _r receive any hon_ma_iuna, payment, or all_)wance otl_er thanfee,for actual out-of-poeket traw_l and rodglng expenses from any source whatsoever for any speech, article, writing, discusslDn, message, or appearance other than hx payment of.his o_lc 'lal salary, alxd for o_cial reimbursements or allowances from the United. States Treasury. nor shall he accept any subsidy payment from the U.S. Treasury, nor shall any income from any enterprise thathe isaccept regulated or financed either wholly or in part by the Government of the United States, provided that any i:acome from U.S. Government secui'lties shall be exempt from this provisfon. Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, a parliamentary inquiry. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will[state it. Mr. HUiVIPHRF. Y. Does that include income from a bank where he may have been drawing interest? SEVEI{AL SENATOIgS.Yes. Mr. P.'[UMPHREY. How ridiculous can one get? Mr. CANNON. lVIr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order for me to make a motion to t_bte the Allen amendment, as modified, as amended by the Tower amendment as modified. The PRESIDiLNG OFFICER. Is there objection? The Chair hears none, and it is so ordered Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I make such a motion. I move to table and I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion of Mr. CA_._NONtO lay orr the table the amendment of Mr. ALT._._, as amended by the modified Tower amendment. The 361 S 5188 yeas CONGRESSIONAL and nays have clerk willcaZlltheroll. The legislative Mr. ROBERT that the Senator been ordered, and the clerk called C. BYRD. the r()ll. I announce Arkansas (Mr. from FULBRIGHT), the Senator from Alaska (Mr. GRAVE'L), and the Senator from Iowa (1V[r. HUGHES) are necessarily absent. I further from announce Kentucky (Mr. that the Senator H'UDDLESTON) iS ab- sent on official business. Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. HBUSKA), and the Senator from Illinois (Mr. are necessarily al_sent, announce that the Senator from (Mr. WILLIAM L. SCOTT) is PERCY) I also Virginia absent on official business. :[ further announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Al:KEN), is absent due to illness in the family. The result was announced--yeas 61, nays 31, as follows: [No. 112 Leg.] YEAS---61 Bayh Ervin Beall Fannin Bennett Fong Bentsen Griffin Bible Hartke Brock Haskell Brooke Hatfield Byrd, Hathaway Harry F., Jr. Holllngs Cannon Humphrey Case ][nouye Chiles Javits Church Johnston Cotton Kennedy Cranston Long Curtis Mathias Dole McClellan Domenici McGee Dominick Mclntyre Eagleton Montoya Eastland Moss NAYS--31 Abourezk Goldwater Allen Ourney Baker Hansen Bartlett Hart Bellmon Helms BAden Jackson Buckley Magnuson Burdlck Mansfield Byrd. Robert C. McClure Clark McGovern Cook Metcalf NOT VOTING--8 Aiken Fulbright Gravel table was MESSAGE agreed Fl as amended, lay on THE Mr. the HOUSE A message fror sentatives by Mr. ing clerks, annou the .House Jerry, one _ced that had passed the J each with an am requests the concl S. 1585. An act to' manufacture and ' "Woodsy Ow][," and S. 2770. An act to 37, United S_ates C. pay structure relatll the uniformed servi( )llowing Senate bills, mdment, in which it rrence of the Senate: revent the unauthorized use of the character for other purposes; and _mend chapter 5 of title de, to revise the special g to medical officers of ;s. The House 362 message als had passed _ announced the following tle the of relief relief of th,_, _ Lldi_i,_ of LesSer H, B[roll; H.R. 4438. An act r th(, Stephan; H.R. 4590. An act Catambay Gutie_rez; H.R. 5667. An act Julie Dickson H.R. 5907. An act Bruce B. Schwartz, tI.R. 7207. An act A. and Agnes J. H.R. 7682. An act posthumously upon Silva; It.R. 7685. An act Greco; H.R. 3101. An act to e:ral agencies to detail _quipment to the and W£tdlife, De H.R. 3586. An act to sale of the passenger reItet the relief th_ of of relief Meliss_, of Lind_, tre relief of Capt. Army; the relief of Emmet':: corder citizenship Corporal Federic,:_ the _eliefofGinsepp_, · Fed.. onnel and to loa_:_ (,f Sport Fisheries.; the Interior; the foreig_:L steamship Inde-. act the re!Lief of A. Mar? H.R. 12925. An _t to a t:horme appropr:_atlons 1974 for certain Department _ H.R. 13542. An. act to of Commissioner of for other purposes, of Repreof its readthe House that the bills in of th( authorize to the States H.R. Judllla 7363. and An act for Virna J. The enrolled bills signed by the Acting pore (_r. HUSH SCOTt). domestic off.. uthoriz_ and direct; D_partment under is _perating t_::_ ov_md by ClarAlaska, to be dOCU'L' t[OUSE The orally erredas B?r,T- c following :,'ead twice indicated: .Ho by REFERRED Lse bills heir titles f, f¢ the the were and setref- of Lidia relief relief of Lester H.R. _438. An act fo the relief of Boulos St_pha]_; H.R. _590.. An act fo the relief of Melissa Cataml:.:ay Gutlerrez; H.R. 5667. An act f( _ the relief of Linda grille D:ickson (nee Wat rs); H.R. 5907. An act f, r the relief of Capt. Bruce ]E.Schw_rtz, U.S Army; H.R.':'207. An act for the relief of Emmett A. and ,_gnes J. Rathbu L; H.R. 7682. An act o corffer citizenship pc_thu]nously upon La: ce Corporal Fredertco Silva; H.R. r685. Ai_ act for _he relief of Gtuseppe Greco; H.R. 3823. An act for the relief of James A. Wentz; and H,R. 9393. An act fcr the relief of Mary Notart_omas; to the Judiciary. H.R. 3586. An act to ;_ale o: the passeng, Irldepe_dence; Committee uthorize vessel on the the foreign steamship H.R..0942. A n act to tmend the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of July l, 1918 (40 Stat. 755), as ame:_ded, to exten¢ and adapt its provision§ to the Conw ntion between the United States and the _ _overnment of Japan for the protection of nigratory _irds and birds l::x danger of e :tinctlon, and their environment, conclude( at the city of Tokyo, M_rch _, 1972; H.R. 109T2. An act /_ delay for 6 months the tak:ng effect of cer_ _in measures to provide a_.ditlonal funds for certain wildlife restoration projects; H.R. ::1223. An act to _ uthozqze amendment of cont,'acts relating to the exchange of cerfain ve:_sels for conver_ on and operation in ur_subs_dized service b_ ;ween the west coast of the United States ,nd the territory of Guam; H.R. 12208. An act to _3nfer exclusive jurisdiction on the Fe, eral Maritime Cornmisslolq over certain novelnen_s of mer_handl_e by barge in : )reign and domestic offshor_ commerce; and H.R. 12925. An act t) amend the act tq _uthorlze appropriation_ for the fiscal yea9 1974 foe certain marlti _e programs of the Depart]lent of Commer,;e; to the Committee On Commerce. U 2ited States so a_; [n the Americax_ ORDE]_ the act to the fiscal programs of _nd thePositio_ end Wildlife, ENP_I,L]KD The message the Speaker had the following enrolled H.R. 1321. An act for minga l?ettit; H.R. 5106. All act for Datiles Tabayo; and amend, exchang_ and opera., between th,_ and the ter_, confer excluslvs Maritime Com-, and April 3, 1974 H_R. 2537. An act Mysllna_a Bokosky; H. H.R. KroE!; 3534. An act Boulo, the relief of James mented as a vessel to be entitled t_' fiisheries; to. _ ,OM cot currence H.R. 11223. A:2 act merit of contracSs of cert-_in vessels for lion in unsubsLdized west coast of the ritory of Guam; H.R. 12208. -_n act Jurisdiction on the n_isslon over dise by barge ixa s:hore commerce; tt.R. 12627. An act to ihs Secretary of the which the U.S. Coast c_use tiae vessel Miss once Jackson, of Juneau Percy Scott, WilliamL to requests H.R. :[0942. An t ae MlgratorF Bird Treaty Act of 3, 1918 (44) Stat. 755), as amended, to an_ adapt its pro.. visions to the the United States and the of Japan for th,_, protection of m[ bi cds and birds i]:L danger of extinc?_ion, their environment, c,_ncluded at the city of March 4, 1972_ It.R. 10972. Ar_ act de .ay for 6 rnonth'_ tlhe taking effect pro.. vide additional funds for certain _qldlif_ restoratlonproj_2gs; Metzenbaum Mondale Nelson Pearson Randolph Roth Schweiker Stevens Weicker motion So Mr. CANNON'S ALLEN'S amendment, it Senate: H,R. 2537. An act Iv£yslinska Bokos:_y; Ha_. :3534. An act pendence; H.R. 8823. An Wentz; H.R. 9393. An l_otarthomas; Muskie Nunn Backwood Pastore Bell Proxmire Ribicoff Scott, Hugh Sparkman Stafford Stennis Stevenson Symington Taft Talmadge .Thurmond Tower Tunney Williams Young Hruska HUddleston Hughes which RECOR]D--SEi_'/A,"EE au,. yea).' th,_, Mr. FOR ADjO1 11 A.M. TOI_ ]_OBERT C. B_ I ask l.nanimous Senate am_[ RNMENT ORROW RD. Mr. con_, .mt that UNTIL President, when the completes its business today, it in adjournme: ,t until 11 o'clock stands a,:m. to:morrow. The PRESIDING ( FF][CER. objection, it is so ordei ,_d. Without SIGNED announced iMs signature the thai;, t_::, r,._lief relief relief of of of Do.. F_or,_, Rito E',_ _re subsequently .:sider.t pro rem- D:[VIS_,_:ON CLOrURE OF TIME 1V/OTIO Mr. ]_OBERT C. B_ I ask lmanimous con :_or debate on the mo :_ure tomorrow be tq '_ween the Senator i CANNO]:_) and the Sen (Mr. The ALLEN). PRESIDING objection, it is SO order, ._'_)R DEBATE _ TOMORROW ON aD. Mr. President, ent that the time ion to invoke cloua P y divided be'om Nevada (Mr. for from Alabama ._-_CER. d. Without Ap_l 3, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL ORDER THAT _ .MENDMENTS AT DESK BEFORE CLOTURE VOTE QUALIFY UNDE] RULE XXH Mr. ROBERT C. ] I ask unanimous cc all amendments at the vote on the mot begins, be conside_ read by the clerk si the rule. The PRESIDING objection, it is so o_ YRD. Mr. President, _ent that tomorrow he desk at the time on to invoke cloture ed as having been as to qualify under 0_'_'ICER. Without _ed. FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN AMENDMENTS OF 1974 ACT The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill (S. 3044) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing of primary and general election campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating to the financing and conduct of such campaigns, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill is open to further amendment, Ai_ENln_ENTlqO. 1102 Mr. BROCK. Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 1102 and ask that it be read. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated, The legislative clerk read as follows: On page 75, between lines 4 and 5, insert the following: "(3) Tjals subsection does not apply to the Democratic or Republican Senatorial Cam, paign Committee, the Democratic National Congressional Committee, or the National Republican Congressional Committee." On page 77, between lines 5 and 6, insert the following: "(e) This section does not apply to the Democratic or Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee, the Democratic National Congressional committee, or the National Republican Congrassional Committee." On page 77, line 6, strike out "(e)" and RECORD -- SENATE S 5189 expeditiously handled. I do not see the tribute to a candidate, in [he light of the need for extended debate, so I reserve fact that these contributions collected the remainder of my time. would have come from a total source or Mr. DOMINICK. My immediate ima great number of people; is that correct? pression, When my Colleague was offe r* Mr. BROCK. Exact]y. lng his amendment, Was that I would Mr. CANNON. And it is not the intenlike to be added as a cosponsor, tion to attempt to va:fy the limit on exMr. BROCK. I thank the senator, penditures that a candidate can spend, Mr. President, I ask unanimous connor would it change the amount of sent that the name of the Senator from money that a person himself could conColorado be added as a cosponsor of the tribute to a candidate or to a political amendment, committee? The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without Mr. BROCK. By no method whatsoobjection, it is so ordered, ever would it affect either of those. Mr. BROCK. I thank the Senator very Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, in the much for his support, light oil that, I personally would have Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, would no objection to the amendment. the Senator explain just what he intends Mr. ALLEN. 1V.[r.President, will the by this amendment now, in order that Senator yield? the R_.CORDmay be clear? Mr. BROCK. I am delighted to yield Mr. BROCK. Mr. President, this the floor. amendment is to page 75, between lines Mr. ALLEN. I commend the distin4 and 5. We are dealing here with a secguished Senator from Tennessee for the tion--if I may find the place in the bill-concern that he is manifesting with rewhich relates to limitation on expendigard to the party system. The party syf;tures generally. This limits expenditures tern, it occurs to the Senator from Alamade on behalf of any candidate for habaron, will be a :near casualty if not a tional office--in essence, limitations on casualty of public financing, and I can contributions by political committees, certainly understand, since the Senator We have an exemption, under subsecis an organization member, that he would tion (5) (b) on page 73, for the national be concerned about the party system. committees, of 2 cents per voter, and an But I am concerned that this amendexemption for the State committees of 2 ment would constitute a great big loopcents per voter, which is not counted tohole being created before this bill is even ward the sum total. But under subsecpassed, and I would envision that as tion (c) (1): time goes on other loopholes will be No person may make any expenditure created. (other than an expenditure made on behalf To create a loophole right at this time, of a candidate u_der the provisions of subbefore the bill even becomes law, seems section (a)(4)) advocating the election cedeto me to be unwise. I would like to infeat of a clearly identified candidate during a calendar year which, when added to all quire of the distinguished Senator if other expenditures made by that person durthere would be any limitation whatsolng the year advocating th/_ election or de- ever on'a congressional campaign comfeat of that candidate, exceeds $1,000. mittee, either Republican or Democratic, Mr. President, that simply is impossible for us to comply with. Thepurpose 'of these committees is to afford people an opportunity to give to a large agenda itures it may be any' on receipts thatmake. it mayWould receivethere or expendceiling at all? Mr. BROCK_ I 'would assume, and I believe I am co_wect---ff the chairman lnser_ lieu thereof ". Mrl in BROCK. Mr. "(f) President, I offer this amendment to exempt in a limited fashion the two campaign committees of the Senate and the two.campaign committees of the House simply because I do not believe that as the bill is written we could literally operate support language. of our candidates under the in existing I am of candidates, and orwea cannot support a House Senate adequately candidate who is a viable candidate in any other sense of the word with that limitation, What I am trying to do is simply say that the dollar ceiling on committee givlng not apply but to the Senate say and Houseshallcommittees, I would to the chairman that this has nothing to do of disagrees, there he may cor-. rectthethc_ommittee impression--.that are ceil-. not sure that that was the intent, but it is a matter of great concern to me, and I think it is important that we know the potential hazard for our two major parties in the proposed legislation as it may finally be enacted, ! think it is important that our parties not be weakened, but strengthened, by whatever action Congress takes. I would hope that in writing this particular bill we can provide that kind of sense of purpose with this amendment. The amendment simply exempts the House and Senate campaign committees from the specific limitations established for other political committees, I have discussed the amendment at length with my colleagues, both those on the committee and those who are involved in campaign activities. ! would h.ope the amendment will find favor on both sides of the aisle and that it can be with the limit on how much a candidate can spend. We leave that as it is, intact, We simply are trying to afford to the committees opportunity support the candidatesan of their party,to and the effort here is to strengthen the parties involved, Mr. CANNON. So the net effect, as I understand it, then, would be that the Democratic or Republican Central Campaign Committee and the Democratic National Congressional Committee or Republican National Congressional Cornmittee could collect funds through contributions or dinners or otherwise, but would not be held to the limit imposed on the amounts committees could contribute to a candidate? Mr. BROCK. That is right, Mr. CANNON. They would be exempt from the $6,000 limit that we have in here now, that a committee could con- bill.ings TheregiVen wouldunder be°therno ceilingSeCti°nSon°fwhattIle the conunittee could receive in sum total, nor would there be any ceiling on what the coramittee could spend, except as it applies a specific candidatecandidate's and the limitatiionto in that particular campaign. Mr. _U.,LEN. In other words, theoreti-. rally, then, in the committees could take and campaign disburse literally mil.. lions of dollars in furtherance of the candidacies of House and Senate Mem-. hers; is that correct? Mr. BROCK. I Would say so. Mr. ,_,LLEN. And this money could be spent separate and apart from the cam-. paigns of the Members of Congress, could it not? Mr. IBROCKi No, it is still subject, _. the chairman has I_inted out, to the limitations the bill imposes on an lndl.. vidual _candidate. Mr. _LLEN. Very well. But this money could be used to supplement the cam-: paigns or the campaign funding of an_ candidate for the House of Representa-. tives or the Senate that these committees selected? 36:3 $ 5190 CONGRESSIONAL Mr. BROCK. That is correct, Mr. ALLF. N. But that could add millions of dollta_ of receipts and expe_ditures, could it not? Mr. BROCK. Well, I do not know that it would be added, because what the committees do is afford a vehicle for people to give broadly rather than specifically, if there arc a few individuals left in the country who would prefer to give to the political party of their choice rather than trying to seek out candidates individually. Mr. ALLENo Well, would it be possible for an individual to give, say, $1 million to one of these campaign committees? Mr. BROCt_. No. Under other s_'mtions of the bill. that would be prohibited. We exempt .here, by this amendment I have offered, the committees only from that section which limits the giving by a particular cormnittee to a particular eandidate. It does not change the limitation on political contributions on the part of 'any individual at all. Mr. ALLEN. Well, it adds a section there under the provisions for limitations on contributions, and another one-_-Mr. BR'(_2K. They are both to the same section, Mr. _ALLEN. To the section on limitation on expenditures, Mr. BROCK. No; the amendment here applies or:ly to section 615, which is limitations on contributions. It does not affect the limitation on expenditures at all, as the Senator from Nevada has pointed out. _ Mr. ALLEN. Well, 'what would be the maximum amount that could be received by a campaign committee, a senatorial or House campaign committee, from any contributor? Mr. Bi:tOCK. There have been so many amendments; that I may be a little confused on what is the present limit, but the same limit that would apply to giving to a campaign or to the national committees 'would apply here. I am not sure what the amendment says with respect to that,--was it a $3,000 or a $6,000 limit? Mr. ALLEN. If the committee is authorized to make contributions in any size, would tlhe House or Senate Member be authorized to receive a contribution in any size? Mr. Bi_OC!K. From these committees? Mr. ALLEN. Yes. Mr. BROCK. That is correct, Mr. ALLEN. In other words, the senetorial or congressional campaign cornmittees could get money from all over the country within certain limits and then funnel that without limitation as to the amount, s into the cam0aigns of the various Members of the House and Senate; is that not correct? Provided it did no run over the amount he could spend, of course. Mr. BttOCK. That is right. If I may say to the Senator, the purpose of the section as originally written was to djminish and, hopefully, to eliminate the possibility of undue influence on the part of special interest grmtps who form cornmlttees for the purpose of legislative advocacy on a particular issue and raise a great deal of money and then give to 364 RECORD-- SENA'rE tZhose candidate, who world support, say, a consumer protection bill, or who would[ be opposed to :tach a bill. For example, there is no simfiar situat! on as it relates to House and Senate carr.paign commit-, tees. These are party committees. They receive their flmds from a lc,road base., VTe have thousands of con'_ributors--. hundreds of thousands---_,nd the average, contribution would be wet1 under $100, I ara sure, from both con_nittees. I am sure :[ can sl>_ak for the Republican Party. The contribuLion would be on a broad base, to incumbent and c'nallenger alike, In the sense that this bil. must preserve and enhance tlhe party structure, as I k:aow the Senator feels, and we share this concern wi_;h the bill as it is written,. the bill, unless amended further, irapinges on our ability as parg_ies to sup-. l_3rt our own candidates. Mr..ALLEN. Would it be impossible, a,; the Senator from A1_bama sees it, then, for a candidate who bas a legal right to spend $1 million in his: campaign but, having collected only one-half that amount from private sorrces and from the party_ could apply t) one of these committees for a contribution--that is, theoretically--of half a million dollars; is that :not correct? Mr. BROCK. I think it is. Mr. ALLEN. I am jus'; wondering if that would be in the public interest, to allow these contributions [o cc,me in. to a big fmxd there and have it parceled out without any limitation as to the amount, T/eat is what worries me. Mr. BROCK. May I say, there is a limit on the individual candidates and on how much he can spmd. Mr. ALLEN. Yes; but il he :is running si:Loft, _hen the committe_. _ can give him a present of tremendous ,';urns of money under the Senator's amendment; is that not correct? · Mr. BROCK. That is correct, I would say to the Senator, and I think that he would agree with the statement that this :is far preferabx_ to receiving a check from the ]_ederal Treasury. Mr. ALLEN. Yes; if he would accept this instead of the other l;rovi,dons, that would be fine; l_ut I am :_fraid that we will have the other provisions and what the Senator is adding to. If I thought his .araendment would help dffeat the bill, I would be for the amendm_mt, but as it is now, it looks like a tremendous loophole to provide a method of making large contributions not otherwise permitted mz_der the bill to various 2andidates for the House and Senate. I wonder whether the same objective could not be accomplishefl, Ix}ssibly, by m_reasing the a:mount that the committee can receive and expend rather than leaving it with the sky as the limit, Mr. BROCK. Perhaps ] have an unwarranted faith in our two parties. I do have that faith. I have enormous respect _or both parties, for thei_ adherence to their basic principles, in [heir belief in their own party philosophy and their belief in this coumtry. I frankly fear no conflict of interest with the parties disbursing the money. I have a great deal of fear of a conflict of int_;rest when the April 3, 1974 _'ederaJ Government, or when we, eh]:lance vested interests. That is what I am t;_ring i;o avoid. I wm;:ld point ()ut to the Senator, ff my figures are correct--and I think they are fairly close--that as of a month ago, our averag_ contribution was ,'mmething on 'i;1%_ order of $23.75 in the Republican :?arty. We have survived aaxd sustained _mrselv,_s simply because we have a huge _-mrnbel: of people willing to participate :n supr, ort of the party. By no definition :::an thst $23.75 be sufficient to influence Lhe election or the vote of an individual cunning; for the Senate. But individual 1Senators do not have the, capacity to _stablish that broad base in sufficient :nagnitude to warrant the confidence I;hat they can finance their own cam9aigns. Xt is lhe purpose of the committeres not ;o finarJce a candidate's csznpaign. That must come essentially from his own State. ii_lut it i:; supportive in the early stagesat the t.:enesis---of a campaign so that it ':;gill att:,'act a broad level of support. The candidate must have a chance to win. 'Jnless this exemption is given to Senate :md I-I,)use Campaign Committees, I :hAnk teat what we will do will be to run the terrible risk of making the bill worse than it is. I share this concern with th_ Senator from Alabama, in the Imblic aspect of it. But we will make the ]:,ill. wor:;e unless we afford the party some opportunity to support the people who _[dhere i;o the party's philosophy. t_r. ALLEN. Would it be possible for contributors who might not want to appear on the report of a given candi,date to make a contribution to the contrresz;ional committee, anti then the (:ongres:;ional committee makes a contribution to the candidate without the identity of the contributor being made t::nown? 55c. BROCK. No contributor can, _,:ither tiireetly or indirectly, overtly or ,:overtly or even implicitly, imply that he v/ants l_is funds to go to a particular candidal;e, without its being' reported as a donation by the committee, for the candidate. Even under current law in our own committee--I am not sure about my colleague's committee, but I would assume it is simfiar--we will take a campaign c(;ntribution for a particular Sen:s:tor or challenger and report it forth',;.,itlh. Brt we tell the contributor and the challenger that we do not operate a launc_y in the Republican Party and have r,o interest in it whatsoever. We adhere :['eligiously not only to the letter but the s['irit ol the law as it is today. We do c:_port tlmse, and we should. Mr. ALLEN. Under the Senator's amendment, would a contribution to the committee be limited to $3,000? Mr. ROTH. Yes, as I understand the bill, thai: is correct. Mr. COOK. Yes, that is co_rect. Mr. A:i,,LEN. What would be the value of gettir:_g the same contributor to cont:ibute ix) the candidate dJxect? What :nlagic is there in going through congressi.onal committees? l_.(r. B:_OCK. I would say 50 the disi;:4.ngnish,_.'cl Senator from Alabama, for _i_hc,m I have such enormous respect, that April 3, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL nothing at all ts wrong with that. In many cases, this Senator would so advise a particular contributor. We do not have many $3,000 contributors. That is not the problem. What we are trying to do is to broaden the base of the party. As I said, the average contribution is $23.75 and we are trying to enlist large numbers of people. That, frankly, is not to give to the candidate broadly. Certainly we can support our candidate broadlY. That is the kind of contribution I want to attract, and I think we can attract, If we do, then we have to have some method of exemption so that we can get the contributions in bulk. We could not physically handle the volume of each one indix;idually, as the Senator was suggesting the $3,000 contribution, which we could do quite readily, Mr. ALLEN. I thank the distinguished Senator for giving me this information, I will not stand in the way of the amendment. Rather, I would say, I should like to be recorded as voting _'nay" on the amendment, Mr. BROCK. I have nothing further, Mr. President. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment of the Senator from Tennessee. The amendment was agreed to. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill is open to further amendment, Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The second assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I ask nnazzimous consent thai the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered, MESSAGE F_ ENROLI__D _I THE HOUSE_ BILLS SIGNED A message fron the House of Representatives by Mr. 3erry, one of its readlng clerks, annou Lced that the Speaker had affixed his si nature to the followlng enrolled bills s. 71. An act for t e relief of Uhel D. Polly; S. 205. An act for he relief of Jorge Marlo Bell; S. 507. An act fo_ the relief of Wilhelm J. R. Maly; S. 816. An act for ;he relief of M.rs. Jozefa Sokolowska Domans L; S. 912. An act for the relief of Mahmood Shareef Suleiman; __d S. 2112. An act f¢ ' the relief of Vo Thl oyt). _Suong(Nini Anne ] The enrolled bi ts were subsequently signed by the Prei _nt pro ternpore. FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1974 The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill (S. 3044) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing of primary and general election campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating to th_ financing and conduct of such campaigns, RECORD-- SENATE S 519:1 Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I call up rue of their numbers and that, in my my amendment No. 1126 and ask that judgment, is the way it should be. it be stated. Throughout the debate on S. 3044, I The PRESIDING OFFICER. The have heard repeated references to the amendment will be stated, inordinate influence of special interests The assistant' legislative clerk proas a primary defense for public financceeded to read the amendment, ing. But;, according to the study released Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I ask unanlast week by Common Cause, I was the imous consent that further reading of top recipient of political contributions in the amendment be dispensed with. 1972 from business committees; and I ara The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without positive that I could have raised the same objection, it is so ordered; and, without amount of money from individual conobjection, the amendment will be tributions if I had been required to by printed in the RECORm the law. The fact of t:he matter was, and The amendment, ordered to be printed is, that I am not. in the RECORD,iS as follows: The study released last week by CornOn page 78, line 16, strike the closing moa Cause states that at least $14.2 milquotation marks and the second iaeriod, lion has already been raised this year by on page _8, between lines 16 and 17,insert various groups and ,'_pecial interests to the following: support candidates in the House and the "§ 618. Prohibition of contributions other Senate. than byindividuals Mr. President, I lnight say that the "Notwithstanding the provisions of sec- aggregation of contributions by special tions 615 and 616, no person other than an interest groups is a matter that has been individual make of a contribution. tion of the may provisions this section isViolapundiscussed widely in public forums and lshable by a fine of not more than $50,000 in private. There is a great distinction imprisonment for not more than five years, betweer. L those contributions which are or both.", legal, and those to which I refer as legal, On page 78, at the end of the matter ap- but undesirable. pearing below line 22, insert the following: In my case, it was stated that $50,000 "618. Prohibition of contributlor_s other than or thereabouts had been contributed by by individuals.", business interests. That is roughly 5 perMr. BAKER. Mr. President, this cent of the total amount of the money amendment would allow only individuals collected from over 10,000 individual to make contributions to political camcontributors to my campaign in 1972. paigns. It would strictly prohibit conThat 5 percent, I do not believe, is going tributions by organizations, associations, to have any distortive effect by its auco-ops, caucuses, committees, or any merical value and weight on my position other group which aggregate funds from on issues of the day, It should be elimiits members and gives those funds in the nated. name of a cause, interestj or section of In colloquy with the distinguished the country, senior Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Having served for over a year as vice chairman of the Senate Select Activities, Committee on Presidential Campaign I can conceive of no more effective way to eliminate the distortive influence of special interests than by banning group contributions altogether. Obviously, not all contributions by groups distort or, in any way, influence the political process, However, there is no effective way to eliminate the groups that do, short of prohibiting group contributions or segregated funds completely--and that is precisely what I propose to do. I do not think corporations or labor unions should be permitted to contribute, They cannot now, but they do through AMPAC, BIPAC, COPE, and a half dozen other devices. Moreover, I do not think KENNEEY) the-other day he said: Howofwould you money eliminate force and effect business and the labor money ir you did not go to public financing? Mr. President, this is my answer. I would simply prohibit any contribution by any :_peeial interest group, and require instead that financial contributions be a matter of individual initiative, and only those qualified to vote, individual human beings, as distinguished from legal ehtitles, organizations, associations, co-ops, and committees, be able to add their support for any candidate. The Associated Milk Producers has collected $1.4 million; the American Medical[ Association ihas collected $889,000; the United Automobile Workers have collected $717,000. purely political action groups should be permitted to contribute, They cannot-vote. The American Medtcal Association cannot vote. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce cannot vote. Common Cause cannot vote--except as individuals. So, why should they be allowed to contribute. Only individuals can vote, and I believe only individuals should be allowed to contribute, I do not wish to infringe upon the freedom of association. That freedom is guaranteed by the first amendment to the Constitution; and I do not believethat my amendment would diminish that right in the least. However, it would dimtnlsh the ability of groups to assert influence beyond what they wield by vlr- These figures have been quoted by sponsors of the bill as proof of the need for public financing. And yet, even if we have public financing under the provisigns of S. 3044, the ability of these groups to contribute to various cantpaigns will not be-impaired. In fact, an amendment adopted narrowly last week doubles the contribution limitation iaiposed on groups of $6,000, applied separarely to primaries, zainoffs, special, and general elections. I understand that to mean that special interests can then-contribute $6,000 to a candidate in the prlmary _md an additional $6,000 in the general election, or a total of $12,000. Virtually all public officeholders are not influenced itt the least by $12,000_ 365 S 5192 CONGRESSIONAL _towever, I suspect that some might be ff that $12,000 were matched by three or&[er committees or corporations of similar in.[crest--interests which worfid then be represented by $48,000, and probably far more influence than they deserve. This is what I mean by the distort[ye effects of st_ecial interests, The sponsors of the bill argue that S. 3044 is the only reasonable answer to this most serious problem. But_ I respectfully urge them l_ tell me how they can make such a claim. Granted, S. 3044 imposes a limit on the amount individuals and groups can give to political candidates. But, S. 37:2 did that; and we ta)uld impose such limits without ever hav'hxg to resort to partial or full public financing. Under S. 3044, arty special interest can contribute up to $12,000 to a candidate If it is given separately Jn the p_:ima:t'y and gener_il election campaigns, I realize that if a major party caltdidate reaches the required threshold durlng the primary campaign, he is eligible for a granl_ from the Treasury to the tune of 15 cents times the voting age population of the State or district. However, individuals or groups can still contribute if Lhey wish, so long as their contribution is deducted from the subsidy provided by the Government. Moreo,/er, in cases where an incumbent is contested, but not se:riottsly challenged, and that incumbent decides against public financing, [,he special[interests can contribute $6,000 in the primary and another $6,000 in the general election. So what has been done to protect the political process from specia]. interests in this bill? They can 5till contr4_bute at least $6,000, and possibly $12,000. Limiting the total amount of their contributions ks a significant improvement over what we have [tad in the past .and what _'e have today; but I do not think it is enough to convince the American people that the financial influence of the special interests has been diminished, much less eliminated. That is why I propose tiaa[ only individuals be allowed to contribute and that group contributions, particularly special interest contribu_ions, be strictly prohibited. Otherwise, the $14.2 million which Connnon Cause reports has ',already been raised for House and Senate :races will be given and public suspicion about cor_porations, labor unions, and other's wielding inordinate political influence will continue, __(n disclosing the study lm_t week, a spokesman for Common Cause said: Anyone who thinks the _ratergate scandals have put special interest givers out of b_sine_,;s had better take a close iook at these fig'ares." life went on to say that there is "no way to restore confidence i_ this systen_ w:_en 'khe sa_qe old thing is going on. 'ITds is precisely my point. 'IT_e special interest giw_rs are alive and well in 1974, Watergate and potential indictments not withstandJ, ng. Moreover, I could not a_ree more that confidence will only be restored if we correct the glaring abuses of past c_cmpaigns. Nevertheless, S. 3044, with the avid support of Common Cause, allows the same old things to cc_ntinue. It will allow groups or organizations, whether they are occupational or other'wise, to distort the most sensitive of all 366 RECORD--SENATE procea_es. It v_ll perpetuate the worst :[)art of our electoral pro_ess. And it wi].:[ continue the ;mrious er3siorl of public 'trust in our major govern[mental institu., [ions. I cannot accept the argument _ha'_; group contributions are neces.,;ary to adc-. quately f'tmd a:n effective two-party sys_, tern. But even if they were necessary irt the past, they certainly should not be,' under a new system of rublic financing:, or even under a refined form of private financing through realistic tax incen-, tires such as I ihave prop,)sed with Sena [ors EgwN, TALMADGE, GErRNEY and others. I would be willing to bet, though, that; under the provisions of S. 3044, in which. the role of pti%ate contributors has beer. substantially reduced, the reduction w-il!. not be felt so much by the special inter ests _ by the individual c.ontributor, ]in fact, I doubt very serLous whether S. :_044 will reduce at all the number ol' special-interest givers. I; may only re.. duce slightly the amount of money the_; can give to individual card[dates, Now, is that real reform? ;it seems to. nle that the or]y realisti_ way to el[mi-hate the distort[ye effects of special in.. terests is to prohibit contributions b5 groups altogether. They cannot vote. Only individuai[s can vote; and I, there.. fore, propose thaionly indiyiduals be al-].,)wed 1;ocontribute. In my view, it would be the shzgle most constr _ctive improve-men[ we could make in the political proc-ess, in the wake of the events of the past 2 years. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield myself 3 minutes, Mr. President, while thc amendment oli U._e Senator from Tennes,;ee is very laud-. able in its objective--all cf us want to see a reduction in 'the influence of .special interest groups--it is sor'; of ]like throw-. lng the baby oat with th_, bath water. Ii; is, an overkill situation. It would put all political comm_ittees out of business, a,; well as other types of groups, over and above that of individuals I do not think it, is practical. I do not think a campaign could be carried onin th[,; fashion, under the terms of the bill, as we have drafted it,, if we are to lcrohibit any co_tributions from committees. And I lo not see thai; ii; really aehiew.'s an obje( tire that would be very helpful to the process, I think the main thing that is going: to result in a ;lessened f:_fluenee in the political giver :.qeld is the fa_t that we have not required a complete and full( disclosure and _aave limited tire amount, S0 that a person cannot g'ive more than $3,000, and in tnrn we here limited the expenditures. _O I would hope my colleagues would not support the amendment. ,ks I said, I do not think it is a practical one. I think: we are gradually getting ourselves into a position where it is going to be impossJble to carry on political campaigns, Mr. COOK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield me some ti:ne? Mr. CANNON. I yield, Mr. ,COOK. Mr. President, after my discussion the other day _ith the Senator' from Connecticut, I fin. 1 myself in a strange position with the amendment of rny good friend and colleague from Ten- April 3, 1974 nessee. I, as he knows, have very serious reserw,Mons about the Federal Government's subsidizing and paying for poi[tical c_mpaigns, but I also know that what the Congress giveth, the Congress can taketh away, and I think somewhere along the way we have to at least attempt to give things a try. I guess I find myself in the Xind of situation where maybe we should try. I know that we on this side of the aisle, as Republicans, are alway,s told that all the big givers in the United States somehow or other are Republicans. I have just got to say, Mr. President, that in my St;ate that "just ain't so." Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, will the Senator yield so I may ask for the yeas and nays on the amendment? Mr. COOK. I yield. Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I ask for the yessandnays. The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. BAKER. I thank the Senator. Mr. _OOK. In my part of the country that jlLst is not so. Somelhow or other that is a much used and I. must say, in alii fairness, a much maligned remark, and I ;hink my good friend from Mtnnesota would say there are some pretty good givers in the South other than i_epublicans, and they are Democrats. Mr. IIUMPHREY. Not so many. Mr. COOK. They are not nearly enoug_._, I am sure. I rar_ my last campaign on a third of the meney that the last two candidates, Democ:rat and Republican, ran on in my State, _md I would like to feel this could work. X would like to feel that some day, if we try and we fail, this is what we will do. I dr) know tha_ we p_ssefl a bill last 7ear and we sent it over to the House, and it got nowhere, and I ,'_m sure there are [hr,se who say the Republicans are I;rying 7o do something about it and are against Government financing, but I I;hink even the gentlemen in the news gallery would have to say it is r. ot the ]gepub] can leadership position that is ,!;toppirg the movement of the political campaign bills in the House of Representatg;es. So I ihave just kind of taken the pos[l;ion that I want to send .the House as much as I can so I can at least get somel;hLqg. _,/Iaybe that is a poor excuse. Maybe that is an easy way out. But I am awfully tired of being, somehow or other, bl'_med, and when we read an article in the morning paper we read that the ]_epubl:3.cans attempt to stall something else. I hate to be grouped together in that way. I stand for what I stand, and we are here on the floor to stand up for [:;he bm_ic concepts and basic principles in whi(h we believe. Somehow or other, i resen; those kinds of characterizations ';hat occur. But X must say to the Senator from 'I'ennes_ee that I wish he were right. He may wry well wind up being right. I Ch:ink ia the meantime, a_ the process ::'.loses and as the process subjects itself l:o cri{izism, there are times when we I:lave to look to different answers and at [east tr:r. ][have convinced myself that maybe we :)ugh[ t) try. I do not like it too muffle. I :,hink _hat I dislike the most is the idea ,4p_ 3, 19T4 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--- SENATE that we are really building two political So, Mr. President, I am going to vote parties, as we know them--the DemoagaLnzt this amendment purely and simcratic Party and the Republican Party. ply because I think we have to reflect a But nowhere does the Constitution say consideration of the American people, that there shall be two political parties in Rightly or wrongly, we have made a the United States. I think that we are remarkable change. Some people may SaYing that a third party will never see totally dislike it. We may be putting the the light of day in this country, because system in jeopardy. But then it is their the biggest portion of the money will go system that is charLged, and if they do to the two principal parties, and that not like it, it will be reflected in this those who really wish to seek reform and Chamber. make a major impact on the country will Whether they like this system or not, not be able to do it. we are not trying to make a change for Abra)mm Lincoln was not a Repubour convenience. Certainly, some polllican all of his life. It was in 1854 that he ticlans have cheated. For everyone who joined another group and established the made a contribution, somebody cheated, Republican Party. It was a minority Mr. President, I am opposing the party, because he came from the W_Ag amendment of the Senator from TennesParty. But he decided to change and that see because I think, on reflection, that he should do something about the basic we have tried, at least, to send to the philosophy in this country. I really canHouse of Representatives a change that not see that happening, and it bothwill be tremendous, but by now we have ers me. gotten no action at all. We will get some I look to the future. I look to 1976 and action, and up to now we have gotten no to 4 Years later, and I see ourselves in action at all. this situation. We discussed it the other Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, will the day. One party will get 40 percent and Senator yield? the other will get 50 percent. That is 90 Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I yield to percent. The other party gets one-ninth the Senator from Kansas as much time of that 90 percent, or 10 percent. That as ! have. means that if there is $19 million, one Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, ! do not party would get $9 million and the other know how much time the Senator has, party would get $9 million. That would but I want to propound a question to leave $1 million for the other party, the Senator from Tennessee. How can a third party be an effective In the discussion he defined the word party in the United States philosophi"contribution." Is that limited only to cally, to impress its desire and philosmoney, or is _t limited to so-called volo_ahies on the American people, when unteer services? What is the meaning only $1 million is going to be applied as of "contribution" under the amendment? against the parties with $9 million each Mr. BAKER. The definition of _conat the polls? tribution" in the body of the bill itself is This bothers me. It truly bothers me as unchanged As I understand the bill, that to how we will freeze in something that would include many things of value. It the writers of the Constitution never inwould not include, as I understand the tended us to do. My salvation is that what description in the bin, the efforts of volCongress can do, Congress can undo. If unteer workers. It would include office we can find a better way, we will find a rent, stationery, and things of that sort. better way. However, I do not honestly The amendment in no way changes the believe that in looking for a better way, definition in any section of the bill maybe we Will have to _try this way. itself, Maybe we will have to try to find a more Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, a recent arequitable solution for equitable distributicle of the Wall Street Journal--which tion in what we do. I do not have before me--which speaks I just cannot see how we can say to about the money spent in Cincinnati, the American people that we have made Ohio, and Grand. Rapids, Mich., where honest givers out of them so that each labor through paid volunteers, was used one will give $I00, and only $100, and to work for the candidates and for the that no organization can give more. telephone banks, We have done this so many times that It occurs to theit junior Senator from · Kansas whether is a labor organizawe cannot count them. We have said we tion or one of the organizations menhave the Corrupt Practices Act saying tioned by the Senator from Tennessee, how much Members of Congress can spend on our campaigns. It has not been done for 40 or 50 years or more. So if this is the route we are to take, I am afraid it will not be long before we do not know what we are to do. What are we to do? Are we to put a person in jail because we gives $50? Reports that have failed to be filed, and nobody is even concerned over doing anything about it. So maybe we have to make a stark change, as bad as it may sound to me, adn maybe find a way out of this to a "better way. Maybe we have to go all the way over the hill before we find a way to get back. That would be a terrible thing. However, every time' we make a slight change; we find a way to violate it, knock holes in it, and get around it. whether or not they are paid volunteers, paid by'the associations or paid by COPE or paid by the unions or paid by the milk producers, we are getting into another area that deserves some attention. As I understand the amendment, I think it is a step in the right direction, This problem may be addressed in another amendment, but, as I understand the amendment, ! think it is a step in the right direction. I do not share the views expressed by my friend the Senator from Kentucky that we ought to do this because nothing else has worked, and that we will not have a first party, let alone a second or a third party. If we adopt such a financ- S 5193 Lng plan, I think that the amendment of the S_aator from Tenuessee is a big step in the dtrec_ z_t cm_r of disclosm_, but al_,_ of l_litLnlt contributions to an individ.ual. Az_ far _ I am concerned, this goes a long way toward cleaning up the process. ! su0port the amendment of the Senator from Tezmessee. The PRESIDENG OFFICER. Who yields lame? Mr. ERVIN. 1_,. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. B,_ER. I yield. Mr. ERVIN. Mr. President, I am strongly in favor of this amendment. ! think it is the right approach. I think it has a twofold virtue. It enables a party'_,_ candidates to get sufficient campalgn :[unds if they lmve sufficient public appeal. Furthermore, it tmterests the American citAzens in the eloctroal process voluntari_y, and not involuntarily as the bill does. I sincerely believe that this will come nearer to solving this problem than a_ay suggestion that has been made at any time prior to this amendment, and I strongly support, it. Mr. BA_ER. Mr. President, ! am certain that the Senator from North Caro, lina has more experkmce on this problem than any other Member of this body. I appreciate his remarks, Mr. BROCK. _MLr_President, will the Senator yield? Mr. BAKER. ! yield. Mr_ BROCK. I commend the Senator for this amendment. ! have great sympathy with it. I would like to clarify.one point, fcc the purpose of establishing legislative history, and that is, does the amendment inhibit the right of the Senate or House of Rel0resentative_rDemoerat_c or Relaublican campaign committees to support the candidates of their choice? Mr. B_k'_,. I_ 18 my understanding that the effect of this amendment on the bill a_ a whole--has to do solely with those who can legally contribute; the amenctment would require that only qualified voters be allowed to contribute to those committees. It wouldnot prevent those committees, however, such as the Democratic or Republicar_ congressional comnrtttees or camlmign committees, from performing their function. - Mr. BROCK. And the committees could support the candidates of their choice? Mr. B,AK_._. Tha_ is my intention. That ils the way I interpret the amendmerit when read in context with the rest of the bill. Mr. BROCK. I thank the Senator. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, will the Senat,)r yield? Mr. DOLE. I yield_ Mr. COOK. If only qualified voters can contribute to that fund, which then, In turn, contributes to a candidate, if that fund Jz not a qnalilied voter how can it contribute to a candidate? Mr. BAKER. Because there is another section of the bill Which recognizes campaign committees; Mr. COOl<. In or&er words, the section the Senator is amending allows not only qualified voters, but campaign committees, to contribute to a candidate? 367 S 5194 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE Mr. BAK_;R. That is right. The cornferred to in another section of the bill mittees which are described in the bill and would continue to f'mction, except; itself, the central campaign committees, that this amendment would preclude the for instance, in section 310, and conreceipt by those committees of contrigressional mad senatorial campaign cornbuttons except from individuals. mittees which are referred to in the bill Mr. HUMPH:REY. Except :From indias well. We do not change that section, vi:duals? therefore we do not change their raMr. BAKER. Yes. tionale, their reason for being, or the Mr. HUMPHREY. But it would not, legitimacy of contributions by them. prohibit those committee,,., as such, after' Mr. DOLE. I thank the Senator very they have garnered in tLe money from much, and I appreciate his intent and individuals, which is exactly basically purpose, what they do, :[rom contributing up to Mr. HU1V[PHREY. Mr. President, will the maximum cf $6,000; Js that right? the Senator yield? Mr. BAKER. ]:t would not prohibt them Mr. BAKF, R. I yield, from functioning as they no_ function. Mr. HUM:PHREY. Do I correctly anThe distinction, and the reason for it, derstand, in other words, that the COPE is that the party system itself contemorganization, of the AFL-CIO, under the plates that the party wi]l contribute to amendment, would be able to make a ii;s nontineees and candidates, but that; contribution? is distinguished from special interest, Mr. BAKER. No, it would not. groups, whether it be the milk industry, Mr. HUMPHREY. What is wrong with labor unions, or whateve:_. that? It is a committee. Mr. HUMPHREY. Or the ld_SA? Mr. BAKER. Yes, but neither COPE, Mr. BAKER. Or the AB._, or the Sierra. the Anti-Defamation League, the U.S. Club. There is a legitimate reason for a Chamber of Commerce, nor anything of party to try to elect its c mdidates. that sort could contribute to one of the Mr. HUMPHI_,EY. The Senator does. committees involved, except the senanot cal:[ the Democratic National Corntorial or House committee of either party mittee a party ,u; such, does he? or its central campaign committee. Mr. BAKER. Yes; the_e are two, one Mr. HUMPHREY. Why not, if the Democratic and: one Rep'lblican. workers want to contribute $2 apiece, let Mr. :HUMPHREY. WeLl, ii; is riot a the committee write out a receipt showparty, lit is a national committee. lng that they contribute $2, and put it Mr. BAKER. I think :hat the party into a fund? Why cannot someone make system in the United States is a blessing a contribution under the limitations of in many respects, and oae of its great; the bill? I do not think they ought to blessings is thai; it is so l¢,osely knit that. have an unlimited right, but if I underit is not inflexible, but it i_,strong enough stand, under the bill the maximum and identifiable enough sc. that we k_ow, amount would be $6,000. for instance, that the E,emocratic NaMr. BAKER. That would be $12,000 for tional Committee, the Democratic Cena primary and a general election; $6,000 teal Campaign Committe( and the Domif it is only one. oeratic Congressional Coramittees are in. Mr. HUMPHREY. Yes. fact a pal_ of the Democratic Party. Mr: BAKER. My reason for it, in anNo one doubts that. I ;hink they add swer to the question of the distinguished strenth to the party ,yste:m, and I Senator from Minnesota, is that I think have a great deal of respect for the twothe aggregation of money in that way party system, _LIldbelieve this amendcreates an enormous sum of money, in ment will strengthen it rather than alimany instances, that has a distortive minish it. impact far beyond the importance of the Mr. HUMPHREY. Ju _t to get the, individual committee, whether it is a record clear, then, once again, this. labor organization, a business associaamendment would elimnate, for extion, a cooperative, or COPE. ample, any campaign fur ds from, let us 1 think it is perfectly appropriate and say, th(; political action cc nunittee of the much to be desired that the individual American Medical Association? worker make his $2 contribution, but he Mr. BAKER. That is coirect. should send that $2 contribution 'to the Mr. tIUMPHREY. Or t:ae Chamber of central campaign committee of a candiCommerce? date, or a congressional or senatorial Mr. BAKER. That is correct. campaign committee, and not under the Mr. HUMPHREY. Or the insurance inaegis or auspices of his company, his dustry? union, or any other group that itself is Mr. BAKER. Yes. not a bona fide member of society. Mr. HUMPHREY. Or t:le labor moveThis strikes at the very reason and rameat? tionale for this amendment, I might say Mr. BAKER. That is correct. to the Senator. It is my belief that onty individuals should contribute, and that special interest groups, whether they are businessoriented, labor-oriented, indust_y-oriented, geography-oriented, ethnic-oriented, or whatever kind of groups, should Mr. HUMPHREY. Or a .1 the dairy cooperatives? Mr. BAKER. Yes. Mr. HUMPHREY. Or _he :Friends of the Wilderness ? Mr. BAKER. '.['hat is correct. Mr. HUMPHREY. Or you name it; in not be able to make these huge contriMr. HLrMI'HREY. What about buttons that they do frequently make.the Democratic ,or Republican Central Cam- other 'words, if they went out and cxmtributions, they were for truly volnnsolicited their and rnembershil) voluntary tary contributions, they _ould still not paign CommitteeS BAKER. They ?Mr.are speciflca]ly ment?be eligible 368 re- under this par;icular amend- April 3, 19 74 1Vir.EAKER. This is absolutely correct. ]Fir. ?resident, I yield back the re:nainde:" of my time, if the, chairman is ._repared to yield back his.. ]Fir. CANNON. I yield back the remaindec of my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. HELMS). All remaining time having been ?ielded back, the question is on agreeing _o the ;_mendment of the .'_enator from Fennea_;ee. On this question, the yeas _,nd nays have been ordered, and the clerk will call the roll. The ]egislative clerk called the roll. Mr. ]:{OBERT C. BYRD,. I announce :hat the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. [_ULBRICHT), the Senator from Alaska (Mr. (]-RAVEL), the Senator from Iowa (M:r. HWGHES),the Senator from Massachuset_; (Mr. KENNEDY), and the Sena_or from Ohio (Mr. METZENBAUM) are ::Lecessa::ily absent. ][ further announce that the Senator !'rom Kmtucky (Mr. HUDDLESTON)is ab:_ent on official business. Mr. (}RIFFIN. I annotmce that the 3enato} from New York (Mr. BUCKLEY), the Ser ator from Illinois (Mr. PERCY), ::md the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. 'i_reuNa) are necessarily absent. ]: also announce that the Senator from VirginiE, (Mr. WILLIAM L. _C]COTT)is ab_erlt on official business. I fur_;her announce that the Senator ['rom W;rmont (Mr. AIKEN) is absent due i:;oillne_,;sin the family. The cesult was announced--yeas 36, :lays 5_, as follows: [Nm 113 Leg.] YEAS---36 _kllen Domenicl ].VlcClure :Baker Dominick _Ylontoya Barttett Ervin Nunn E_eall Fannin Packwood iBellmon Fong Pearson :_ennett Goldwater :Randolph Srock Grifi_n :Roth :_y_d, Gurney 'raft Harry ]'L,Jr. Hansen 'rhurmond ::;hiles Helms Tower dotton Hollings Weicker ::.'u:_t_s Hruska :)ole McOleUan NAYS--53 _!,bourezL Haskell :VIuskle :3ayh Hatfield Nelson :i:_entsen Hathaway ]Pastore :J3ible Humphrey ]?ell :!3idea Inouye Proxmire :i3rooke Jackson Ribicoff ?3urdlck Javlts Schwelker :_3yrd.l_ooert C. Johnston _cott, Hugh :_annon Long Sparkman ,:_ase Magnuson ,'_tafford .:_hurch Mansfield .'Stennis Olark Mathlas :_tevens .::_ook McGee .'Stevenson ::_ransto_ McGovern -'_ymlngton :',:agleton Mclntyre Talmadge :i:_astland Metealf Tunney :l_Iart Mondale 'Williams :_:[artke Moss NOT VOTING--Il .:_Aken Huddleston Percy )3uckley Hughes .'Scott, :i::'u]brigh; Kennedy William L. ,::_ravel Metzenbaum Young So M:c. BAKER'Samendment (No. 1126) ';,;as rejected. ,, THE II¥COME TAX_MA_'I'ER OF THE PRESIDENT Mr. CURTIS. Ma-.F[restdent, this morn:ng t made a statement before the Joint _.,ommiltee" · on Inter_al Revenue Taxa- April S, 1974 tion which erence to the CONGRESSIONAL my position tax matter RECORD-- SENATE in refof the letter from Mr. J ,roes E. O_Teill, Acting Archivist, to former 3enator John WUI_amA of Delaware dated D comber 7, 1973, which President of the United States, which ata_es that Prestdel t Nlxon's gift of papers had been referred , the Joint Committee was made on Marc_ 27, 1969. For further exon Internal Taxation. x _k ample, I found no .eference to the Foundsthat the statement be tion which the Presi Lent was reported to have printed in the formed in the fore _ art of 1969 which, I asThere being objection, the statesume, was to be a I residential Library such ment was to be printed in the as Presidents Johns n, Elsenhower and Truman created. This _ fight have a bearing on I_ECORD, as follow_ the issue of donative intent. STATEMENTOF CARLT. CURTISBEFORE What all this mea ,._to me is that there are THE JOINT ON INTERNAL REVE- legitimate factual d sputes and that we have NUE TAXATXON, 3, 1974 no proper way to r solve-them. Let me exMr. Chairman, you are aware, I have plain. It apepars t_ _t the staff's report was devoted a substantie _mount'of time to carebased on interview,, not under oath and at ful line-by-line of the draft of the which the Presidel _'s representatives were staff's report on of pre-presiclentlal not present and th_had no opportunity for papers and the which Messrs. Rose and cross-examination, lin my view, therefore, all Gemmill submitted on behalf of the Preslwe have accomplisl_ed with certainty so far dent, which I last Saturday. is to establish tha_ there are fundamental Let me say at outset that to me it is disputes as to th_ facts. The resolution clear that the Staff made an exhaustive of such factual c_ntroversies, particularly examination into facts surrounding the where the facts h_]ve legal significance as controversy over _riety of the income they do here, has, _ our legal system, long tax deductions clai with respect to the been a function o]the Judiciary. This is papers. This task to the staff was proper. The courts ]are equipped to receive an onerous and ex difficult assigntestimony under o_th and to subject that ment, in the of which the staff testimony to cross-_xaminati0n. Equally iraclearly has devoted enormous amount of portant, in resolving factual disputes the time and effort. I ave alWays had a high courts permit only Shat testimony which is regard for this I therefore trust that competent and material to be admitted in ne/thor you, my nor the members evidence. For exan_le, testimony which is hearsay and that which is unfounded opinion of the asstaff will in becs_tse history has taught ments a criticism theway staff.view my corn- is disregarded Having said however, ! do have a us that such test]rnony may be entirely few observations I think must be made wrong. [ if we are to carry our task to fairly and We are legislator_ and our procedures are impartially seek not equipped to gat_her evidence under such When we agreed a review of standards. In short,_ to the facts, a Judicial this question, I and I think others approach, and noti_ng less, is required. We did as well, that, careful investigation, are not the persons lib do so. we could arrive at agreement as to what I also now appear that, even if we had an the true facts and then proceed to agreed statement o: facts, which we do n_t apply to those sound legal principles, have, we could not dmply apply well-estab _' it is now apparent me that this is linlished principles of !aw to those facts as we possible. The facts in dispute and cornoriginally thought could do. This cause it now has 1_ 7e ._ome apparent thereis beare petent lawyers are apparent disagreement as to the proper i principles, Let us look at , factual .disputes first, As I reviewed the certain items of testimony cried out for crossexamination under For example; quostions have been about Mr, Erlichman's recollection of the _sident's statements of donative intent, further example, take the testimony of Mr the appraiser, He has modified his statements of the facts, was his recollection in fact more accurate than _is original one, or was it the _ther way We don't know and we can't know his testimony under oath, and subject rigors of cross-examination, there seems to be a question as to understanding under which the GSA and e National Archives accepted possession the President's papers on March 26 and 1969. Some of the evideuce indicates that ,ers were received on those dates "for purposes." The staff has apparently the impression that the pal ; received only for custodial purposes, we cannot simply pick one version The need for sworn testimony with full vpportunity for crossexamination is There is problem which . The staff's report calls into question the President intended to make a gift of of papers or whether he intended a gift which would give the maximum tax benefit for 1969. know that we have all of the facts on critical question of donative intent? I suggest that we may not have in the staff rel_ort which was delivered to me Saturday all of the information on this other questions of fact. For Instance is no mention of the honest differences opinion as to what the law requires. Let me nlustrat, the staff's report states that a deed was re uired to effect the 1969 gift of papers beca_ _ethere were restrictions on their use. The P_ldent's counsel disagreed. They say tl_ _t there was no need for a deed since it sh_ uld have been assumed that the restriction., attached to the 1968 gift were equally applic_ ble to the 1969 gift. As a matter of common sense, this is persuasive to me. Moreover, if recall the principles of the law of gifts co_ .ectiy, a deed is not an essential element o1 a gift of personal property. Additionally, t _e Presidential Libraries Ac_ suggests a stro_ g publlc policy in favor of gifts of papers, the President's counsel make much of this act. It seems to me that some of their point _ are well-taken. Yet, it seems to me that t _e staff may disagree. ! could go on, but t] ese two examples Ulusirate to me that th legal principles are not as clear-cut as _ · had supposed they would be. Since there are b .th fundamental factual disputes and disagr ,ements over legal principles, what course, f action should we take? In my view, there i_ only one proper course. We should let the matter be decided in a proper judicial forul L I_ fairness to the publlc, to the Preslden_ and to the truth, I see _o other alternative If the facts were undisputed and complet , and they are neither, perhaps we might _ake a Judgment. But, at present, we have lo basis for such a judgment. I therefore prop_ _e that we let the IRS make its aseeasment _nd, if the President disagrees with the _'' _ament, he, like any other taxpayer, may have his recourse to the courts. The Staff's _austlve report may be S 5195 forwarded to th 1 IRS. Jif a majority of the Committee so de_ ires, it m_y be made public together with aI explanation of why, contrary to our cfi! Ln_l expectation, we could not properly rea/ I a definitive conclusion. If we cannot a this time agree on a decision to follow th; course which ! have outlined in the abov , paragraph, we should take ample time to ;udy the Staff report and meet at a later ¢ _te to determine our course of action. · FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN _VIENDMENTS OF 1974 The ,'_enate continued with the ACT con- sideration of the bill (S. 3044) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing Of primary and general election campaigns for Federal elective ofiice_ and to amend certain other provisions of law relating to the financing campaigns. and conduct of such Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, ! move to recorLsider the vote taken on amendmerit No. 1102, for a t_,_chnical correction. The PRESIDING OFFICF_. The questioIt is on agreeing to the motion c_ the Senator from Nevaxla. The motion was agreed to. Mr. ,CANNON. Mr. President, that amendment appeared to remove the calendar limit on the $25,000 which an individua!l may contribute to all candidates and committees, as applied to Senate and House campaign ee_2mittees. The colloquy showed that that was not the intent. We have discussed the matter with the Parliamentarian and the legal counsel in order to get the correct wording; and I therefore move to amend that amendmerit as follows: On line 7, after the word '"_0" insert; trib{ltions madeb_'. the following: "coil- The PRESIDIN/3 OFFICER. The amenckaent will be stated. The .assistant legislative clerk read as follows'.: On page 1, line 7, after the word "to" insort "contrlbutiaus made by". Mr. CANNON. :Mr. President, I say to my colleagues that all this does is to make absolutely cIear that this does not ' remove the $25,000 overall contribution limit that we had written in the hill The PRESIDING OFFICEI_ The questiOn is on agreeing to the amendment. The mnendment was agreed to. AMElqDMENTNO. 10_5 my 1_r. B_K_. Mr. President, I call up amendnlent No. 10_5. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The The assistant legislative amendment will be stated. ceeded to read the amendment. clerk pr¢_ Mr. BA_ER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered; and, without objection, the amendment will be printed itl the ]/_ECORD. The amendment is as follows: On page 35, line 14, strike out "tenth" axed insert in lieu theren Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for p_.bliccampaigns financing forof Fede_al primary elective and general election office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating to the campaigns. financing and conduct of such M_ke Mansfield, Warren G. Magnuson, James B. Pearson, Robert Dole, Hugh scott, Claiborne Peli, Frank Church, Qx_entin N. Burdick, Marlow W. Cook, William Proxmtre, Clifford P. Case, Lgenry M. Jackson, Daniel K. Luouye, _Iubert II. Humphrey, Joseph R. BAden, Jr., Ted Stevens, Stuart Symington, Floyd _. Haskell, Birch Bayh, William D. _Iathaway, Edmund S. Muskle, Jen_ings Randolph, Dick Clark, Jacob K. _avits. C,_,T,T. OF THE I_OLL The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem];,ore. Under rule X,x_, the Chair directs the cl,_rk to call the roll to ascertain the prese_:_ee of a quorum. The second assistant legislative clerk called the roll, and the following Sennbors a:_swered to their names: [No. 114 Leg.] Abourezk Bible Case Atken BAden Chiles ._Jlen Brock Church Baker Brooke Clark Bartlet_ Buckley Cook Bayh Burdick Cotton P,eall Byrd, Cranston Bellmoa Harry F., Jr.C. Dole Curtis Bennett Byrd, Robert Bentse_ Cannon Domenici APril Dominick Eagleton Eastland Ervin Fannln Fong Goldwater Gravel Griffin Gurney Hansen Hart Hartke Haskell Hatfield Hathaway Helms Holllngs Hruska Humphrey Inouye Jackson Javits 4, 1974 Johnston Kennedy Long Magnuson Mansfield Mathias McClellan McClure McGee McGovern McIntyre Metcalf Metzenbaum Mondale Monteya Moss Muskie Nelson Nunn Packwood Pastore Pearson PeU cONGRESSIONAL Percy Proxmire Randolph Ribicoff Roth Schweiker Scott, Hugh Sparkman Sta_ford Stennis Stevens Stevenson Symington Taft Talmadge Thurmond Tower Tunney Weicker Williams Young Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that the Senator from Iowa (Mr. HUGHES), and the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. FULBRIGHT) are necessarily absent. I further announce that the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. HUDDI_ESTON), iS absent on official business. Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. WILLIAML. SCOTT) is absent on official business. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. HATHAWAY). A quorum is present. The question before the Senate is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on S. 3044, a bill to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing of primary and general election campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating to the financing and conduct of such campaigns, shall be brought to a close? The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule, and the clerk will call the roll. legislative clerk called theThe roll. assistant Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that the Senator from Arkansas (Mr, FULBRIGHT) and the Senator from Iowa (Mr. HUSHES) are necessarily absent, I further announce that the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. HUDDLESTON) iS absent on official business, Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. WILLIAM L. SCOTT) is absent on official business, The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 60, nays 36, as follows: [No. 115 Leg.] YEAS--60 Abourezk Haskell Muskie Bayh Hatfield Nelson Beau Hathaway Packwocd Bentsen Humphrey Pastore Blden Inouye Pearson Brooke Jackson Pell Burdick Javits Percy Byrd, Robert C. Kennedy Proxmire Cannon Long Randolph case Magnuson Ribicoff Church Mansfield Schweiker Clark Mathias Scott,Hugh Cook McGee Stafford Cranston McGovern Stevens Dole McIntyre Stevenson Domenici Metcalf Symington Eagleton Met_enbaum Tunney Gravel Mondale Weicker Hart Montoya Williams Hartke Moss Young NAYS---36 Aiken Allen Baker Bartlett Bellmon _ennet_ Bible Brock Buckley Byrd, Harry F., Jr. Chiles Cotton Curtis Domlnick Eastland Ervin Fannin RECORD Fong Goldwater Griffin Gurney Hansen Helms Hollings Hruska Johnston McClellan McClure Nunn Roth Sparkman NOT VOTING--4 P_tlbright Huddleston Hughes Scott, William L. SENATE Stennis Taft Talmadge Thurmond Tower S5277 On page 77, between lines 5 and 6, insert the following: "(e) No candidate, or person who accept_ contributions for the benefit or use of that candidate, may accept a contribution whictl, when added to all other contributions accepted by that candidate or person, is in excess of the amount which is reasonably necessary to defray the ependiturss of that candidw;e.". On ps,ge 77, line 6, :strike out "(e)" and The PRESIDING OFFICER_ On this vote the yeas are 60 and the nays are 36. Fewer than two-thirds of the Senators insert ir. lieu thereof " (f) ". Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I yield self suclh time as I may utilize. present and voting having voted in the affil_native, the motion is rejected, The pending question is on the amendmerit by the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. BAKER), NO. 1075, on which there is I ask: for the yea.,'; and nays on the amendment. The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, the ptu'pose of this amendment is to purify the a 1-hour limitation, Who yields time? Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum, and ask unanimous consent that the time not be charged against either side. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk will call the roll. The second assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered, Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, would the Chair state the pending question? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will state the amendment, The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to read amendment No. 1075. Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendments be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered, process of public disclosure of campaign contributions by requiring the completion of that process before rather than after the election has taken place. In other words, my amendment would require political candidates to disclose the size and source of all contributions a time certain before each election. In this way the public is afforded their full and legitim;_te right to examine the sources of a particular candidate's financial support, and then draw their own conclusion prior to voting. The mechanics of my amendment are quite simple. A deadline is established 10 days before each election. No contributions cern be received by candidates after that deadline, from any source, This means that unless a contribution was either personally delivered or postmarked prior to the deadline, it would have to be returned to the contributor by the candidate. Five days after the deadline, and 5 days before the election, each candidate is required to file a final report of all campaign contributions, including, of Amendments No. 1075 are as follows: On page 35, line 14, strike out "tenth" and insert in lieu thereof "fifth". on page 36, line 9, after "other than", inserf the following: "the fifth day preceding an election and". On page 36, line 15, after "fried on" insert the following: "the fifth day preceding an election or". On page 63, beginning with line 11, strike out through line 5 on page 64. On page 64, line 7, strike out "318." and insert in lieu thereof "317.". On page 64, line 14, strike out "319." and insert in lieu thereof "318.". On page 75, line 19, strike _ut "(a)" and insert in lieu thereof "(a)(1)". course, the sources and amounts. This better enables the public to review relerant disclosure data, so as to base their ultimate judgments on the complete Eecord. That is the point of public disclo- On page 75, between lines 23 and 24, insert thefollowing: "(2) No person may make a contribution to, or for the benefit of, a candidate for that after the election and after it is too late to make a difference. My amendment would not permit this. The only circumstances under which contributions could candidate's campaign for nomination for election, or election, during the period which begins on the tenth day preceding day of that election and which ends on the day of that election.", be received after ing up to and On page 76, between lines 2 and 3, insert the following: "(2) NO candidate may knowingly accept a contribution for his campaign for noraination for election, or election, during the period which begins on the tenth day preceding the day of that election and which ends on the day of that election.", I am aware that the establishment of a deadline 10 days before an election with the final report due 5 days preced-. lng the election will require a massive amount of accounting at a very critical time in most campaigns. However, I be- On page line 3, strike out "(2)" and insert in lieu76, thereof "(3) '. On page 76, line 6, strike out "paragraph (1) ." and insert in lieu thereof "paragraph (1) or (2).". my- sure, and we mislead ourselves and the American people if we give the impr_,_-. sion that all the financial cards are on the table before the election. The fact of the matter is that they are not under the present system and will not be under the reforms embodied in S. 3044. That is Why I tlave offered teds amendment. AS of now, any candidate can postpone disclosure of potentially damaging information on political contributions until the 10-day including would be to defray lng the campaign. debts period leadthe election incurred dura-. lieve, s_ I am sure most of my colleagues do, that public disck_sure is essential to the success of any system of private financing of political less of how limited vidual contributor campaigns, regarcithe role of the indimight be. This was 379 S 5278 CONGRESSIONAL April 4, 1974 RECORD --- SENATE evidenced by the unprecedented public disclosure requirements enacted in the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971. Moreover, it now appears obvious that we might have avoided a great deal of the campaign finance abuses associated with the 1972 campaign for President, and other races, had these provisions been in effect long before the spring of that year. For that reason, I have proposed an amendment which would not only seek to avoid the abuses of earlier campaigns, but also enhance the public's right to know. That right is significant as it relates to the matter of public disclosure, because normally, a great deal can be learned from examining the sources of individual contributions. The names and occupations of the individual contributors tells the public where a particular candidate's strongest support lies; and it can often imply how that candidate would vote on a particular issue without knowing the candidate's personal view. For example, if it were disclosed that a candidate had receivdd contributions, regardless of the amount, from a dozen With respect to the reporting provisions, we have checked carefully with the peope who ]lave had ,,ome experience in the field of reporting and making the information available on some useful basis, and they advise u_ that this type of reporting is :not long e.aough for a re-. port to be mailed in ard for them t_ put out that informatior and make the information public as it ,,hould be made. Therefore, I am opposed to the amends, ment. I think tllat page 3 sub,;ection 6, i_ completely redundant. I; provides tha_i; a person cannot accept a contribution in an amount in excess of the amoun:!; reasonably necessary to defray the ex-. penditure. We will never know what the expenditures are until they have beerJ incurred. Sometimes the expenditures,; occur late, at the last mir.ute. Sometime_,_ bills come in even afte_ the campaign is over. We have in the bill a provision for payment to the Treasury over the excess amount that may have been col-, leeted. That provision i:; in the bill. ]I think it is adequate. This amendment is vague and uncer_. tainar, d would impose all undue burden or two dozen individuals who all happened to work for various veterans organizations, then it might be assumed that those individuals considered that ' candidate generally Sympathetic to veterans' concerns; and the same example could be applied to countless other cccupations. The point is that public disclosure plays a very important role in assisting the voters to make up their minds, whether it is for a primary or general election, And yet, that role is substantially hindered by the present reporting procedures. The question Ds not so much whether those procedures are used to purposefully deceive the public, but rather whether they actually retard the public's ability to base their judgment on all the fsmts. I believe clearly the present procedures and the reforms proposed in S. 3044 do retard that ability and that they are not consistent with the true intent of public disclosure. Thus, I urge that we amend that procedure by prohibiting the receipt of additional contributions after 10 days preceding the election, and require a full and final reporting of those contributions 5 days before the election takes place. It is the only way I know of to guarantee the public's right to know, and it is for this on a candidate and those working in his behalf to determine what is reasonably necessary to defray the _xpenditures oli the candidate, so that he will not have excess money and be in violation of that: r, articular provision, Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I am virtually prepared to yielc back the re-_ mainder of my time ani proceed to a vote. I have one brief rem ark in response t,_ the observations of the distinguished chairman, the manager of the bill. Briefly stated, the rstionale of the amendment is that if theI e is to be public', disclosure, it Ictus to be an integral part of the system :if it is to attract impor-. tanee in the eyes of the public, and if ii; is to have something to do with wheth-, er one votes for or against a candidate. I_ seems essential to make that final rep_)rt before the election, kecar_e between t]he time 10 days before the election and January 31, a candidate could collect a million dollacs, and tlc e public would n.ever know it. The sole purpose of the amendment is that if we are going to have full disclosure, let u,: make it before tlhe election, net after the election. Mr. President, I yield back the re-. mainder of my 'time. Mr. CANNON'. I yielc back the remainder of my _;ime. reason that I urge the support of my colleagues, I reserve the remainder of my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time? Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I am opposed to this amendment. In the first place, with respect to the contributions, it is completely unrealistic, because the rough part of the campaign, insofar as the need to have funds available is concerned, occurs in about the last 10 to 15 days. The prohibition in the amendmerit would make it so that no eontribution could be made within 10 days of an election, and the candidate could not accept a contribution within that period of time. So really, if we are going to do this, we may just as well move the election up 10 days. That, for all practical purposes, i.,s what it means, The PRESIDING OFFICEt%. All time Messages in _ has been yielded back. _.?he question i_,; dent of the Ur_ on agreeing to the amendment of the municated to th_ Senator from Tennessee. The yeas and! one of his seereta: nays have been ordered, and the clerk willcalltheroll. 'iting from the Presl;ed States were comSenate by Mr. Marks, les. The second assistant legislative clerk: called the roll. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce: that the Sena'_or from Arkansas (Mr FULBRIGHT), the Senator _rom IoWa (Mr. I_[UGHES), the Senator irom Louisiana, (Mr. LoNo), and the Sen_,tor from Wyoming (Mr. MCGEE) are aecessarily absent. I further announce that the Senator from Kentucky (]Mr. HUD)LES_:()N) is absent on official business. Mr. GRIFFIN. I annc.unce that the Senator from Kentuck5 (l_[r. COOK), the Senator from Arizona (Mr. GOLD- REPORTS OF. COMMISSION 'THE PRESIDE The PRESIDi HATHAWAY) laid message from , United States, w panyint; reports, Committee on Ir [airs. The messa SIX RIVER BASIN _--MESSAGE FROM qT big OFFICER (Mr. before tlhe Senate a ae President of the rich, with the accomwas referred to the erior and Insular Afis as follows: To the 5'ongress Z am happy tc annual reports of mission% as reqr the United States: ransmit herewith the he six river basin cornced under section 204 380 the Senator from North Cato}.ina (Mr. HELMS), and the Senator from Ohio (NIr. TAFT) are necessarily absent. I als(:, announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. WXLLIAM L. SCOTT) is absent an official business. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. H}_,LMS) would vote"yea." 'The result was announced--yeas 33, nays 57, as follows: 'WATER), iiken &Hen Baker Bartlett Be[lmon Bennett _Blden :Brock Byrd, Harry Z_.,Jr. Cotton curtis [No. 116 Leg.] YEAS--33 Dole Domenici Domlniek Ervin Fong Griffin Gurney Holllngs Hruska Mansfield McClure McGover_r Metzenbaum Nelson Packwood Proxmlre Ribicoff Roth Schwelker Stevens Thurmond Weicker NAYS---§7 Abourezlr Hansen Moss Bayh Hart Muskle Beall Hartke Nunn Bentsen Haskell Pastore Bible Iiatfield Pearson Brooke Hathaway Pell :Buckley Humphrey Percy Burdick Inouye Randolph Byrd, Robert C. Javlts Jackson Scott, Hugh :Cannon Sparkman ,case Johnston Stafford chiles Kennedy Stennis ,Church Magnuson Stevenson Clark Mathtas Symington, .c_anston McClellan Talmadge :E_;leton Mclntyre Tower ZEastland Metcalf Tunney Fa:anin Mondale Williams ._ravel Montoya Young NOT VOTING--10 Cook Huddleston Scott, Fulbrlght Hughes William L. Goldwater Long Taft :s_elms McGee So Mr. BAKEWS amendment (No. 1075) was rejected. Mr. Y'_OBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. 'The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. CtaUK). The clerk will call the roll. 'l_xe second assistant legislative clerk proceec[ed to call the roll. Mr. AIJ,EN'. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for _he quc,rum call be rescinded. 'The PRESIDING O_'_'£CER. Without objection, it is so ordered. MESSAGES _ 17_ d$i THE PRESIDENT Apr,'l 4, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL (2) of the Water resources Planning Act of 1965. The act states bhat commissions may be established, ¢ reprised of State and Federal member_ at the request of the Governors of th_ States within the proposed commissiol area. Each commission is responsible fo: planning the best use of water and Eels ed land resources in its area and for recc lmending priorities for implementation f such planning. The commissions, the ugh efforts to increase public participat ,n in the decisionmaklng process, can _ nd do provide a forum for all the people within the commission area to voice thc r ideas, concerns, and suggestions, The commissi( as submitting reports are New Englam, Great Lakes, Pacific Northwest, Ohio River, Missouri River, and the Upper M ssissippl. The territory these six commis ions cover includes all or part of 32 Stat 3. The enclosed _ mual reports indicate the activities an accomplishments of the commissions uring fiscal year 1973. A brief descriptio of current and potential problems, stu les, and approaches to solutimzs are incl ded in the reports, RICHARD NIXON. THE WHITE HO SE, April 4, 1974. RECORD--SENATE -Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, Willthe Senator from Alabama yield for a unanimous-consent request? Mr.'ALLEN. I yield, Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that time on the pending amendment be limited to 35 minutes, to be controlled and divided as follows: 25 minutes under the eontrol of the distinguished author of the amendment (Mr. ALLEn), and 10 minutes under the control of the distinguished manager of the bill (Mr. CanNOn). The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withou_ objection, it is so ordered, Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished majority whip. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I thank the Senator from Alabama. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, the argument has been made time and again here on the floor that in order to remove the _nfiuence in Government of large contributors to Federal election campaigns, it is necessary to resort to public financing. It occurs to the junior Senator from Alabama that this is certainly a non sequitur, that it is not necessary to resort to public financing in order to remove the influence of large contributors or to prevent the making of large contributions. All that is necessary is to reduce the amount of the contribution, EXECUTIVE M] _SAGES REFERRED The bill provides the limit that is a As in executiw session, step in the right direction, because unThe PRESID' qG OFFICER (Mr. der the present law there is no effective HATHAWAY) laid efore the Senate moslimitation on a contribution. There is a sages from the 'esident of the United limit as to how much can be contributed States submittini sundry nominations, to one committee. I believe that is $5,000. which were refer ed to the appropriate There is a limit to how much can be committees, contributed without incurring the gift (The nominati, ns received today are tax liability. I believe that is $3,000. But printed at the tmof Senate proceedwe have seen that many candidates set ings.) 4 r up multiple committees--in some cases, a hundred or two hundred. The Senator from Alabama does not have but one FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT committee during a campaign. Some AMENDMENTS OF 1974 candidates apparently find it necessary The Senate continued with the conto have 100 or 200 or 300 committees so sideration of the bill (S. 3044) to amend that these massive contributions can be the Federal Election Camp/iign Act of split up among all those committees. So 1971 to provide for public financing of 'there is no effective limitation. But the primary and general election campaigns $3,000 permitted by the bill mid the for Federal elective office, and to amend $6,000 for a man and his wife are trecertain other provisions of law relating mendous contributions, in the view of to the financing and conduct of such the Senator from Alabama, and should campaigns, be cut drastically, Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I call up Earlier this week, the Senator from an amendment at the desk and ask that Alabama offered an amendment to cut the clerk please state the amendment, the maximum permissible amount of a The PRESIDING OFFICER. The contribution in Presidential campaigns to amendment will be stated. $250--that is, both the nomination race The legislative clerk read as follows: and the general election_and $200 for On page _5, line 23, strike out "exceeds House and Senate races. How did we ar$3,000." and insert in lieu thereof rive at those figures? Very simply, Mr. "exceeds--". President, because the bill before the on page 75, between lines 23 and 24, insert Senate, S. 3044, provides that in prithe following: maries, contributions to Presidential "(1) in the case of a candidate for the office of President or Vice President, $2,000.; races up to $2,500 shall be matched out and of the Public Treasury and contributions "(2) in the case of any other candidate, Up to $100 in House and Senate races $1,000.". shall be matched out of the Public TreasOn page 76, line 2, strike out "exceeds ury by subsidizing, out of the pockets of $3,000." and insert in lieu thereof the American taxpayers, the campaigns "exceeds--". of politicians running for various FedOn page 76, between lines 2 and 3, insert eral offices. the following: "(Al in the case of a candidate for the Apparently, the theory of the bill is office of President or Vice President, $2000; that there must be something evfi, someand thing sinister about contributions in the "(B) in the case of any other candidate, area between $250 in the one case and $1000.". $100 in the other case, and the $3,000 S 5279 permissible contribution, because they do not match those amounts. Where does that leave a challenger and an incumbent? Mr. President, it leaves the incumbent at a decided advantage--and I suppose this certainly could be called an incumbent's bill--because it provides matching ftmds for incumbents' as well as challengers who run for the constituencies that they have or that they might hope to have. So only these amounts are matched. It gives the in.cumbent the decided advantage that since t:_e amounts in. the area from $100 to $250 up to $3,000 _re not matched, the inctunt_nt, on account of being better known and having accommodated, durlng the term of his office, many of his constituents, is in better position to get contributions in that area--from $250 up to $3,000--leaving the challenger at a decided disadvantage. Even as to the matching amounts, it is stacked in favor of the incumbent, I_mause--I have used this example before-:in the State of California, theoretically, they match up to $700,000 of contributions, of up to $100 in House and Senate races. Let us assume thai; the challenger in a State, because of being less well known, is able to raise $100,000--or $125,000, since that is the threshold amount, but let us say $100,000 because it makes the arithmetic a little easier--and t:he incumbent raises $700,000. So there is a $600,0¢,0 spread. Then public financing comes into t:he picture and matches the incumbent's $700,0£_0 and then matches the challenger's $100,000. This is in the primary. The incumbent then would have $1.4 million, and the challenger would have only $200,0(_0, which would give the incumbent a $1.2 million advantage over the challenger. The Senate, in it_: wisdom, saw fit to strike down the amendment offered by the Senator from Alabama to cut the contribution down, to leave it in the private sector; but the amendment, of course, would not have accomplished that, and still kept the public financing. But it would have reduced the amount of permissible contribution. The Senate voted down the $250 and the $100 limits. The pending amendment would raise the permissible contribution from those figures lo $2,000 in Presidential races and $I,000 in House-Senate races, which would be a reduction from the flat $3,000 provided by the bill. That still would leave the right to make massive contributions, in the view of the Senator from Alabama--a $2,000 limit in a Presidenrial r_e and a $1,000 limit in the House and Senate races. It is said that we should get rid of the big contributors. I submit that this amendment would do that to a greater extent than would the pending bill, which allows contributions of up to $3,000 a person or $6,000 for a couple. The figures in this amendment still would be capable of being doubled by a man and his wife. So:, effectively, it would be $2,000, but it could be doubled by a man and his wife. Therefore, $4,000 really could be contributed in a Presidential race. Then, doubling the $1,000 permitted by the bill in House and Serrate races woul4 381 S,5280 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --. SENATE lrmrease to $2,000 the amount that a couple could contribute. SO these amounts ale large enough ff we want to get rid of l_Lxeinfluence of so-called large contributor's. I am not familiar with large contributors myself. I have not had the benefit--or detriment--of that situatiom I would feel that these limits are ample, I might say that this bill does not cut rk>wn on ao_mpalgn expenses. It greatly escalates the cost. It gives each candichate for the Presidential nomination of the two parties up to $7.5 million. They talk about that being campaign reforrm Mr. President, how much time does the Senator from Alabama have remainlng? The Plq'_ESIDING OFFICER. The Senator h_s 13 minutes remaining, l_.r. AI_,LI_. I thank the Chair. Mr. Pre_tdent, these contributions offered by the amendment would still be ample. If we are going to try to clean up the political campaign, the Way to do it is not to just hand a great big pfie of money to these various candidates to office but to restrict the amount that individual contributors contribute, A little kLter on I have an amendment I wish to l_ring up that would reduce by one-third the permissible overall expenditures_ For instance, in the State of Califof nia they would give a candidate for the Senat_ in a general election, a candidate from a major party, a check for--I guess he could ask for cash, I do not know, but he could get the check cashed ff he were given a check--he is handed $2.1 million. I have an(yther amendment that I shall call up ]ate:r to cut that down to $1.4 million. That would seem quite adequate to the Senator from Alabama to present to the various candidates; $1.4 million in California, and lesser amounts on down as the population of States would decrease from. that level, So, Mr. President, the answer is not just giving tremendous 8urns to candidates out of the Public Treasury. The answer is lin0J[ting the overall amount that can be spe_]_t by a candidate and then reducing drastically the amount of indlvidual contributions, The amendment that we have before us now approaches one of those aspects, that is, reducing the amount of permissible contributions. If Senators want reform, this is reform. I get a little displeased and frustrated sometimes when I read in newspapers that; an effort is being made here to kill a campaign :reform bill. Well, if this bill providing for paying for political campaigns out of the public treasury is reform, a different idea of what reform is must prevail from the idea that I have about reform, This bill reforms the law, changes the law, changes it over from a voluntary participation by all the people to recommended payment out of the Public tressm_. So this is no reform hill we have before us. It is another Federal subsidy bill. It is a bill that would remove Gevernment and candidates away from the people they' represent. HoW do we figure that? Well, ff they give a candidate up to $2 million to run a general election campaign, do Senators think he is going to 382 bothe,' to ask for modest amounts cf .,;upport :from ibis consti_;uents, or would his campaign committea bother to try to get voluntary participation from h:s constituents? _hy, no. The Senator from C_ilfo:rma earlier' today was stating that he was a little biter worried about; this $_:.1 million. He thought maybe that wa_ too much, but then he got to worrying about the cha]-, lenger out there and thought he should be well funded and, therefore, he was not going to raise any pein'; about the $2.]. million a ser_atorial c_ndidate might receive. I might say with respect to the Senator from California (Mr. (_RAN;_TON),who was making the remarks, that the subsidy would not apply to his upcoming race, because it would go into effect January :_, 3.976. But it would apply to all these candidates in Congress who are runnin;g for the Presidency. As I read the various ___allup polls and ]_Iarris polls, there are :_bout 10 candi .... dates for the pr_idency '._ere in the HalLs of Congress, candidates eligible for up to $7.5 million in Fede:_al subsidies. I;s 12mt campaign, reform ? That is a cam._. paign handout, in the view of the Sena .... tor from Alabama. Now, Mr. President, Earlier today we had a vote in the Senat_ on the matter of whether the debate on this issu,_ should be bro,_ght to a close. I believ.e that by a vote of G0 to 36, a two-thirds vote being required and that not bein;i_: a two-.thirds vote, the S,mate refused to _';top the debate. That is fne. :[lae Senator from Alabama is glad to see that. But he recognizes and realizes from the amalysis of that vote that this bill, thi,s pernicious bill has not been defeated because there will be subsequent votes on the clotures issue. I understand anoti_er vote is eom ing, Possibly next Tuesday, and the bat._ tle is far from being we a. T_ae task wi]i be to encourage the 3ti Senators who voted against stopping debate on this bill so it could be rammed through the Sen .... ate, to continue being agairust the bill(, and pretty soon it is going to get down to the point where, if one _s against public financing, he will vote a_ainst the invok.._ lng of cloture. If he is fcr public financ lng, he will _ote for i;. There .'ks not going to be any middle position on i_::. ]Either one is for it or ag:_inst it. So the lenbq;hy dism_ssion and th,':_ lengthy amendment pro( ess that the bi:il is being subjected to might lpossibly re. suit in agreeing on atrt[e campaign re .... form bill, a bfil leaving out '_he Federal subsidy provisions, provisions requtrinir that the taxpayers pay for the campal_q:_ of the politicians throu;:hout the court.. try, when the peolsle res lize that this is not a reform bit1, but is a _cheme whereby a large number of Members of Congres_, a minimum of 10, would obtain massiw_ linancing for a race for the Presidential nomination. Knock that out of the bill and we would ';ee the wind go out of th_ sails of this bill. That i:; the importani; leatm-e of the bill, followed by the provi. siena giving Members of the Senate and Ivlembers of the House ur to a 50-percen!: subsidy in primary camp_dgrm and a 100. percent subsid.v in general elections, Mr. President, I do not see that. Id(, April 4, 19 74 not see that it is in the public interest, I will have to oppose that, but I do feel that this amendment would be in the public interest, because it reduces to $2,000 the amount of permissible contributions :[or President and to $1,000 the amount of permissible contributions for House and Senate primary and general elections. It would not kmock out the matching feature. Senators and Representat:_ves would still be able to particiPate, ta put the hand in the Federal till. They would still have that right, l_embers of Congress who want to run for Presid,ent still have the right to get up to $7.[i million, but their ability to get matching funds would be reduced ff we cut down the amount of permissible contributions. I hope the amendment will be agreed to. It would improve the bill It would not improve it to the point where the Senator from Alabama would go for it, but it would make it a better bill, and he is hopeful it will be agreed to by the Senate. Mr. '?resident, how much time does the _%_natc,r from Alabama have? The PRESIDING OFFICEI%. Less than 1 minute. Mr. _LEN. Mr. President, I yield back my time. Mr. _TANNON. Mr. President, I find the Senat(:r from Alabama's argument somewhat _musing in some particulars, in tlmt he suggests we ought not to have public financing and then at the same t_me s_ys that we ought to reduce the amour_t of financing :from Private sources. If we are not to have public financing, when there has to be some form of rafu_ing money to carry out a campaign. The committee considered that, and th [s is one of the reasons why we put in the alternative provision so a person could E_:lectto go to public financing, if he ecmld meet the matching money requiremerit !in the primary and desired to do so, but, on the other hand, candidates were not forced to go to public financing if the_ did not desire to d0 so. The Senator's amendm_mt, ff it were adoptecl, would force practically everyone to go to public financing, which is the vex7 thing he oppose& The very tkdng he is speaking against is public financ:ing. If his amendment were adopte_ arid if his amendment of the other day, which was more restrictive, had been adopted, there would have been no alternative, because, it would have been impossible to raise funds for campaigns for these types of election and raise eaough money to carry on a campaign. He also indicated that the amendment was n¢,t really going to r_duee the expenses of campaigns. I have made just a quick review of some of the States involved in the last campaign to see if it would, and I will read some of them. Here are 12 States, and I may say, they were States which had the most expensive campa:igns last year: Texas, Michigan, IlJinoi,s, Alabama, Kentuck:y, Oklahoma, North Carolina, Tennessee, Louisiana, Georgia, Idaho, and South]Dakota. Those States would not be able to spend as much under the limits of this bill as was i._ent _'. the last campaign, and some of April 4, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL those States actually had no primary. There are others besides the ones I read; these just happen to be some on which I had statistics readily available, partly because the chart indicates that some of those States did not have primaries and partly because the chart indicates they were some of the most expensive States when it came to spending in the last gerteral election, · I may say that in some of those very States, the reduction would be quite substantial in the amount that could be spent for a particular race. The Senator has indicated that he is going to move later on to reduce the formula that we set as the limiting facfor. I have already stated I find no particular magic in the formula. It was the best we could devise in committee. We tried to do it, based on some experience we had on what the previous races had cost, recognizing the fact that some of them had cost too much and there ought to be some limit imposed. The Senator has indicated he is going to make a move later to reduce authorized spending to 5 cents per voting-age population, and to 10 cents per voting-age population in the general election. Frankly, I think that is too low. I think it would overly restrict a campaign and would really make it an incumbent's bill if we cut it down to the area where a nonincumbent, a challenger, would not have an opportunity to go out and make himself known to the proposed constituency in order to compete against the incumbent, If the Senator from Alabama were to increase that figure somewhat, I would be inclined to support it. If he were inclined to reduce the primary figure perhaps from 10 to 8 cents and the general figure from 15 to 12 cents, I myself would find no difficulty in going along with some sort of reduction along that line. I think that the people who really should be heard in that instance are those who come from some of the larger States that have problems peculiar _o their own States and may feel that that limit may be too small, So I think that issue should be thoroughly debated before the vote comes up and should be debated by those who have more of a personal interest in it than I have. As I said, we decided on this particular figure based on an overview of what campaigns had been costing and recognizing that the 10 States whose names I read a moment ago had campaigns that were entirely too costly, and that some of the States had no primaries but still had campaigns that were too costly. That was the basic information we considered in deriving the formula of 10 cents per voting age for the primary election and 15 cents per voting age for the general election. RECORD ---SENATE S 5281 Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. President, will the chairman yield? Mr. CANNON. I yield. Mr. BENTSEN. Will the chairman also say that was not for this particular Senator? [Laughter.] Mr. CANNON. Yes. I merely wanted to point out that the expenditure was considerably above the amount of the limit that would be imposed under this formula. Mr. BENTSEN. Let me also say, so far as the limits are concerned, that I think that the committee has done a good job. I wanted to be sure that we did not have an incumbent's bill. I know that when I was considering running for the Senate, running against an incumbent, we took a public opinion poll to see what my name identification was. It was a little under 1 percent. I was practically unknown. Most people confused me with Ezra Taft Benson, who was an unpopular Secretary of Agriculture. So, in effect, I had a negative recognition. I stayed well within the amount of money that is indicated by the cornmittee. I ran against an incumbent; and to win in the general election means that one has to have enough money to spend. But this has not become an incumbent's bill. I commend the Senator from Nevada. Mr. CANNON. I pointed out to the Senator from Alabama that that was the effect of an amendment he had offered, to reduce the amount to 5 cents in the general election. If the amount were to be reduced in that magnitude, it would really become an incumbent's bill. I said I would support something identical. Mr, BENTSEN. I stayed within those limitations; but if they were dropped back to the limits here proposed, I think it would be very difficult to secure recognition by the public and interest them in what the issues are. Mr. CANNON. We have gotten somewhat off the track of the amendment; but the Senator from Alabama had discussed these very issues. If his amendment were to be adopted, it would drive people away from the opportunity to use private financing', if they did not want to go the public financing route. That is the reason we arrived at a somewhat arbitrary figure and used $3,000 in the bill. It is true that a husband and wife could give $6,000--$3,000 for each of them. Mr. ALLEN. I appreciate the Senator's saying that he would personally favor a reduction from in theAlabama figures; and ,Senator will possibly modify the his unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be reminded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment of the Senator from Alabama (Mr. ALLEN). The yeas and nays have been. ordered, and the clerk: will call the roll Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that the Senator fx_)m Arkansas (Mr. FULBRIGHT), the Senator from Iowa (Mr. HUGHES), the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. LONG), and the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. MCGEE) are necessarily ab-. sent. I further announce that the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. HUnntESTON) is ab-. sent on official business. Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the Senator from Ken.tucky (Mr. COOK), the Senator from Arizona (Mr. GOLDWATEa)_ and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. TAFT) are necessarily absent_ I also announce thai; the Senator from. amendment to conform to that. The PRESIDING OFFICER. on the amendment has expired. Huddleston So MI'. ALLEN'S amendment All time Virginia (Mr. W XLLIAML. SCOTT) is absent on official business. The result was amlounced--yeas 38, nays 53, as follows: IN(,. 117 Leg.] YEAS---38 Abourezk Cotton Nunn Alken Dole Packwood Allen Dmnenici Pearson Baker Eagleton Pen Bartlett Ervin Proxmtre Beau Griffin. Randolph Biden Gurney Roth Burdick Hart Stafford Byrd Helms Stennis Harry F., Jr. Hollings Stevenson Byrd, Robert C. McGovern McClellan Symington Chiles Thurmond Clark Metzenbaum Weicker NAYS---53 Bayh Hansen Mondale Bellmon Hartke Montoya Bennett Haskei1 Moss Bentsen Hatfield Muskie Bible Hathaway Nelson Brock Hrnska Pastore Brooke Humphrey Percy Buckley Inouye Ribicoff cannon Jackson Schweiker Case Javits Scott, Hugh Church Johnston Sparkman. cranston Kennedy Stevens DominlckCurtls MansfieldMagnus°n TowerTalmadge Eastland Mathias Tunney Fannin McClure Williams Fong McIntyre Young Gravel Metcalf NOT VOTING--9 cook Hughes Scott. Fulbright Long William L. Goldwater McGee Taft was re- jected. I see my good friend from Texas (Mr. BENTSEN) in the Chamber. I read the definitions a few minutes ago undercamthe formula. In the general election Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I thought we had until 12:45. PRESIDING Until 12:The 44. Debate started atOFFICER. 12:14. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were not ordered, A me_',sage from resentatives by Mr. reading clerks, House had agreeda: the House of Rep-. Hackney, one of its mounced thatof the ;o the report the paign in the State of Texas, the formula, at 15 cents per voting age population, would permit an expenditure of $1,167,750. According to our table, the expenditures in the general election in Texas, in the last election for the winning party, amounted to $2,301,870. Mr. CANNON. I suggest the absence of a quorum, The PRESIDING O_4FICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I ask committ,_ of conl agreeing votes of ti amendment of the: merits of the Sens 12253) to amend th Provisions Act to pi propriated for app _rcnce on the dis-. e two Houses on the louse to the amend-. ;e to the bill (H.R. _ General Education )vide that funds ap-. [cable programs for MESSAGE FI_ ,, THE HOUSE 38:3 8 5282 fiscal yes_ 1_4 st_ll during the succeeding that such funds_or_iscal remain available _t_ing ,and 1975. _][ CONGRESSIONAL remain available fiscal _ear and year 1973 shall fiscal years 1974 ENROLLED The message Speaker had enrolled bill (H.R. District of ( regarding' ceived by a companies, banks, institutions, INCI_EASES The that tht) to the. amend the Act of 1947 rods re-othe_ ',avings OFFICER Under order, hour of 2 p.m. arrived, the Chair lays before the the amendment of the House of Re to the bill (S. 1866) increases in cer-. tain annuities under chapter 83 of title 5, United SI Code, and fo:c other purposes whic: was to strike out all after the clause, and insert: That section 8345 5. United States Code, is a_ended b ;at the end there.,_ _f the followingnew ,,(f) (1) any ottler provi-sion of this subchapter, _r _han this subsection, the monthly ra_ of aimuity payable under subsection (a) of etlon shall not be less than the smalle., primary insurance amount increase added to tl_at amount to bepaid from time to time title II of the Social _ecurity Act. "(2) Notwithstanding other provision of this subchapter, oth than this subsec.,. tion, the monthly rate annuity payable under subsection (a) of Ms section to a surriving child shall not than tl_e smallest primary il _g any cost-of-living increase amount, authorized to be paid time to time un-. der title II c_ the rity Act, or three times such amount divided by the surviving childern entitled to an annuity whichever is the lesser. "(3) The provisions of subsection shah not apply to an anuita: to a survivor who is or becomes to receive from the United States an ant aity or retired pay under any other civilian or military retirement system, benefits m Qer title II of the. Social Security veterans' compensation, or any other payment of a similar nature, monthly rate. thereof, is equal to than the smallest primary insurance ant, including any cost-of-living increase ,_dto that amount, authorized to be paid time to time under title II of the Security Act". "SEC. 2. (a) An annuit: )ayable from the civil Service Retirement s _d Disability Fund to a former employee or which is based on a separation prior to October 20, 1969, is by $240. (b) In lieu of any incre_ based on an in-. crease under subsection [) of this section, an annuity payable the Civil Service l_etirement and Disabilit5 Fund to the sur'-, viving spouse of an emp oyee, Member, or annuitant, which is base on a separation occurring prior to Oetobe 20, 1969, shall be increased by $132. (e) The ]monthly rate of ,n annuity result-, ing from an increase uncle: this section shall de considered as the mo: thly rate of anauity payable under sectt( t 8345(a) of title _, Unitect States Code, for mrposes of corn-, STEVENS). 384 RI;CORD --- SI!!!,I!';IATE April 19 74 putmg the minimum nauity under sect:tot., 8345(f) of title 5, as [ded by the first sec._ tion of this Act. 3. This Act sh: .t. oecome o:L thes_.c.date of enactme_ Annuity effective increa.se.'; under this Act shan ap 1Uto annuities whit1:.. commence before, on, ( _ffter the date of eh-, actment of this Act, l: t no increase in !m-, nutty shall be paid fc _ny period prior t;o the first day of the firs month which begins; on or axter the ninetie h day after the d_t,:, of enactment of this imf, or the date o:t:. which the annuity c( _.mences, whicheve:c is later, The Chair will s ate that one-h',-ff[ hour of debate is all wed. The Sena,::or from North :Dakota Mr. BURDOCK) :_S recognized, Mr. BURDICK. MI _esident, it is my strong hope that th Senate will ag:cee to S. 1866 as amende __y the House. Tn,:, House amendments _,._minimal, so ti:mt measure before is very similar to bill to which thc enate has alre_.d:!_ current civil are l:eceiving per month--for a ce and by $132 ,m.nually--$11 per :_--for a retireeh__ surviving spouse, tubers will recall that October 20, 1961 was the date o_:} which the law liberali retireme]:l_t.computation formula, to that date, 8n annuity _as >on the basis of the hi after tt:La_! date, annuities were: d on the Mi. President, enacted virtually i mow_ that the S_ amertdment of the Mr. PONG. Mr. oppo:;e passage of would like to cite for n:_y opposition: First. bill Senate has already same measure. I concur in the high-three average salaw averages used base, retirees since joy substantially thrust of thi.; toward redreasing this tion :method. Third, the bill rnously Civil Service in approving it. It mittee for one only; retirees and their dire :linancial need of each retiree or the less _annuity 4, beneficiaries present mini- mun:[ benefit of $84.50. Included social among 145,000 people are 65,0()0 retirees, 75, )00 surviving spouses, and 5/ Many of these people live on the line of poverty; they need and deserve help. NOW, as to Members are aware that under law, in reases in the unfunded liability of the retirement and disability are amortized by payment of 31 annual installments. The annual this bill over 30 year_s',would to $119 million. I mentioned that the House amendments weri minimal in their scope. Under the _ bill, the $84.50 minimum would r apply to a retiree receiving social s benefits; the Home version bro. _ this exclusion to a rei;iree receivinl any other pension, including social se jrity.. The effective ds of the measure as are three m., ,n purposes of uht_ amehded by the is upon enactfirst of tht; _ would establish ment. In the version, the effective a civil ser_ ice retirement an.. date was 90 days enactment. nutty to the r inimum social :.;e.. For the child, the House curity Under present law, thi,_; :is measure allows $I per month, but $84.50 [';h increases pro.. limits the total payable to the vided for Iovisions of Put:db:: children of a retiree to $243.50 Law 93-182 per month. The bill allowed Second, t_m :,uld increase ':;.de three-quarters of $84.50 or approxiannuities of ,3 retired prior to mately $65 for the child alqd $84.50 October 20, 240 annually--$mc a month each for _ [ditional children. viving child of a would receive a nutty of $84.50--th mini:mum--and provi, than three times $84.5! to the surviving child: tant. When I introduce, rained the $20 per higt:,.er , en.. The is to ties that the in rising to 1866 as amended, following reasons originally unani- Post Office and and I concurred ;ame from the eomand one purpose about 70,000Federal who are in _raising the annuity to the mini- ,_eased 'dy minimum an... social security es t]aat no mc, re, would be payable en of any ann',H,., .mum. amount to beneficiaries social was felt that il l_;deral retiree or .nls¥11rvivor was receiving any social ,sect_ benefits l*ederal annuity at the minimum payment der social s which is now S. 1.866, it cc:tx,.. $84.50 month. onth across-the,.. 'before us, how- board benefit which rave described. D::[ committee, the bill w_; amended to re,move that provision b ,cause of its cost. In floor action, howe, _r, _C;enator G,,m... NEY'S amendment res_ )red it, by a w::.te of 70 to 20. This vote represents stro:n_!: Senate approval; we k lOW the provision was approved in the _her body; an(i[ I am satisfied that it aould remain, as ,ever, is in the Sena sentatives, s_ crease to pre-_ 'those receiving eurity minimum give an $11 a mt surviving spouses. These additional: being in accord with gressional consensus. MI'. President, the ute speak for themselv Federal annuitants a: vivin_ 500,000--have not Congress. They ha_ matte cost-of-living_ annuities. Since lq[ substantial ccn,_ _rits of this roes. s-, ',s-- to help thctse Ld their famil:,ies who need help most, t rose struggling to subsist on small annu: ;ies 'based on ilhe lower salaries of past ecades and corn.puted under a less libe _1 average-salsry formula. Approximate 15 percent of by amendment the House of Reprea $20 monthly inr 1969 retirees, even than the social seIt would also increase to their and their surmore than ,_glected by the autoon their annuities [have increased by 35_, _ffice of President may mak_ expenditures in any State in _ntch :he is _ _mrndidate in a primary election, in excess c,:_ _wo times the o:mount whi,',h a ,_ndidate f(::e nomination for election to the office of Sen,star from that State (or for nomination f(:_r _leotion to the .gffice of Delegate in the ca/_e of the District of Colu_nbia, the Virgi:i: :island,% or Gua_n, or to the offio_ of Resider_i, Commissioner In the case of Puerto Rico) :_y expend in that State _a cormection wit:h ]_ts primary election c_mp;fig_ ' (B) Notwithstanding ';he provisions (:;_ _UbloaragralYh (Al, no su¢h candidate rnzs_ :make expendit:u_s throuf:hout the Unite.,_t :_tates in connection with his ¢_mpaign f(_.r _hat nomination l_l excel_ of an amou_'_ equal 'bo lO cents multipl:ed bythe votl_.{:_ _ge population of the U:_ited States. l_,.r pur_o6es of this subparagraph, the terr,'_ 'United States' means the several States _:,_ the Uni_l States, the Dis_Tlct of Columbt_., :_nd the Corn_.nomwcalth of _Puerto Rice:J, Guam, and the Virgin Islands I_nd any are_ J:rom which a delegate to t::e national nora::hating conventk>n of a volitJcal party :LS i_lected. ' "(b) Except -to the e_tent that suc:h amounts are chsl:ged under subsection (I), (,2), no candidate may _ke expenditures Jn connection with his general election ca_.. paign in exce_ of the greater of_ "(1) 15 cents multiplied by ti_e votin&a_ population (as certified wader subsection (gl _ of the geographical i_ In which th4:,_ election is held, or "(2) (Al $171,000, if t::e Federal office sought ts that of Senator, or Representati:e _:rom s, State which is ent ltled to only o:.:; ]._epresentative, or "(B) $90,000, if the l*ederal office soug_,t Jz that of Representative hem s. State whic!: is entitled to more than one Representativ,::. "(c) No cand:idate who :s unopposed in ::_ primary or general electicn _y make e_:.. penditures in connection with his primal3' date, ncluding a Vice-Presidential candldate, il: it is m_de by-"(Al an authorized committee or any other l_gent of the candidate for the purposes oJ.' ma_:ing any expenditure, or _(B) any person authorized ar requested by the candidate, an authorized committee of the candidate, or an agent of the candidate t( make the expenditure, "(4) For purposes of this section an expendit:_re made by the national committee _ a p alitieal party, or by the State cornr_dttee of a political party, in eonnection with the general election campaign of a candidate affiliated with that party which is not in excess of the limitations contained irt sub_ection (il, is not C_)nsldered to be an expenditure made on behalf of that candidate. "(fl ,:1) For purposes of paragraph (2) _(A) 'price index' means the average over a calendar year of the Consumer Price Index (all ite:ms---United States C/ty average) publiahed :_onthly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and _ (B) 'base period' means _2_e calendar year 1973. "(2) At the beginning of each calendar year (commencing in 1975), as n_ data b_ome available from the E_rejau of Labor Statist:Ice of the Department of Labor, the S_retary of Labor shall certify to th_ Federal E:_ectlo_ Commission and publish in the Federal l_ster the percentage; difference between _;he price index for the twelve months precediag the beginning of such calendar year and the price index for the base period. E_ch a_ount determined under subsections (i_) and (b) shall be changed by such percenta_:, difference. Each amount so changed shall b_; the amount in effect for such caiendar _ear. "(gl During the first week of January 1975 and ew_ry subsequent year, Cae Secretary of Commerce shall certify to the Federal Election Commission and publish in the l_ederal R,egistec an estinmte of the voting age populatlon :>f the United Sta_es, of each State, and of each congressional distriet as of the fi_s_ d_qF of July next preceding the date of certtfic_tion. The term 'voting age populati0n' : _eans resident population, eighteen years o: age or older. "ih) 'Upon receiving the certtficalion of the Sec:cetary of Commerce _d of Cae Secretary o_: Labor, the Federal Election Comn_issior shall publish in the Federal Register the ayplicable expenditure limitations in effect tlor the calendar _ear _or the United States, and for each -State arid congressio_al district under this section. ' On F._ge 73, line 3, strike out "(b)" and in_ert in lieu thereof "(il _ On p:_ge 7'3, line 24, strike out "section 504" and ln_:ert in lieu thereof "subc_ectlon (gl; aa:d". On page 74, strike out lines 1 and 2. _:_ per general centumelec:ion of thecampldgn lira:ration in inexcess subset.,c.? _;ion (al or (b) "(d) The Fsderal Election Coramisslo_:: shall prescribe regulations under which any expenditure by a candidate for nomlnatio:i:_ for election to the office of President :for us_,_ Jn two or more States shall be attrihute(i 1_ such candidate's experdltm,e limitation:: in eactx such S$ate, based )n the voting a_'e population in such State which can reason., _bly be expected to be influenced by suc!!: expenditure. "(el (1) Expenditures made on behalf ¢_,: any candidate are, for the purposes of th:_ section, considJ_ed to bi: made by suck candidate. "(2) Expenditures made 0y or on behalf (,: any candidate for the office of Vice Presider:_ of Cae United _:'_ates are, for '_he purpose:_ of this section, considered 'x) be made by th_:, candidate for the office of President of tl_,._ United States with whom he is running, "(3) For purposes of t_is subsection, aJ::. expenditure is :ssade on behalf of a candl- p;_ge in 74, lieu line thereof 6_ strike"tileoutFederal "that ElecAct" andOnl_:ert tion CamPaign Act of 1971". On p_:_e 74, line 8, strike out "(c)" and /nsert J_ lieu thereof "(J)". On page 74. linelO, strike out "(al (4)" a_xd ir_:,ert in lieu thereof *'{el (3)". On p_ge 75, line 6, strike out "(al (5)' and insert in lieu thereof "(d)". On p_ge 75, line 11, strike out "(al (4)" and in::;ert in lieu thereof "(el (3)". The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is a 1-hc_xr limit_tion on this amendment. WhO yields time? Mr. :ISAKER. Mr. President, I yield my_ self such time as I may require. I would /_lvite the Chair, before I begin to disCUSS the merits of the amendment, that I wish i:o yield briefly to the distinguished serii0r Senator from West Virginia, chalrr_:an of the Committee on Public _r/)rks so that we may have a brief collc,quy J:_n another matter, the time for the April 4, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL colloquy to be charged to my time. But first, I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from Kansas (Mr. DOLE) be added as a cosponsor of my amendment No. 1134. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered, DISAST__RELIEF The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Vir inia is recognized. Mr. RANDOLPh. Mr. President,' a large section of th ._United States was struck yesterday _y tornadoes which whipped through tl e countryside. Mr.' BAKER. Mr President, will the Senator yield at tt is point, so that we may ask for the y as and nays on my amendment before _e lose that capabfiity? The PRESIDINC OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? The yeas and na] _ were ordered, Mr. RANDOLPB Mr. President, the exact number of _ersons reported as having been killed iY this disaster runs well over 300, the e_ _ct number not being known yet. But de truction and hardships follow in the 'ake of such a disaster. The able Senator 'om Tennessee, who is the ranking min rity member of the Committee on Publ c Works, will speak in a colloquy, as he has indicated, I have just been gq _en the latest figures. _s of 2:30 p.m. th, number of dead is 338. Agencies of the l _ederal Govern-ment have responded, an [ they_are providing ;relief services. Our _ommittee on Public · Works has-jurisdici on over disaster relief legislation. Sin_ _ early morning, we have been ,contactl _g _several Senators from States ravage¢ by the tornadoes of yesterday. Member,, of our subeommittee, and other mere _.rs of the full cornmittee, will visit d saster sites in four States'tomorrow an [ Saturday. They will exami_ e the extent of the damage and evaluat _the implementation Of disaster assistar _e measures by the Federal Governmer _. It will be a firsthand inspection, al d it will take place under the leadershi of the Senator from North Dakota_(Mr. BvarxcK), who is the chairman of our S' bcommittee on Disaster Relief. There are dama_ _d areas in Tenr_essee, in Indiana, in Ohio, and in Kentucky, and in res_ _nse to requests of Senators B_.a an ! Bsoc_, BAY_ and HARTKE, METZ_-N_A_ £and TAFT, COOK and HUDDLESrO_ we sha] 'go into those States. The Senator fi'orr New Mexico (Mr. DOMENICI), the anking Republican member of our s_ )committee, will, of course, participate, I think that the t _ur is necessary. The information that c_ n be obtained by an on-the-ground che(: into the matter will provide important _ fidance, not only for this committee an subcommittee, but for the Senate as w_ a. The subcommitt_ _ is at the present time corisidering m ,jOr revisions of the Disaster Relief Act ,f 19_0. Many Merebets of the Senat_ will remember the devastation wrou_ _ in several States during the period _hen that act was RECORD -- SENATE S 5287 being developed. ,_ L_barna, I will say to Senator AT.LEN, W _ one of the States struck at that tim ,. We have tried t, set in motion a response meehanisrr to disasters at the Federal level fha will assure us the quickest possible _ief to the victims of these disasters-_nadoes, hurricanes, floods, or without whateve ,arning. because they strike suddenly, The Federal rok must also include an in the buildings, th: _ many more dead are anticipated, a Iai _er number injured, and tens of millio ns dollars in property damage sustained. I appreciate the cerest that the Sen.. ator from West Virg aia and the Senator from .Tennessee (Ml BAKES) are mani-festing in this traged y, and I am hopeful that the subcommitb be able tier 9o get into Alabama, in ti will northern of counties there, and s, our ravaged areas effective recovery !oft, assoquickly that theas cornmunities ckn be reke! _ilt possible and the perso is who live there can firsthand, I do feelalso. that we ;hould have some permanent legislati¢ _. that Will do the go back lives. to their and their normal I thi¢ :cupations lk we all agree that while there is no w_ y that we can prevent necessary andtheu Lll provide job the tomechanics forjob doing necessary alleviate the sufferin ,_ that our people natural provide have sustained. isWe that and. the pres.ent legL,;lation in_ _eel dequate, I am pleased that the PrE _ident has declared Alabama and the otll _r States mentioned by the distinguishe_ chairman as dis_ aster areas, which _ ill allow public faciliUes, public utilit es, and public improvements to be res ored and_will make available loans for assistance. I am pleased with the rem tion that we understand h_ taken plac among the Federal agencies in rushing to aid our people. We hope that th_ _ is taking place throughput the dam ,ged area. I conunend thc _ istinguished serator from. West VirgirJ a, the Senator from Tennessee (Mr: BAKI _), his full committee, and Particularl: i his subcommittee which i_ going to tr ,vel over large portions of the countr_ examining the extent of the damage. I wonder if the m ;mbers of the cornmittee have Alabama on their itinerary. might Mr. RANDOLPIL _[r. President, ! ap- disasters we can the relieff_ )m and occurring, rebuildingpro- grams which are n_ _essary. · So, Mr. Presidenl I think it is the duty of the Senate to s _e that.any suffering and any disruption that result from such tornadoes as struc yesterday be minimized, and that th problems that ensue be kept to an absol te minimum, Mr. BAKER. Mr. 'resident, I thanl_ the Senator from Wes Virginia, the distingulshed chairman ,f the Committee on Public Works. I mi it add to his remarks by pointing out at according to the Weather Bureau th: _is the worst tornado disaster in 49 yea_ ;; that in Kentucky there are 98 know. dead, in Tennessee 58, in Ohio 40, and in Indiana 43 known dead; and that 9J tornadoes were reported sighted by t _e U,S. Weather Bureau in just the ea_ tern part of Tennessee last night. hard to im: gine destruction thatIt isaccompanied these theuntimely and unfortunate death_, and I commend the , chairman for auth_ 'izing this first-hand field examination by a subcommittee chai J _to ed the by disaster the Senator from North Dakot_ (Mr. BURDIC_C), the ranking Republiear Member of which is the Senator fromm New Mexico (Mr. DOME_CX), to begi_ in the morning and to cover the affecte_ States. Mr. AL_,_._q. Mr President, will the Senator yield? And ask unanimous consent that if the S_ rotor does yield the time not be eharge_ against his amendmerit. Will the Sen ttor from Tennessee yield in order that [ might question the chairman of the ( ommjttee on Public Works a moment? Mr. BAKER. ! a_ happy to yield. Mr. President, I ask un_ _imous consent that the time not be aarged against my amendment. _ The PRESIDINC OFFICER. Without objection, it is so o_ Lered. Mr. _r._.mN. Mr. ] resident, we all recogntze t he vast corn ,assion that the distlngulshed Senator _rom West Virginia always manifests , _hen the American people are in distres and when they sustaln tragedies such a; have befallen many of our people in th_ last 36 to 48 hours. The Senator men_ ioned the damage to Alabama back in 1! 70. I call to his attention that Alaban a this time also was one of the hardest _it States, and that already thereare _ known dead in ,aAabama, with the lik_ ',ihood, inasmuch as some of the building_ have been destroyed to such an extent th: t they have'not been able to ascertain hat bodies are still preciate the eoncer that the Senator from Alabama has e_ _ressed peopie of altl the affectei areas. for He the correctly calls attention to t _e very heavy damage in his own State :if Alaba. ma, and to the very high death _oll there. We are not certain )f just how our trip can move, but I hay, a feeling that we will want to inspect ther disaster area.,;. Mr. ALLEN. Yes. Mr. F,ANDOLPH. ghile it might not be possible this weeh t wotild be our intention to inspect, in ,far as we can, the area the Senator a_ spoken of in Alabama. I know that Senat_ r DOMENIC! and, cf course, Senator, Bm _xcg identify with these matters in su _ommittee leadership. ,_ I have ind cared earlier, they are wor_ing with th, staff very carefully, and we want to d, a thorough job. Mr. A'r,T,W.N.Yes, I now. Mr. RANDOLPH. I opefully we will not miss those areas th ,t need to be COYered. I want to indicate ,his before I finish: I have noted that 5he Senator spoke about the inadequac: of the present law. Mr. ALLEN. Yes. Mr. RANDOLPIt. _ here was a time not so man_ years ag() _ _en, frankly, all we did, when disaster c_ ne by way of tornado, rio(gl, hurricane, on earthquake, was to come into the S_ rote Chamber and appropriate money , be spent on relief and on rebuilding, ut we did, back ha :' 1970, set in motion good ... Mr. Ar.r.w.N. Iagr_ 387 $ 5288 CONGRESSIONAL Mr. RE CORD -- SENATE April 4, 19 74 (continuing). Pro· we have been able to give relief and to a very realistic and Thus, I respond again to. the Senator · Alabama, that I am sure we vail i attention to the areas 'which have devastated. I appreciate, ourproblem andthe words tl_t he] Mr. Mr. President, I should, like to say, behalf of my senior colleague (N.M. that he shares the concern I feel for the plight of our people also on behalf of our dis-. George C. Wallace; so that if the, will come to Alabama and can project its plans in such a way provide for a visit by the or the full committee to our transportation by State trooper car, by State airplane will be to the committee, and all the necessary requirements of the committee be arranged for. We would welcome the committee with I Mr. That offer of cooperatlon at the mJ level is very valuable and necessary oft times. We will keep that in mind thank the distinguished Senator f Mr. Mr. President, I should like to comment on the dialog which has between the Senator fro m West the Senator from I am the ranking Republican of the subcommittee, and I should to tell the Senator from Alabama that schedule is still indefinite, is not here to explain it. But to of my knowledge, we will start tomorrow morn- covered. I thi k we have several ira,., 'but t;:xere are p ople in the State of Illiprovements to ;hat which can be done nois who are uffering some damaged rather quickly. : assure the Senator and prol_rty. There has also been some loss others interest d that we are on the of life. verge of prodt :lng a viii and this w.ill: So, in additio _to commending the disexpedite it. tinguished Sens ;or from West Virginia, I We will be at [e to gi-e due considera-, simply want to _xpress the hope that in tion to the ne_ kinds of facts that we the deliberatio s of the committee, it find here becau ;e we fi 3d them in ew:ry mighi: try to fil d some time to visit the kind of disas_: We will do this at the districts damag :d in Illinois. It would be earliest possibl, time. helpfal to th e c( mmittee's understanding Mr. ALLEN. ] want to stabe.to the d:.s_ of th,_; sufferin_ caused in Illinois, as to tinguished Sen; tor ths t I [hope he _[11 the division of relief and also, perhaps, use his good off ces to .,ce that the corn-, in the prepara ion of legislation for a mittee or the su )committee does come to ].onger term. Alabama. This Senator hopes that the I a:n sure om Governor and all of our Senator, the rs _king nino_ty memb,:z_r, local officials w4 uld be more than grateor the chairma l, will :_otify the junior ful a:ld delight ;d to provide every acSenator from &labama and my d!s commodation I _ssible for the conventinguished se:al, r colleague (Mr. Stamp:.. ience of the cc nmittee, if it were posMAN) if a plan can be arranged to in.. sible to include a visit to the State of elude Alabama o that )ne or both of us Illino:is in forth ',oming trips by the subcan be on hand ;o greet you and accomcomn:ittee. pany you throu: aout tr:e State. Mr. RANDOL 'H. I tharik the able SenThe PRE[_I: ING OFFICER (1MI;r.ator from Illin( :s. We do know that the STEVENS). If th_ Senator from Alabanm. President is nov declaring certain States will yield to the, _air tc intervene at ti;ds as di,_aster Sial _s or areas within those point, the Chai '. would state that the State:-. As the Senator indicated; the unanimous cons mt agreement was thai death toll in hi; State is no so large as the Senator fro n Temlessee' yielded [.e that compared ' rith other States but the the Senator frol i Alabama for the pu:r_ impact in many ways is felt in West Virpose of engagir _ in colloquy with _t):_e ginia, There wa; the death of one small Senator from. X _est Virginia. It is not child in West _rginia, which of course to be charg.ed to th_ Senator from s,addens us all _ry much., especially the Tennessee; The Chair :s constrained '1_. O little commur ;y of Meadow Creek, note that this. c_ tloquy has extended bewhict:_ I know v ry well and have visited yond the una:nii Lous consent agreement, there dozens of times. The damage was Mr. BAKEI_t. Ylr. President, to make quite severe in bhe community. But we sure that this v _rthwt2. ile colloquy does have the respc xsibility, certainly as a not gobble up dl of my time on my Congress, the c ,mmittee, and especially, amendment, un;mim.ous consel::tt: m_bcommit! in moving quicklyas and that,this and I s ,sk y furlher colloquy re-- the earnestly to dj, e, :harge our duties re- lng-and for at our itinerary, to travel on indefinite, but .with Senator plants for other States this Week. Th, ator knows, around the are scheduled April 9. There that are must do garding toms, dc s, and so forth, not be charged against ny time. The PRESII)I IG O!_FICF. R. Without objection, it is sE ordered. Mr. ALLE!q'. I_ r. President, I yield to. the Senator fron West Virginia. Mr. RANI_)L_ H. Mr. President, so far, the documenatio t given by the able Se:n.-ator from New: [exico is Very helpful. I had said at th hearing today, as we began this disct sion, that the work ot the subcommittE _ in s;rengthening the present legisl.ati_ n has been in proceeds, and we will, of '_ourse--the leadersh:,p, Senators Bus.vt( _, Do_rmqxct, and wil;h the cooperation [ all the ot]aer members of the subcommi ;ee ant the committee .... give attention t( these :hatters. I want to tell _u, M:t. President, that when we had the broubls with the earth-, quake in CaE.fo_ da, tiere was litera;.Iy documentation , _ hur_dreds of peon/lc who took adwmt ge of :;hat situation. ,3o that we have to t _ very careful when we set a sum of mo_ ey, that is, money ii:Ce _hat. That is a si( e issue, of course, I yield now my colleague frc:m Illinois. Mr. STEVEN: ,N. l_r. President, _: want to conm_en, also :he distinguish,::_d Senator from W_ ;t Vir_,qnia for his vic-. lance and the wa_ in wh:.ch his committee instantaneously _ _sponded to the pligL_t of the people w: ;ose l_omes have b_n damaged by :rec_ _t tornadoes. Many ,of those people res de in Illinois. Illincds was not so seve2 ely damaged as other States, such as O do, Indiana, Kentucky, ately _fter the everyone of two what do we do $5,000 under serious grant pro,,ram State with wh/[-have not by stances but by emergency has _needy. We have think it will to come up Senate, I am will be acted every aspect must be at a bet/er for or a lice facilities 388 2 days we will plan we will continue and Monday is still personally Will confer and will ask about week, about going into we cannot complete it as the Senhad numerous hearings By coincidence, we mark up the bill on two parts of the bill improvements and we about them quickly, be able to act, immedicarry out what is the implementation One, I might say, is tak. e the place of the loan area. We have 2onsideration a $2,500 be administered by the money to the people .needy; that is, needy of economic circumof what the that makes them agreed on it. I do more than 4 or 5 days it. The history of the is such that the bill y and given The long-term _ate. We will arrive -range implementation to group communities, addition to the pubhave always been sponsible iegis_ _-s. Mr. BAKElq a-_ _'_'"_* ' th._lk my cha_r._m_._ for hic rc_'nar!:c abc'.:': this -L_,_' ..... .............. _ --_'*_- and thc oDDc_unity t____ te the ec!!C.q'ay bS' _'zc_ many c,thc-; _:,_*^_-, .......... _'"_'_'_ _--_ _..t:..,,'.n_hcd;_ '-_ ' _,ccupo_,_ _ _ o_,_ _ r_,,e,_zc_ ' who is _h; .... _-_ i,_,_ 'm,_,_h .... _h,_ ._,,_. ........... ...... _++_._.,_. ................. ,_ _ ,_Y._.i££_1-[.._-_._.._......_to_ _n, *e ,v_c _ _he e_,_,_ttee. Conga-cos, arid t,kc 2c_;atc ,'-.ave ;'c3bz,r,dcd _................ Mr. President, turning' my attention now t'.>amendment No. 1134, I yield myself such time as I may use. Mr. President, this amendment would strike all of title I of the bill regarding public: financing of campaigns for Federal o:_ce. In its place, I would substitute a refined form of private financing designed, to broaden the base of participation _md prevent the abuse of earlier camp_igns. Specifically, I would propose a 100perce:_at tax credit on all political contributions made in a calendar year up to $50 fcir an individual return and $100 for a joint return. As it is now, an individual can c;aim a tax credit of 50 percent of ali co:atributions made in a calendar year up to $12.50. On a joint return, the credit is up _o $25. In S. 3044, the tax credit is still 50 percent; but the amount is increas_d to $25 on an individual return sznd $50 on a joint retm'n. Once again, my a:mendment would allow a 100-percent tax credit on all contributions made in a calendar year up to $50 on an indi- AprR 4, t974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE vidual return and $100 on a joint renlques. For reasons of expedierme, we turn. In this way, the small contributor have traditionally geared our fund-raisIs offered a clear and realistic incentive lng efforts to the so-called fat cats and to contribute between $50 and $100 to the sought small contributlonz when the big candidate of his or her choice, money was riot available. Thtus, we are Moreover, we can avoid most of what comparatively inexperienced when it I consider to be the intrinsic liabilities of comes to undertaking a broad, low-level partial o¥ fun public finaneAng of camsolicitation effort, paigns for Federal office. What are those Under the expenditure limitations of liabilities, in my view? I shall attempt to S. 3044, a Presidential candidate can list them. spend up to 15 cents times the voting age The question'of public participation in population of the country in the general our' poNt/cai process /s one which conelection campaign. If my calcvJations are cerns me greatlY., as I am sure it does accurate, that comes out to about $24 most of my colleagues. In the past few nn_liom Pursuing this arithmetic arguyears, that participation has declined ment a little further, that translates into steadily, as has public trust and confi8,000 contributions of $3,000 each. I dence in our major governmental lnstirealize that we are talking abou.t only one tutions. Tn the wake of Watergate and Presidential candidate during the genrelated events, it becomes increasingly eral election campaign, but tiffs can be incumbent upon us to ascertain the key extrapolated into other races for Federal to increasing public participation andoff/ce; and Isubmit that a thc rough expromoting public trust in elected officials, amination of the actual number of conThose who advocate public financing tributions required to adequately fund argue that the onlY. way to prevent furcampaigns for Federal office would shock ther erosion of public confidence is to a great many people. In fact, that numremove the opportunity for financing bet is infinitesimal in light of a votingthat process from the hands of the speage poptflatlon of over 140 million people, c/al interests, and to entrust a suhstanNevertheless, a great many of my colt_al portion of that responsibility in the leagues in the Congress are convinced Federal GOVernment. I do not quarrel that we cannot raise sufficient funds so with the need to elimfr_ate the inordilong as we limit the size of individual nate influence of special interests. In contributions. It is proposed, therefore, fact, I believe that only individuals that we enlist the aid of the Federal should be allowed to contribute to pollGovernment through a system of partial, tical campaigns; and even then, not in but substantial public financing, excess of the limits prescribed in S. 3044. But I cannot accept that alternative, But, ! strongly disagree with the pre- I cannot accept it because there seems sumption that eliminating the financial to me something politically :Incestuous influence of special interests necessitates about the Government financ:ing, and I grantink that influence of responsibility believe inevitably then, regulating the to the U.S. Tre/_sury. I_ seems to me the day-to-day procedures by wh/ch the American people should be given the Government is selected. It is extraordioption of assuming that prerogative narily important, in my judgment, that rather than the Federal Government. the Government not control the maIt' is not just a question of whether we chinery by which the public expresses need the power of the Government to the range of its desires, demands, and enforce the relevant statutes, nor dissent. And yet, that, in a se_e, is what whether we need an effective means of we are debating here. I do not question prosecuting those who violate those statthe motives of those who drafted this utes; for clearly, the Government must legislation_ but rather the po.,_sible conplay a major role in this regard. But, sequences of its enactment, the question is really how necessary is Indeed, I can even visualize a scenario it that the Government directly involve in which bureaucrats, empowered to write itself in financing political campaigns. If checks on the Public Treasm_---checks it were the only viable means of funding essential to the success of w_rious poa clean and competitive two-party syslitical campaigns-can abuse, maniputern, then I might support public financlate, or otherwise influence the outcome lng. But it is not, in my judgment, for of those elections by generating the kind the following reason, of bureaucratic red tape which is charTo the present day, the Congress has acteristic of our burgeoning Fe,ieral Gevnever successfully sought to effectively ernment, limit the amount of money an individual For these reasons, I would urge that or group could contribute to a political We avoid delegating significant fundcampaign. In fact, I believe S. 3_2 was lng authority to the Government until the first time that 'either House had it is absolutely necessary. The American passed legislation which actually sought people should retain exclusive responsito bring this about, Thus, rather than bility for funding political ¢_mpaigns, political candidates being compelled to and they should be encouraged to do so raise 50 contributions of $100 each, they on a much broader scale, have always opted in favor of the single The amendment which I have offered $5,000 contribution when they could find proposes to vastly expand the base of it. public participation and increase, by litIt is only natural; and as a politician, erally millions, the number of Im_ople who I can certainly understand why candihave a personal stake in political camdates find it easier to raise a specific paigfis. This would be done by offering amount of money in large contributions the kind of clear tax incentive required rather than small ones. But we should to prompt small contributions from conalso realize what influence this has had cerned Americans. Moreover, it would ehon our respective fundraising techtitle those Americans to choose the in- S 5289 dividual tB whom they wish to contribute. Und4.-r the present dollar checkoff, as well as the provisions of S. 3044, the individual taxpayer is unable to determine who receives his or her tax dollars. However, under my approach, the taxpayer is :not only able to designate the particular recipient, but.also the amount involved, thereby leaving complete discretion to the individual contributor. This brings me to my final argument in opposition to public financing. Al_hou_;h S. 3044 does not specifically prohibit Private contributions during any phase of a political campaign, it certainly discourages them, particularly between the primary and general elections. It is during that time that private contributions are subtracted from the Geveminent subsidy available for major party candidates who have reached the required threshold. The thrust of the bill is that once the threshold has been reached, private contributions are no longer soug, ht nor needed; and this would seem to clearly infringe upon the individual'sfirst amendment right of freedom of political expression. Not only does tha_ right include the option of contributing to a political campalgn at'the appropriate time, but it also includes _he option not to participate at all ff the individual so chooses. And Yet, under S. 3044, $2 on an individual return and $4 on a joint return is automatically paid into the Federal election campaign fund unless the taxpayer indicates to the contrary. In other words, the only option available to the individual is a negative one; and this, in my judgment, is wrong. Morover, if insufficient funds are raised by the proposed $2 or $4 checkoff sYstem, the Congress is required to appropriate the necessary difference, thereby negating the decision of taxpayers not to have their tax dollars used for politlcai caml_aigns. This, too, is wrong, in my opinion, and abridges still further the individual's first amendment right of freedom of l_)litical expreaslon. However, this amendment would avoid all of these constitutional questions by protecting the freedom of political expression :md by encouraging that eXPression through a reallzt_c tax cred/t systern. At a tiime when public confidence In our Government is at an all-time low, It is difncuJt to resist the temptation to throw the baby out with the bath water. And it is equally difficult to enact constructlve and meaningful reform. But, going from one extreme, that Is, essentially unrestricted private financing, to another, that is, public financing of all campaigr_s for Federal office, is not the answer. :Rather, we should consider a refined form of private financing in which the size of individual contributions is strictly limited, and in which there is full public disclosure and an effective enforcement mechanism. That would seem to be the most logical next step, and that is what I am proposing with a majority of my colleagues on the Senate Watergate Committee as well as a number of other Sermtors. Mr. President, in a word, I am not prepared to say we have reached the place where we can no longer discuss the po- 389 S 5290 CONGRIESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE April 4, 1974 litical process. We can and we should reI agree with the Senator on the pro.- ,Sena,_or's objective, we might have a vote fine, ref_rrbhsh, and redesign our politvision as it was origin _lly in title V on ,on it, I would vote for the tax credit, the ical system so that it is fully supported the checkoff. £thinka]_erso:ashouldtake tax deduction, and the checkoff, but I by voluntary contri,butions of individuals, affirmative action if he desires his morley cannot vote for them in his amendment We should elimiriate contributions of to be contributed to the political process which would delete public financing. Special in_.erest groups and restrict conrather than to have it I;o to this purpc,se lVlr. BAKER. Mr. President, before ! tributions to those made by qualified unless it were checked off otherwise. :Field to my distinguished colleague from voters on].y. We Should have timely disWhen that proposal comes up in the North Carolina, I would like to make a closure of all contributions, and by proper form :from the Committee on ]iq.- brief remark. If I were to withdraw the "timely" I mean to have the final report nance on the finance b[U I would expect 'amendment, if I were to fail to insist on on contributi.ons before the election and to vote with the Senator from Tennes_see this alternative, it seems to me it would not after, and others on that poir,t. ,deprive the Senate of an effective reform Mr. President, S. 3044 provides for the I would hope that the Senator wm:dd measare as an alternative to public final 'report to be filed on January 31 in not press for proposals here today related :firrancing. the year following an election, when it to the tax credit, ta:.' deduction, and All the Senate could vote for would be is of procious little importance to the checkoff. I say that, because there i_,;a for public financing or nothing. Thereaverage voter, serious constitutional question involved :fore, I feel a strong obligation to insist We should limit the amount of contrias to the propriety of ';hat issde on ti:tis on this amendment. I might point out bution that an individual can make. We bill. 'that there is no tax deduction included should limit the dollar amount that can We have discussed ;his on the floor lin this amendment. be expended, on numerous occasion_, before. There i,_ I yield now to the Senator from North There is a range of other options no question that it would be subject to Carolina (Mr. ESVIN). which Will bring more representative a point of order in the House. We haw'_ ' Mr. ERVIN. Mr. President, in furthergovernment to the people and together had that ruling from the Parliamen-. ance of the remarks of the Senator from they form. a package infinitely more attarian on three occasions, and on tl:tis Tennessee, if the Wa tergate affair inditractive to this Senator than the present occasion we have had i he motion of the cates anything, it indicates that we need system, distinguished Senator from Louisiana '_ome reform in raising of campaign Mr. President, I reserve the remainder that title V be referred to the comm:.it -,, funds for Federal officers. of my time. tee on Finance with the assurance from Despite my great respect for my good Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield him that they would attaclb that to an friend from Nevada, I cannot agree that myself 5 rainutes, appropriate revenue bill from the House 'there, is any constitutional question inThe PRESIDING OFFICER. The and :report it to the fi(_)r cf the Senate volved here. The constitutional provision Senator from Nevada is recognized, so that we would haw an opportunity which is germane to a claim of that aaMr. CANNON. Mr. President, I find to vote thereon, ture Js in section 7 of article I, which myself in agreement with 'the distin= With respe:ct to the compensation. I says: gulshed Senator from Tennessee on a completely s4;ree with the distinguished All bills for raising revenue shall origifiate good marly points he made. However, Senator from Tennessee on the compe::a-. :in th_ House of Representatives. there are a number of points I cannot sation, doubling, or increasing the There is not a syllable in the amendsupport in this amendment for reasons ammmt. I am in favor of increasing the meat offered by the distinguished SenX shall enumerate, tax credit; I am in favor of increasir_r ator i'rom Tennessee, ofwhich I am a coFirst, the most recent POint he made, the deductions; and I am in favor of spon.sor, that undertakes to raise a single that he thought a final rePOrt should be the checkoff position. B at I am very fear-, penny of revenue. It does not undertake filed prior to election so voters could ful that if we leave it tn this bill we are to raise revenue. It does not impose any know about it. This is a practical imposgoing to run into some serious difficui-, taxes. But it not only does provide a sibility, because the final report is inties. We have voted already on the fiem" method whereby we can reform the fitended to finalize everything that was of the SenatA_ on one (_casion to strike nancmg of Federal elections in such a transacted from a reporting standpoint, that from tr. as bill anti refer it to the way :[_s to leave the power to make volin the ca_npaign. Obvionsly, one cannot Committee o:a Finance. So ! would be untary contributions to the taxpayers file any report that would take care of . quite hopeful that tlc Senator from of th_s country, but is also calculated to those de_iis in the 2 or 3 days of the Tennessee would at ]east modify his :_imulate the political parties and cancampaign.. It would be a physical im- amendment to take out that particular didates for political office to insist on l_ssibility. A written report has to be portion. If that is dole, then We have further involvement by the people of the prepared, it has to be filed with a reremaining only the bill S. 372, which we United States in the election processes-ceiving officer, and it has to be made passed last year withoat public financ-, and that is the crying need/along with available and publicized. One cannot lng added, the need for reform. even get something in the newspapers So we get back to the issue we voted We have gotten into an unfortunate unless it involves something of a headon earlier with the S(nator from A]a-. state in this country--when anything line nature these days. So the practicalbama. If one is for public financing, he goes ',_rong, we say, "Go down to the bof ,ity of that suggestion is out of the should vote against the amendment; if tom ¢ffthat empty hole we call the Treasquestion, one is against public financing, he should ury of the United States and get some Now, we have required a number of vote for the amendment;, money out of that empty hole to cure the reports in the reporting process. The 1atThe Senate already ba_ expressed :i_,_ problem." Inmy judgment, it would mulest one would be a complete report of judgment overwhelmhlgly on S. 3':i'2_ tiply _he problems, because here is an in= everything that happened up to 10 days which is a good bill, and the House acted direci; encouragement to anybody who before election day. We felt that was as on it. Had the House acted on it l_,_st want,_ to have a lot' of money at his disclose to e][ection day as we could go and year, I do not think _e should be here posal to have a good time traveling still make information available to the going through this exercise at this tin:m, through this country by becoming a canpublic so that they could be informed because the l_ressure '_ould have been didate for the Presidency of the United and make an informal judgment with rerelieved somewhat. It was a good bill al-. States. This bill is going to be a stimulaspect to the voting process, though it did not ha_e the feature of tiontoget more money out of the TreasThe distinguished Senator made some public financing and other features irt ury of the United State.,_ so people can reference to the checkoff provision in this bill. indulge their political fantasies, and I do title V. I would point out that title V has So, Mr. Pr,_ident, I again say to my' not _hink that is something to be been eliminated from this bill and is no colleague that I would be very hopeful enc°Uraged. longer a ]Part of the bill. Therefore, we he would not press his amendment with I think the Senator from Tennessee should not discuss the matter in the conrespect to the financing items. The issue should insist on having a vote in the text of title V, except as he proposes to already has been determine_l once. It is ,Senate on this amendment, since this is put it back in in his amendment and not properly on the bi:l and will crea_. _ not axl amendment which would raise a have it called title I. more difficulties for u_. If that is tae single penny of revenue, but, on the con- 390 April 4, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE teary, would form a method by which the taxpayers could voluntarily make a contribution to the candidates of their choice and to the parties of their choice, I think it is a highly desirable amendment, and ! sincerely hope the Senate will adopt it. Mr. BAKER. I thank my colleague from North Carolina, who not only is a great constitutional authority in the country and the Senate, but I point out, has a greater familiarity with the very abuses we are trying to prevent in this country than anybody :in this Chamber. The p_lnt he makes with respect to the _constitutionality of this legislative situation is entirely correct. The point he makes with respect to the awesome authority of the anonymous bureaucracy being brought to bear a_ainst the politicai system, the _ost delicate of all its governmental devices, :is one that must commend itself to this body for considoration. I thank the Senator from North Carolina for his support, Mr. ROTH. Mr. P_asident, will the Senator yield? Mr. BAYs_. I am happy to yield to my colleague from I_elaware. Mr. ROTH, I would like to'compliment the Senator from Tennessee for offering his amendment. I think it is a highly 'clesirable alternative to the public financing approach, I would just like to emphasize a point he made a few minutes ago. Those of us who SUppOrt the "tax credit" approach to campaign reform, as opposed to public financing'of elections, _re placed in a very difficult position. We are told that this option of a tax credit is parliamentary not feasible. I was happy to hear the arguments made by the Senator from North Carolina, but there _re editorialS, for example, including in my own paper, which say those of us Who support the other options should nevertheless vote for cloture, so there is an up-and-down 'vote on "public financing." What this means, in effect, if it is ruled that the "tax credit" amendment is out of order, is that we really have no opportunity to debate an alternate approach to "public financing." I would just say that one of my great concerns with publi c financing is that we are emphasizing money, rather than deemphasizing it. It seems to me that if we are really golng %0 restore public confidence /md get 'greater citizen participation in campaigns, we have to use another law big approach spending. tharL just tO vote into There has been considerable discussion about the constitutional question here. I correctly stated the proposition that this matter had been raised, I believe in 1961, and it was on a campaign reform bill, an amendment of which I was a sponsor and which was before the Senate at that time. The then distingulshed Senator from Virginia, Harry Byrd, who is no longer with us, made the point that the amendment would be subject to a point bf order, and it was for a tax credit similar to the tax cxedit in this particular amendment, and the Senate was advised at that time that the House would not even consider a bill with this type of provision in it for that reason. So my statement with respect to the point of order has been borne out historically here by what happened on the floor of the Senate, and I was the author of the particular amendment that was offered. As I said earlier, I support that provision of the distinguished Senator's amendment, and when I have the opportunity, in the proper forum, I expect to vote for it. Mr. BAKER. I thank the Senator. Mr. ERVIN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield me 3 or 4 minutes? Mr. BAKER. I yield. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 1 minute remaining. Mr. BAKER. I yield that 1 minute to the Senator from North Carolina. Mr. ERVIN. Mr. President, I have already read to the Senate the provision in the Constitution which states: All bills for raiSing revenue shall originate in the House of l_epresentatives... This amendment does noL propose to raise a single penny of revenue. The House has some rules over there, but I think'the Senate ought to assert its right to legislate under the Constitution, lrrespective of House rules, and I am not willlng, as far as I am concern_d, to let the Senate take a subordinate position as a legislative body. There is nothing in the Constitution that would prevent the Senate from adopting this amendment, and I think the Senate ought to insist that it is at least an equal body with the House of Representatives in every respect tha,t the COnstitution does not deprive it of the privilege of so doing, and this amendment has no constitutional tmplications whatsoever, Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield back the remainder of my tirae. Mr. BAKER..Mr. President, my time I do not intend at this stage to debate either the merits or demerits, but I want to point out that the parliameptary situation, if this amendment is not proper, puts those Of US who ;support an alternate way in the position of having to vote on public financing withoutup aand full down opportmlity to debate an- has expired. The PRESIDING OFFICF. R. All time on the amendment haying expired or been yielded back, and the y,eas and nays having been ordered, the question is on agreeing to the amendment of the Senator from Tennessee. The ci[erk will call the roll. other way, which come.,; closer to correctlng the problems of campaign spending. Mr. BAKEI_ Mr. Pre,rldent, I am grateful for the remarks of the Senator from Delaware. I am prepared at this time to yield back the &emainder of my time. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield myself 2 minutes for an observation. The legislative, clerk called the roll. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. I_ULBRIGHT), the Senator from Iowa (Mr. HU(_HES), the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. LONa), the Senator frora Texas (Mr. BENTSEN), and the Senator from Indiana (Mr. HA_r) are necessarily absent, I further announce that the Senator S 529:1 from Kentucky (Mr.._UDDLESTON) iS absent on official business. Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the Senator from Utah (Mr. BENNETT) lis necessarily absent. I also announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. W:[.LI^M L. ScoTT) is absent on official business. The :result was armouneed--yeas 34, nays 58. as follows: [No. 119 Leg.] YEAS---34 Aiken Dole Hollings Allen Eg)minick Hruska Baker Eastland McClellan Bartlett Erviu McClure Beall Fannin N_Xnn Bellmon Fong Roth Brock Goldwater Sparkman Buckley Grimn Stennis Byrd, Gurney Talmadge Harry L_.,Jr. Hansen Thurmond cotton Hatl_.eld Tower curtis Helms NAYS.--58 Abourezk Hulr_phrey Pastore Bayh Inouye Pearson Bible Jackson Pet1 Biden Javits Percy Brooke Johnstort Proxrnlre Burdick Kennedy Randolph Byrd, Robert C. Mansfield Magnuson Ribicoff Cannon Schwelker case Mathias Scott, Hugh Chnes McGee Stafford Church McGovern Stevens Clark McIntyre Stevenson cook M'etcalf Symington Cranston . Metzenbaurn Taft Domenici Mondale Tunney Eagieton Montoya Weicker Gravel Moss Williams Hart Muskie Young Haskell Nelson Hathaws,y Packwood NOT VOq'ING---8 Bennett Hartke Long Bentsen Huddleslon Scott, Fulbright Hughes Wtlllam L. So Mr. BAKER'S amendment (No. 1134) was rejected. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I mow_ to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was rejected. Mr. N[ANSFIEI_. I move to lay thai: motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. de ORDER FOR AD 16 A.M. ' Mr. I__ANSFIEL unaninwus eonser; ate completes its in adjournmerlt o'clock tomorro_ The Pi_F, SIDIN objection, it is so o _ rOURNMENT LENTIL 'OMORROW ). Mr. President, I ask that when the SenJsiness today, it stand _i;il the hour of 10 _orning. _ OFFICER. Without dexed. _ LEGISLA'Iq : PROGRAM Mr. 1QIANSFI]/3 D. Mr. President, a number of State _, including Indiana, Iowa, Tennessee, Alabama, Kentucky, and two or three o hers---especially Ken-. tucky---have beer hit rather hard by tornadoes, winds orms, and the lfi_e within the past 2_. to 36 hours. It is imperatiw,, in my judgment, tlrat Senators from t_ _se States return to their States to ass _ss the damage, to see what can be done _o alleviate the situa-. tion, and in that manner to carry out their responsibilit _s. Therefore, after discussing the matter 391 S 5292' CONGRESSIONAL RECORI) --- SEN.fi/rE April 4, 19 74 shed Republican leader, the joint has decided that while we will be tile pending business tomorrow, there be no votes tomorrow, and that votes which may arise will be earr'ied ' until Monday. Mr. HUGH Mr. President, if the majority leader will yield, I think it essential that Senators from tlhe States have the opportunity to home for the reasons cited, and the further reason that they can estimate the role of the Feders:l in applying such legislation we have already enacted, whettler additional legislaion, or what may do to assist in the relief ithose people who have mediat_ hearings o_ if he requests it, we will hold tull (_xr mitte. _ hearings. In o_her words, the _ pprol)riations Cornr_dttee is ready 1_ a( ;. All we are awaiting is adequate and nec ssary information tc i_fform us, so that w, can act intelligently and effectively, Mr. HUGH SCO Yr. i_[r. President, I a:m infomed that he Subcommittee oJ' the Senate Public _rork:; Committee is considering cornpre[ [ensive disaster relief legislation much o: which involves the consolidation--I kn _w we have other information on that- -of e:dsting disaster relief legislation. _ le subcommittee, a_,; I understand il; fr, m th,_ distinguished Senator from Wesl Vh-g: nia (Mr. RANDOLPH), Consist'; of ;enab)r BVRDXCKand Mr. MANSFIELI. _;hank the Senator BAXER) for yieldinf Mr. t;AKER. I th majority and minm mg out this schedul who are affected u the trip. suffered effects of needed, the tornado damage; from and ff they can best advise Moreover, can advise the Execufive, as we did the case of Hurricane Agnes, where ; Federal Govermnent moved both on _legislative and executire sides very indeed. For example, mobile and other equipmerit may be promptly needed, and Senators, of their peopie back home needed there, lVlr. I would agree with what the Republican leader has just To reiterate, there will be no votes If there are any votes, they be carried over until Monday, and no will occur before the hour of 3:30 .m. on Monday, which should give the Members a reasonable to assess the damage and to come to own'conclusions as to what should done. It is the of the leadership to lay down a motion tomorrow. It is the hope of leadership that the Senate will a vote will occur on the cloture which will be laid down tomorrow 4 o'clock, on Tuesday afternoon next. That is about it think. Mr. Mr. President, will the Senator yield just a moment? Mr. Mr. This has been, apparently, a serious/Jaing that we estimated. I do think legislation I will say to the Senator gets down to the question appropriations and money. I see, the chairman of the comrz,d_tee I would think that we might to our colleagues that we would for maybe somespecial on Monday to dis- ranking Ftepubl:ica tBAKEL Member, Senator D O_EN:CCLSenator also has beer active in this regar [, I a_a informed. Mr. MANSFIELD. [ might say that they will look at the dis ressed areas on Friday, Saturday, anc Sunday if need be a_adpa_ of Monda_ Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, reserving the right to obji_t- -and I shall not obj_f?---I wish to exI tess my sincere and deep thanks to th: distinguished majority leader and t Le distingoAshed minority leader for u )rking out this plan that will enab]e S nato_s to return t¢, their home States ld be with their peop;te--the people, tl a y re_rese:at here Ir this body--4iuring 2eir time of tragedy and travail. Certainly, I couh do nc.thing less than to agree with the d _ting_ished majority leader's request th_; the cloture vote be Set, I believe the ] mjority leader said, for 4:30?--for 4 o'cl _k? Mr. MANS_ELE Fotu' o'clock. Mr. tkLLEN. _ou_ o'clock. Certainly I would not object, bi t I wish to commend ttxe distinguished aajon.ty leader and the distinguished ninority leader for working out this _n that will accommodate Senators. It is verr kind of them. Mr. MANSFIELE I thank the Senator from Alabama cry much. objection, _' ' _ ORDEtt FOR AD_ )LrRlVMENT FROM TOMORROW T( MONDAY NEXT Mr. MANSFIELD Mr. President, I ask _nanimous corment that, when the Senate completes its Eusine_,s to:morrow, it stand in adjommm_ mt ur.til ti_e hour o_ 12 o'clock noon on YIondaY next. The PRESI_DIB ._ Ok_ICEi_ (Mr. I_.[CCLURE). Withe objection, it is SO ordered, ---_'-- A_ENDI_EINYT NO. llaS Mr. ]!_AKER. Mr. President, I .call up :myamendmentNo.1135arid ask that it be stated. The PRESIDING OFfiCER. The _trnendizient will be stated. The :tssistant legislative clerk read as follows: s. 3o44 Or_ page 3, line 6, strike out "FEDERAL" _mdinsert in lieu thereof "PRESIDENTIAL". ()r_ p_,,ge4, line 6, strike out the comma and ln_rt in lieu thereof a semicolon. on page 4, beginning with line 7, strike out i;h_yugh ·line 12. CUSSthe matter appropriations may be made. Mr. That is a good idea and include it in supplemental now before us. Mr . In the supplemental now before us, But I do not think that legislation l_/r. Mr. President, og course, any will have to originate in the of Represent, atires. I think want to wait until Senators ret-urn f their respective States and bring · some concrete info_qmation as need. H that is done, why the the Senator from can under hold ira- ORDER FOR AD. DUI{I_!MENT FROM MONDAY NEX'I ^_r.'_RIL 8, 1974, TO TUESDAY, ._PR __ Mr. MANS_I;ELI. Mr. ]?resident, I ask unanimous con,;eni that, when the Senate completes its )usiness o:n Monday next, il; stand in _ fijournment until 12 o'clock noon on T_ _sday, April 9, 1974. The PRESIDFN£ OFF:[CER. Without objection, it is .,;c,o dered Mr. MANSFIF. L_ Mr. President, I also ask unanimous co _sent that the time for the 1-hour debi _e on the cloture motion begin at 3 p.m. ion Tuesday next. The PRESID OFFICER. Without objection, it is [FN£ ,_o )rdered. ()r_ page 4, line 13, strike out "(5)" and in._rt in li:;u thereof "(4) ". on page 4, line 17, strike out "(6)" and in_ -_rt in lieu thereof "(5)% on pa[;e 5, line 6, strike out "any".' on pvgestrike 5, line 21, lmm_._iately before 'F_._tera]", out "a". On page 7, line 3, strike out "(1)". on page 7, beginning with "that--" on _i_ 5, .'_.trike out through lln_ _ on page 8 _mi insert La lieu thereof "that he is seek:_ngnomination election to the office of 2resident and heforand his authorized cornmittees have received contributions for his campaign throughout the United States in a _otal amount in excess of $250,000.". ()r_ page 9, line 6, after the semicolon, ins_rt on"and". pai;e 9, strike out lines _and B and in- 392 SOLAR [Mr. MANSFIELD unanimous consent _;ension of 30 days to file ti:lc report on t:he committees ha oo:mple_:e their work The [PRESIDING Mr. President, I rom Tennessee (Mr. us this time. ak the distinguished ty leaders for work_so that those of us 11 be able to make _NERGY Mr. President, I ask ;hat there be an ex'rom April 12, 1974, [.R. 11864, to permit lng jurisdiction to on the bill. DFFICER. Without it is so or{ _ed. FEDli',RAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1974 The ,'!_enate continued with the eonsideration of the bill (S. 3044) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing of primary and general election campaigns for Federal ele::tive office, and to amend certain oti_er I_rovisions of law relating to the financhxg and conduct of such campaigns. _Mr. ERVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the distlnt_ished Senator from Termessee (Mr. BAKER) may yield to me so that I may proceed for 5 minutes, with' the under.,;tanding that by so doing the Senator !!rom Tennessee will not lose his right to the fioor. Mr. 1!lAKER. Mr. President, I will be ,qsxl to do that but may I ask my distingu_ished colleague from North Carolina to permit me to lay down my amend:ment and ask for the yeas and nays while there are still a sufficient number of Senators in the Chamber? Mr. ERVIN. Of course. April 4, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL sent in lieu thereof the following: "(2) no co_atrlbution from", On page 0, beginning with "and" on line 13, strike out throughline 10. On page 10, beginning with "(1)--" on line 3, strike out through line 16 and insert in lieu thereof the following: "(1), no eontribution from any person shall be taken into account to the extent that it exceeds $250 when added to the amount of all other contributions made by that person to or for the benefit of that candidate for his primary election.", On page 13, beginning with line 16, strike out through line 18 on page 14 and insert in lieu thereof the following: '*SEc. 504. (a) (1) Except to the extent that such amounts are changed under subsection (f) (2), no candidate may make expenditures :in any State in which he is a candidate in a primary election in exCess of the greater of-"(A) 20 cents multiplied bY the voting age population (as certified under subsection (g)) of the State in which such election iS held, or \ "(B) $250,000.". On page 14, line 19, strike out "(B)" and Insert in lieu thereof "(2)" and strike out "silbparagraph" and insert in lieu thereof "paragraph". O n page 14, line 20, strike out "(A)" and insert in lieu thereof " (1)2'. On page 15, line 8, beginning with "the greater of--", strike out through line 17 and inSert in lieu thereof "i5 cents multiplied by the voting age population (as certified under subsection (g).) Of the United States.". On page. 18, beginning with line 10, strike out through line 20, On page 10, line 11, strike out "Federal" and inSert in lieu thereof "Presidential." On- page 25, between lines 4 and 5, insert the following: "L%TCREASE IN TAXCREDIT "SEc. 102. (a) Section 41 of tf_e Internal Revenue COdeof 10'54(relating to contrlbu" tions to candidates for_ public office) is amended by-"(1) striki ng out 'one-half of' in sUbsectlon (a) and inserting in lieu thereof 'the sum of'. "(2)' amending Section 41(b).(1) of such Code (relating to maximum credit for contrlbutio ns to candidates for public office) to read as follows: ' "'(1) MAXIMUM CREDrr_The cr.edit allowed by subsection (a) for a taxable year shall not exceed $50 ($100 in the case of a Joint return under sectlgn 6013).' "(b) The amendments made r_y this sectton apply with respect to any political contrlbution the payment of which is made after December 31, 1073. "REPEAL OF PRESENT PRESED.FAKTTIAL ELECTION F_TANC_qG LAW "s'rc. 103. (a_ Subtitle H of the Internal Revenue Code of 105_ (relating to financing of · Presidential election campaigns) is repealed, "(b) The amendment made by this section applies to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1973." On page 26, lines 2 and 3, strike out _'under section 504 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, or". On page 71, beginning with line 20, strike out through line 2 on page 73 and insert in lieu thereof the following: "(a) (1) Except to the extent that such amounts are changed under subsection (f) (2), no candidate (other than a. candidate for nomination for election to the office of President) may make expenditures in eonnectlon with his primary election campaign In excess of the greater of-"(A) 10 cents multiplied by the voting age population (az certified under subsection (g)) of the geographical area in which the election for such nomination is held, or "(B) (*) $12_,000, iX l_e Federal office 7 B RI. CO_,.D -- SENATE S 5293 sought is that of Senator, or ]_epresentati_e date affiliated with that party which is not in from a S_ate which is entitie(I to only one excess of the limitations contained in subRepresentative, or section (i), is not con, sidereal to be an ex"(ii) $90,000, if the Federal office sought penditure made on behalf of that candidate. is that of Representative from ELState which "(f) UL) For purposes of paragraph (2)-Is entitled to more than one Reprpsentative. "(A) 'price Index' means the average over "(2) (A) No candidate for nomination for a calendar year of thE; Consumer Price Inelection to the office of PresidE, at may make dex (all items--United States city average) expenditures in any State in ,;_hich he is a published montilly by the Bureau of Labor candidate in a primary electior_ in excess of Statistics, and two ':lme_ the amount which a candidate for "(B) "base period' means the calendar year nominatii_n for election to the office of Sen1973. ator from that State (or for n. smination for "(2) At the be_,inning of each calend, ar election to the office of Delegate in the case year (conunencing in 1975), as necessary of the District of Columbia, t.lae Virgin Isdata become available from 'the Bureau of lands, or Guam, or to the office of Resident Labor c_;tatistics of the Department of LaCommissioner in the case of Puerto Rico) bor, the Secretary of Labor shall certify to may expend in that StatA_ tn connection with the Federal Election Commission and pubhis primary election campaigrL, lish in the Federal Register the percentage "(B) NotWithstanding the provisions of difference between thc price index for the subparagraph (A), no such c.:mdidate may twelve months preceding, the beginning of make expenditures throughout the United such calendar year and the price index for States in connection with his campaign for the base period. Each amount determined that nomination in excess o1' an amount under subsections (a) and (b) shall be equal to 10 cents multiplied ':Jy tl_e voting changed by such percentage difference. ]_ach age population of the UniterS[ States. For amount so changed shall be the amount in purposes of this subparagra]:,h, the term effect for such calendar year. 'United States' means the several States of "(g)' During the first week of January 19'15, the United States, the District of Columbia, and every subsequent year, {he Secretary of and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Oommerce shall certify to the Federal ElecGuam, and the Virgin Islands and any area tion Co_unia_ion and publish in the Federal from which a delegate to the national nomiRegister an estimate of the voting age popuhating convention of a political party is latlon of the United States, of each State, selected. and of :each congressional district as of the "(b) ExCept to the exterLt that _uch first day of July next preceding the date of amounts are changed under ._ubsection (f) certification. The tel_ 'voting age popnia(2), no candidate may make erpenditures in tion' means resident population, eighteen connection with his general _;lectlon camyears of age or older. paign in excess of the greater of-"(h) Upon reci_iving the cert4fication of 12ae "(1 ) 15 cents multiplie d by the voting age Secretary of Commerce and of the Secrets.ry population (as certifie_l nnd,r subsection of Labor, the Federal Election Commission (g)) of the geographical area in which the shall pc_blish in the Federal Register the apelection is held, or plic_ble expenditure limitations in effect for "(2) (A) $175,000, if the Fe:leral office is the calendar year for the United States, and that of Senator, or Represen':ative from a for each State and congressional district unState which is entitled to only ime Represender this section." tative, or On page 73, line 3, strike out "(b)" and "(B) $90,000, if the-Federal office sought insert In lieu thereof "(i)" is that of Representatiw_ from _ State which On page 73, line 24, strike out "Bection 504", is entitled to more than one B,epresentative. and insert in lieu thereof "subsection (g); "(c) No candidate who is u:aopposed in a and". primary or general election ca:rapalgn .in exOn page 74, strike out lines 1 and 2. eess of 10 percent of the limit;ation in subOn page 74, line 6, strike out "that Act" section (a) or (b). and insert' in lieu thereof "the Federal Elec"(d) The Federal Election Commission tion Campaign Act of 1971". shall prescribe regulations under which any On page 74, linE; 8, strike out "(c)" and expenditure by a candidate for nomination insert irL lieuthereof"(J)". for election to the office of Pre_tdent for uSe On page 74, linE; 10, strike out "(a) (4)" in two or more States shall be attributed to and insert in lieu thereof ,,(e) (3)". such candidate's expenditure limitation in On page 75, line 6, strike out "(a) (5)" and each s_%ch State, based on the voting age insert in lieu thereof "(d)". population in such state whic]_ can reasonOn pnge 75, line 11, strike out "(a) (4)" and ably be expecte d to be influenced by such insert in lieu thereof "(e) (3) ' expenditure. Mr BAKER. Mr. President, I ask for "(e) (I) Expenditures made on behalf of the yeas and nays on my amendment. any candidate' are, for the purposes of this The yeas and nays were ordered. section, consideYed to bi; made by such canMr. BAKER. Mr. President, I am happy didate. "(2) Expenditures made by or on behalf to yield 5 minutes to the Senator from of any candidate for the office of Vice PresNorth Carolina (Mr. ERVXN). ident, of the United States are: for the purA_ENDiVXENTNO. 1068 poses of this section, considered to be made Mr. F.RVIN. Mi'. president, I ask unanby the candidate for the offic_ of President of the United States with whc,m he is runimous consent that I may call up my nlng. amendment No. 1068, which can be dLs"(3) For purposes of this .,;ubsection, an posed of in less than 5 minutes. expenditure is made on behalf of a candiThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Witho ut date, including a Vlce-Presldenl;ial candidate, objection, it i_ so ordered. if it is made by-Mr. ERVIN. i_r. President, I call 'up "(A) an authorized committee or any other my amendment No. 1068 and ask that it agent of the candidate for the purPoses of be stated. making any expenditure, or "(B) any person authorizedL or requested The PRESIDING OFFICER. The by the candidate, an authorl::ed committee amendment will be stated. of the candidate, or an agent of the candlThe assistant legislative clerk prodate to make the expend:lture, ceeded to read the _mendment. "(4) For purposes of this ,._sction an expenditure made by the nation,al committee Mr. ERVIN. Mx'. President, I ask unaniof a political party, or by the i!;tate commitmOllS consent that further reading of the tee of a political party, in coanection with amenc_ment be dispensed with. the general election campalB_:L of a candlThe PIi_ES_IN(_ OFFICER. Wlthoul; 393 g 5294 CO:NGRESSIONAL objection, it is so ordered; and, without objection, the amendment will be printed in the RECORm The text of the amendment (No. 1068) is as follows: S. 3044 On page 3, beginning with lime j, strike out through line 4 on page 25. On page 2,6, lines 2 and 3, strike out "under section 504 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, or". On page _, lines 3, 4, and 5. strike out "A candidate shall deposit any payment received by him under section 506 of this Act in the aCcount n_aintained by his central campaign committee.". On page 63, lines 14 and 15, Strike out "(after application of section 507(b) (1) of thisthe ACt)". On page 64, line 9, strike out ", title V,". page OUtOnthrough lieu thereof 71,linebeginning 2 on pagewith 73 line and the following: 20, insertstrikein percent of the RECO1;'D -- SE NATE 1imitation ill subsection (a) :ning. "(3) For purposes of this subsection, un _xpenditure is made on beLalf of a candidate, .including a Vice Presidential c_mdtdate, ff it IS made by-"(A) an authorized committee or arLy other agent of lhe candidate for the purp_:e nectlon witll his primary election campaign of making any expenditure, or In excess of the greater of-"(B) any person authol lzed or request_d "(A) 10 cents multiplied by the voting age by the candida-re, an authorized eonunitb!_e population certified under in subsection of the camdidate or an ager.t of the candidal:_e (g)) of the (as geographical area which the election for such nomination is held, or _ make the expenditure, "(B) (i) $125,000, if the Federal office "(4) For purposes of tLts section an e:.::sought is that of Senator, or Represemtative pendtture made by the national committee of a political party, or by th,_ State committA!_e frOmRepresentative,a State whiChor is entitled to only one of a political party, in connection with the "(ii) $90,000,'-if the Federal office sought general election campalg_t of a candida[:_ is that of Representative from a State which affiliated with that party _'hich is not in e:,:tess of the limitations cor.taln(_ In subsec_ is ".(2) entitled(A) to more than one Representative. tion (i), is not :onsidered to b_ an e_cpend:iNo candidate for nomination for lure made on behalf of that candidate. election to t_e office of President may make · exPendlture_ tn any State in which he is a "(f) (1) For purposes of par:_graph (2) candidate in a primary election in excess of "(A) 'price index' mear_, the average over two times the amount which a candidate for a calendar year.of the Con;umer Price Index nomination :for election to the office of SeaR- · :all items--United States city average) pul:,.for frgm the State (or for nomination for ]ished monthly by the Bureau ofLabor St_,,election to the office of Delegate in the case _;istlcs, and "(B) 'base period' means the calendar ye.'_:¢ of the District of Columbia, the Virgin Is1973. lands, or _uam, or tO the office of Resident Commissioner in _he case of Puerto Rico) "(2) At the beginning of e:_ch calendsj make States that equal with year data of may Labor .Statistics of the Department of Labo:_', the Secretary of Labor shall o_rtify to t_e ]_deral Election Commission and publish In the Federal .theRegister percentage i)stween price theindex for thedifference twelve expenditures the United in connection in throughout wi.th nomination excess his of campaign an amountfor to 10 cents multiplied by the voting age population of the United States. For purposeS, united States'°f thi smeanssub_oaragraph,the several thestatestermof the United States, the Distrlct of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, amd the Virgin Islands and any area from which a delegate to the national nominating convention of a political party is selected. "(b) ExcePt to the extent that such amounts are charged under subsection (f) (2), no candidate may make expenditures in connection with his general election campalg_ in excess of the greater of-"('1) 15 cents(as ,multiplied by the subsection voting age population certified under (g)) of _he geographical area in which the election is held, or . "(2)(A) $175,000, if the Federal office sought is that of Senator, or Representative from. a State which ts entitled to only one Representative, or "(B) $90,000, If the Federal office sought is thatof a Representative from a State which is e_tttled to more than one Repre,sentative. "_c) primary dilutes geaR-al 394 NO _ndidate who is unopposed in a or g_ election may make ex-pen1_ connection with his primary or electlen campaign in excess of 10 4, 19 74 On [)age 74, lime 6, strike out "that Act" (b). and ii: sert in lieu thereof "the Federal Elec"(d) _ne Federal Ele.'tion Commission tion Campaign Act of 1971". shall prescribe regulations, under which a:_:_y' On page 74, line 8, strike out "(c)" amd ,expenditure by a candidate for nominath::m insert in lieu thereof "(J)". for election to '_he office o:! President for use On page 74, line 10, strike out "(a) (4)" In two or mor_ States shall '0e attrlbut_d and ix:,sert in lieu thereof "'e) (3)'. to such candidate's expenditure limitation in On il)age 75, lime 6, strike out "(a) (5)" and ,_ach such State, based arkman Stafford Stevens Stevenson S.vmlngton T!_ft T_lnney Muskle Wslcker Nelson _'tlliams Pastors Yc}ung NOT VOTIlqG_9 Hartke Lang Huddlest0n S_:ott, Hughes WUliamL. Bennet_ Bentsen case Futbright So Mr. BAKER'S amendmen'_ (No. 1135) was rejected, Mr. STEVENSON. Mr. President, I have joined today in submitting three amendments to S. 3044 wi th Senators TAFT and DOMENICI which wcmld authorize partial, but substantial, public financink of Federal general elections and eliminate from the bfil pub:tic financing of congressional primaries, The first amendment is directed at Federal general elections. In place of the 100-percent public financing provided for major party candidates, our amend[nent provides for not less than 25 percent nor more than 50 percent public financing for such candidates.'Major party candidate_ would become eligible I'or a 25-percent formula grant upon nomination. They could also qualify for up to an additional 25 percent in Federal matching payments against small contributions, but no candidate could receive Federal payments totaling more than 50 percent of the applicable campaign expenditure limit. It is probable that ali major party general election candidates for Federal office could qualify for 50-p_;rcent public financing. It is also probable that the amounts :"checked off" by taxpayers would more than equal the cost to the Treasury over the 4-year election cycle of 50-percent public financing for the Federal general election c_mpaigns, The small contributions eligible for matching are the same as those which ¢he committee bill applies to primary elections, that is, $250 in Presidential campaigns and $100 in congressional campaigns. The relative size of the maximum subsidy available to minor party candidates in general elections is the same as in the committee b:_ll, This amendment also lowers the contribution limit for congressional general elections, now at $3J)00 for individuals and $6,000 for political cc,mmittees ,to $1,000 for all donors. The contribution limits for Primaries and Presidentialgeneral elections are not changed, This amendment endeavors to strike a fair and sensible balance between a host of competing consideratiorts, including the need to replace big money with unquestionably clean money, the need to encourage citizens to make.--and candldates to seek---small contx:tbutions, the S 5295 need to assure the less well-known can.dldate enough start-up funds to mount all effective campaign, and the need to nlinilniz_ the cost to the Treasury. The second amendment combines all Of the features of the first amendment with provision of that congressional would eliminate public a J_'lancing primaries. While I I_lieve that a good case can be made principle that topublic funds shouldfor bethemade a_/ailable ehcourage greater and more equitable competition atin the prenomination stage, particularly connection with Presidehtial elections, I am convinced that the risks areprimaries so great and in regard to congressional experience so slight that there exists a substantial possibility the extension primaries of public financing that to congressional at this time would do more'harm than good. I prefer not to _Jn what I regard as a serious risk of weakening the political system :in the name of reform. Among the problems I see in public financing of congressional primaries are the following: First, it is not at all clear that a candidate's ability to raise the threshold amount is a good measure o! his popularity or legitimacy. It may merely measure the sophistication of his fund-raising operation, or it may be a reflection of the amounts of big money he or she was able to raise early. Second, the matching system magnifies the amounts by which one prima_ candidate is able to outspend another. Assume, for example, that in a SenatoriaI primary in a State where the total contribution limit is $1.5 'mffiion there are two candidates, one who has raised $400,000 and one who has raised $700,-. 000. Without matching the second can-. didate can outspend rite first by $300,000. If all the funds raised by both candi-. dates are eligible for matching, the first candidate will have a total of $800,000; the second, $1.4 million. The result is that the first candidate is outspent by $600,000 instead of $300,000. It is not a_ all clear that such a system promotes more equitable competition between primary contenders; it may web have the opposite effect. Third, matching may encourage a pro-Uferation of primary candidacies, some insincere, all of which will be more heavily funded. The cumulative effect could well_b_ heightened public confu.. sion and irritation, lower turnouts, less well-informed decisions in the voting booth, and the nomination of candidates unrepresentative of the party as a whole, The result could be a weakening of the two-party system. By no means does this exhaust the doubts about public financing of primaries on a matching basis. I do not 'contend'that the prenomination stage of the electoral process is perfect, or that it is hmpossible to design a system of public financing which will improve that stage. I do maintain that the criticisms of public financing of congressional primaries are serious enough-and the risks of irreversible damage great enough--that the issue is best left for another day, a day when, through the experi_mce with public _mncing in gerteral elections, we will be in a better p_dtion to act constructively. 395 S 5296 COi_IGRESSION.AL We have also joined in introducing a third amendment which does not contaln the partial public financing scheme and would simply eliminate public financing o;Fcongressional primaries, I beliew; that these amendments could substantially improve S. 3044. They would elinfmate the corruptlve influence of large contribution, but not the healthy influence of small contributions by citizens seeking a voice ltl their Government. Indeed, to go that far, as does S. 3044, raises doubts about its constitutionality, Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order to order the ;yeas and nays on my amendmerit No. 1152 at any time, which vote will not occur until Monday. The PR_BSIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered, Mr. CL_.LRK, Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on my amendment No_ 1152. The PI_,,'SIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a sufficient second. The yeas and nays are ordered, Mr. BAKER, Mr, President, a parliamentary inquiry. The PP_IDING OFFICER. The 8ehator will state it. Mr. BAKER. Do I understand the order included an order for the vote to occur o:n Monda:_? The PI_,:SIDING OFFICER. No, it did riot. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. He just stated that the vote would OCCur on MOllday. Mr. BAKER. I thank the Chair and the Senator fro TM West Virginia. . AMENDMENT _ _r' _ENERAL EDUCATION PROVISI( _S AC T--_CON_RENCE P,_PORT Mr. PELL, Mr. ! resident, I submit a rep_-t of the eorr_ _ittee of conference on H.R, _2'7.53, and sk for its immediate consideration. The PRI_IDINC OFFICER. The reportThewill _ statedle_ ] ;lative y title. clerk read as assistant follows: The ce_mittee conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Homes on amendment the amendment of the Se of ate the toHouse the billto(H.P, the 12253) to amend th_ General Education Provisions Act to pre ride that funds appropriated for apPli ,_ble programs for fiscal year 1974 shi 1 remain available during the ,,mcceedin fiscal year and that such funds for fisca rear 1973 shall remain available durh ; fiscal years 1974 and 1975, havingmet after fulland free conference, have ag] _ to recommend and do recommend o their respective Houses thhl report, sJ ned by a majority of the conferees, The PRESIDING ,Fi_ICER. Is there objection rel_rt? to the consi eration of the conference There being no ob; _tion, the Senate proceeded to conside_ (The co_fference re the House proceedint SXO_a, RZC0a_ Of Apr H2434-2435.) Mr. PELL. Mr. Pres to report to the Senal, ence was amiable, am Senate amendments _ 396 the _rt of 2, report, is printed in the CONG_S1974, at pages tent, I am pleased that the conferthe theory of the bhe House_passed RECORD -- SENATE A_'l 4, 1974 bill was filed report goes through the exact: amen_i-, ments point by Suffice it to say whic;h has aroused the _zterest, the cla:rifieation for zed loans under t_:m guaranteed lo_,n program, h_i_ been adopted in following manner, Youngsters from with an adjusted gross ' of tess than $15,0t)0 will be eligible for! a subsidized loan of $2,000 without a analysis. The yearly loan a ill ri;main at the $2,500 level, and sam,; youngsters could get an $500 subsidiz_M loan ff they show that need c_m,n only pertain to th, ;50( in excess of the $2,000. Students _. family with'_m adjusted gross of $15,000 aI:Ld above will still a subsidized loan of up to ,_2,50_ mush show need, To :my mind, th_ eozfference has done is to make what we in the Senate thought we adopted ii1 ti:lc 1972 Education It w_Ls then, and still is, cot tentlon that tm.der the language ,vas no authorit;y :for the of Health, Educalion, _md Well'are require a needs te_t .[rom student, s from with an aii[- prhm_ry and general election caml_J_ns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating t;o the financing and conduct of such campaigns. Mr. TALMADGE. Mr. President, I send t;o tl_ desk an amendment and ask that it be stated. The PRESIDING O'._TICER. The amen:hnent Will be stated, The assistant legislative clerk prOeeeded to read the amendment. Mr. TALMAIX_E. Mr. President, ! ask tmanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OPF_. Without objection,' it is So ordered; and, without object,ion, the amendment will be printed in the RECOam Th(_ amendment o lowing new subsection: gency type. _ (b) 1_o.person shall cause to bO published Mr. JAVIT_I. Mr. the cot.:a fals_,_ and defamatory s_tement _about ference report; h as signed by all tlae character or professional ability of a _tonferees on ' Is that correct ? candldi_te for Fe_leral-ofitce- with respect to Mr. PELL- _._at: cozrect, the qualifications of that that o:_Sceif such person knowscandidate that suchforstateMr: JAVrI_. Mr , the mino_ .... ment i!_false. Violation Of _'_vlste_a_ of :try, ther_ore, it to the Sella_!!:, t_ais su_sectlon is a mlsdemean_ pu_h_le as Mr. doe_P_T,T.. the m_ority not exceed to exceed $1,0_, tmpr_l_r. I move thf_ by menta lbi_e _ot to six months, or both. _ adoption of the rel_ort. On l_,age 71, line 16, strike out "004." and The motion was to. i_ert tn lieu thereof "305.% Mr. JAVITS. Mr Pr,_iden¢, I m0_e Mr. TALMADGE, Mr. President, this to reconsider the by wk[ch the mc .... m._en_ment is de_ned to _ the _on was agre_,-d to. situation that we observed during the Mr. P_t,!. I lay flint motio:¢, _rator_ate hearings, where people go _m the table_ around..the country Issuing def_ The motion agree¢! to, to that arethem knowingly false and sending tln-_ghm_ the countr:_. We have seen several _[-IENiq, Y AARON :_Oi_.[_RUN NCI,,, of f_-a'b. RUTH A man named Segretti was tfired to perfor, m ,dirty tricks and dh-fy tricks Mr. T_DGE. } tr. President, I a_a alone. Two of our C,olleague_ in the Senvery proud to notify _he Se<_to that _::_ ate we_ victimized by that practice. l_day's 1974 basebal s,_Oh's oisent_ii._' The cutting edge of this amendment game between the fi ,l_ata :Braves and state_: Cinchmati Reds, He: _'y "H_mk' .&arort (b) _ro person shall cause 't_/be published lilt his 714th home r_ .--_ying the record a false _ defamatory _tatement about the of Babe Ruth, charac_;r o_ professional ability of a c_z_lThis is indeed a: _ome_tous day /a::t date _r Federal omce with re_ect to; the baseball history, and I ,;xtond myper q_talificationsofthatcandid_tef_rt, hatofficeis ff such person knows that such statement ,,_)nal Congrab_latior_ to Haa_k Aaron false. V!olation of She provisions o£ this sub'. _md the Atlanta Bray s. It is my under., section t_ a misdemeanor punishable by a fine standing tha_ Aaron t _a_'be benched fo,': not to exceed $1,000, lmp_t not to the other two games n Cincinnati, and exceed six months, ce be4h l: hope that this is tre. As a Georgian, I have discussed this amendment with ]: would like hit the rec bi_;!,, (me--the one h) to _e" al task" Babe Ruth's .... the m:_mager of the bill (Mr. C_mwo_) ordain Atlanta Stadi mt Monday nighl and the assistant maJorlty leader, and I in the Braves' i,'ame_ .... on the _t table was !_)s Angeles. _cuments willfuily undersibandthe arc,endment.theyare prepared Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, to accept will the I?_ED_RAL ELF,CTION CtLM_'AIGN AC? Senator answer a question(m the amendment? AMEKDMENTS 0P 1974 In every ease of this character, it would The Senate continued with the con,,, always be a question of first amendment sideration of the bill (S. 3044) to amendi rights _-md constitutionality. the Federal Election C_.mpalgn Act o_1! Mr. !I?,_M&D_E. Yes. 1971 to provide for public financing o111 Mr. JAVITS. I think it would be-ex- April 4, 19 74 tremely useful. It sounds intelligible sounds right and does not sound CONGRESSIONAL and con- RECORI3, -- SENATE should take sensible steps grossly unethical practices, to stop such trary to the Constitution. Mr. TAIA/AI_E. I may say I checked out the very question the Senator raises with the legislative counsel, and was informed that the first amendment did not protect a person knowingly publishing false and defamatory statements. The · amendment is drawn so it must be willfully and knowingly done. Mr. JAVITS. As I say, it sounded right to me, but I think it would be useful to US ff we could get the legislative drafting services to get a legislative memorandum WhiCh the Senator could ' put into the RECOaD. Mr. TALMADGE. I think I have one in my office. I did not offering the amendment at this anticipate time. In so doing, we must be ever mindful of the first amendment_ whic]l protects free speech. The Constitution says that you have a right to speak your piece. It protects those who, in good 1aith, verbally blast or put on satires or criticisms of political candidates. It protects those Who, in good faith, attack the views of candidates. I know, of no other country on Earth whose citizens _joy such broad freedom, Still, in my' view, there is .'Lpoint at which speech becomes unprotected conduct. Political speech is usually protected, but calculated lies are not. The Supreme Court has recognized this in a wide variety of cases. At this time I would like to make the following statement as a part of my remarks, Mr. President, during, the so-called Watergate Committee's investigation into the 1972 Presidential campaign, what has since come to be known as the "dJxty tricks" escapades came to light, An extreme case involved the actions of one witness who deliberately put together a false and malicious letter accusing two prominent candidates of deviancy. Other campaign workers prepared and circulated brochures and letters grossly misrepresenting prior remarks of opposition candidates. Major candidates became the targets of calculated halftruths and complete falsehoods, American politics has always been rough and tUmble. Campaigns are often highly partisan and, in many ways, this is a healthy sign of a free society. Certainly, none of US advocates _ one-party system, or even a system where the majar parties closely resemble one another, Most people want and all of us are ehtitled to .hear both sides of the issues, But I do not think that people ought to be misled'by fraud and deception. My amendment attempts to clarify just where that point is in Federal political campaigns. It makes ii; ufilawful to knowingly and willfully- prepare or send out clearly false and defamatory information about recognized candidates for elected Federal office. For example, my amendment makes it unlawful to write a letter to a newspaper f_lsely stating that a candidate has been _a a mental institution when the letter writer knows this assertion is not true: _ On the other hand, this statute does not extend to the good faith preparation or distribution of materia:i reflecting the author's views, no matter how controversiai they might bi.'. H a man honestly disagrees with a candidi_te or that candidate's positions, 1_._can write what he will, so long as he does not send o_lt what he either knows is or has deliberately and maliciously arranged so as to be defamatory and untrue. If Congressional Candidate X constantly socializes with corporate executives, a critic could print an advertisement a picture of X shaking hands with these coxporate officials and caption it "Do You Want Fat Cats Running the Country?" But it would be-unlawful for that advertisement to say "X" Accepts Big Contribution from Fat Cats" if that was known by the author to be untrue. Tricks and pranks in political life have been with us since the early days of our Republic, Americans enjoy humor, and humor has a legitimate place in the giveand-take of po!itical campaigns. So does criticism. If a candidate or party has a weak point; ! agree that other candidates _hould be able to lampoon or criticize it. Democrats have done it to Republicans, and Republicans have done it to Democrats. Anyone who stands for election realizes that you have to take the heat, or else you should get out of the kitchen, Mr. President, the right to vote is sacred. ! do not ever want to see the election process in our country subverted. There is nO need and there is no place for outright lying in campaigns, especially when such lies carry strong and sensational charges. The law should be strengthened to deter and, if necessary, to punish those who would use the calculated falsehood to take unjust ad_ vantage of the voting public, For this purpose, I am proposing an amendment which makes it a Federal Mr. President, actual[ knowledge and deliberate lying are the keys to this crime, It does not extend to reckle_ or negligent corgiuct, which is alr_eady adequately covered by.the libel and slander laws. It does not extend to the press' innocently printing a .,_purious or false letter to the editor. It does nat make it unlawful for the media to transmit a candidate's speech, even though that speech might misrepresent the facts or be laden with inaccuracies. It is a carefully drafted proposal which permits the free Ilow of ideas in the political m:_rketplace. It forbids outright lying and _intentional misrepresentations, In Garrison versus I_)uisiana, the Su~ preme Court stated that: "The use of calculated falsehood, however, would put a different cast on the constitutlonal questlon._ Although hones'_ utterance, even if inaccurate, may further the fruitful - exercise of the right of free spot,ch, It does crime to prepare or otherwise particlnot follow th/_t the lie, kn,nwingly and dellbpate lnunserupulous"dirtytricks'aimed erately published about a pul)llc official, at destroying the character of political should enjoy a like immunity. _kt the ttme candtdl_t_6 on untrue grounds. We the lPlrst Amendment was adopte d, as today, S 5297 there were those unscrupulous enough and skillful erLodgh to use the deliberate... falsehood as an effective political tool to unseat the public servant or even topple an adminlstr_.tlon. That Sl_._ch Is used as a tool for politl_al ends does not automatically bring it u:ader the protective mantle of the Constitution. For the ust_ of the known lie as a tool is at once at odds with the premises of democxatic government and with orderly m_,nner in 'which economic, social, the or political cfaange is to be effected. Calculated falsehood falls lnto _hat class of utterances which "are no essential part of any'_xposition of ideas, and are of such Sllgllt social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from 'them is clearly outweighed by the"Hence social interest'In order false and morality .... the knowingly statement do[es] not enjoy constitutional protection." This amendment is not a cure-all for "dirty tr!Lcks." I recognize the right to dissent _nd to speak out. I have no quarrel with those who "shoot from the hip" when they speak. But, there is no right to prepare calculated falsehoods. My amendment shuts t,he door on a tiny minority of people who would sit down 'and deliberately write a defamatory lie concerning candidate eral office. Ia hope it willforbeelected adopted.FedSenatorMr' GR--.yield? Mr. President, will the Mr. TA_E. I yield. Mr. GI._IFFIN. ! support the amendment offered, and I think it is.a valuable conl;ribution, tt goes without saylng and I want t_) establish this--t_at the amendment would apply to a newspaper reporter, a newspaper publisher, just as much as it would apply to someone else who caused to be published matters that were knowingly false. Is that not true? Mr. TALM_E. I think it perhaps would. However, it is aimed at mails shipped in interstate dommerce, and ! think it would. Mr. GRIFFIN. It says, ,"No person shall ca_se to be pub]ished'a false and defamatory statement about the charactor or professional ability of a candidate." Mr. TALMAD(3E. That Is right. Mr. GI._IFFIN. "No person" is an ailinclusive category and I would assume that if there were a newst_per reporter or a newspaper publisller who caused to be published a f:_ise and defamatory statement about a candidate, knowing it to be fal,,e, this amendment would apply to them. I want to i_ sure that is a proper understanding. Mr. T_MAIX}E. I think that is right. Mr. GI_I_FIN. I thank the Senator. Mr. TALMAI_F. I thank my distinguished colleague. Mr. PF.LL. Mr. President, there is a question I would like to raise here, and that is, would this amendment apply to books as well as articles or campaign literature?, Mr. TALMADGE. The amendment reads: No pe_on shall cause to be published a false and defamatory statement about the character or professional ability of a candldate for 'Federal office with respect to the quanfications of that candidate for that office if such person knows that such statemerit ts false. 39'7 S 5298 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE I think it Would. However, it is not a Mr, TALMADGE. I never ask for a common practice to publish books in po.- rollcall when I can get a default judti,> litical cam.pa[gm. What this amendment ment. is aimed at is some fellow circulating Mr. GRIFFIN. I do rLot doubt that. I around the country, creating an instance think it is ur_fortunate tha'_ we do not like we had in New Hampshire, where have a rollcali vote so the Senate could they said Senator MusKm has said express itself overwhel:_ingly in favor something derogatory about some par_ of this amendment; and I am thinking $icular ethnic group in the State of that it might possibly haw. · some side Maine. effect on the Supreme Courl; when they Also, the distinguished Senator from have another case corn: ng up and they Minnesota was victimized in the State of are considering the cor.stitutionality c,f F%rida by the same group. Also, the it, but maybe not. distinguished Senator from Washingto n Mr. TALMADGE. I h we no objecticn ,_'as victimized, to a rollcall vo'_._. This amendment is intended to provide I understood one Senator to tell other a prohibition against that kind of action. ,Senators a few minute., ago that there I think it would be applicable to anyone would be no more rollc_,ll votes tonight, who published it, but he must publish it lit could go over until _[onday. I would knowing it to be false at the time. ihave no objection to [xat. If the dim. Mr. PEI2[,. It is my understanding that, tinguished acting majority leader would under Sullivan against New York Times, set a time ee:ctain for a vote, I would if one is a public figure--and that inihave no objection. cludes any candidate for public office--Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. Presideni'.;, there is virtually no law of libel that is may I ask the distinguish_ Senato:c, applicable, along with the assistant minority lead¢.r Mr. TALMADGE. They reduced se- and the acting manager of the bill, how verely, as I understand the Sullivan case, much time they think they would want to the ability to recover in a libel suit by debate this amendment? anyone in '.public office. I believe it must Mr. TALMAEK)E. Thirty :minutes, 115 be proved that it was malicious and false minutes to a side. and done with a malicious motive. UNANIMOUS-CONSENT AGREEMENT Mr. PELL. To prove a motive--the SenMr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President:;, ator from Georgia as a lawyer is much I ask unanimous consent that on Mon.more familiar with this than I am--is a day, after conclusion of the routine very difficult thing, morning business, the Senate resume Mr. TAIiMADGE. This does not relate consideration of the unfinished busines,,;_, to motive. S. 3944, and that at that time the amend .... Mr. PELL. That is correct, ment of the distinguish_ d Senator frora relates theto publicswhether or Mr. not TAIA_ADGE. the man who Itmakes tion knew it to be false at the time. Mr. PELL. I completely support .the objective of the Senator from Georgia.. I am wondering ff this amendment would run counter to the Supreme Court ruling in Sullivan versus New York Times. Mr. TALMADGE. Of course, that was a suit in libel. This does not deal with libel cases at all. Mr. PELL. So there would be no confiict with constitutionality? Mr. TAKM[ADGE. There would be no conflict wit_ respect to libel at all under this amendment as it is written. This creates a new penalty, a misdemeanor, for someone who publishes a false and defamatory statement about the character or professional ability of a candidate and introduces it into a campaign, ff he knew the publication to be false at the time he made it. Mr. PELL. I think it is an excellent idea, and, at the moment, I look forward to recommending to my colleagues that it be Mr. approved!, GRIt,'FIN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield ? Mr. TAI_dVIADGE. I yield. Mr. GRIFFIN. Is it the intention of the Senator from Georgia to have this amendment adopted without a rollcall vote? I.think it is unfortunate---Mr. TALlVIAE_E. I understood, after. conference with the lloor manager (Mr. CANNON) at; the time, and als0 his Republican counterpart, that they were prepared to accept the amendment, Mr. GRIffiN. I have no doubt about that. 398 April 4, 19 74 from Georgia (1%r. TALMADGE)about the spectacular feat, f Henry "Hank" Aaron, of th_; Atlanta ! caves, tying the home run record of th .great Oeorge Herman "BabE_' Ruth on this day of April 4. I have consult 1 with my good friend from (_eoi_gia, wl ) is always a charitable and ccmsiderate _ ntleman, and he knows I am ,. real basel_ ll enthusiast and cheer even v/hen my M mesota Twins lose, and refuse to admit ' hat they lose. On this occasion he has lC;rmitted me to initiate, o_ hi.,:, behalf an [ on behalf of his colleagu_ Senator [UNN, and the distinguish(:d acting minority leader -(Mr. _[RIFF):N), and ti ; distinguished majority whip (Mr. R( CEnT C. BYRD), to submit a resolution, for which I shall ask immediate consi_ ;ration. The resolution reads _mfollows: s.._ES. 303 Whezeas, baseball .s a great Amerlcan sport; Whereas,. baseba is a great American sport; Whereas Hank A_ on of the Atlanta Braves has brought great honor to his team, his race, m_.dhimself; Whereas Hank A_ _on on the date of April 4, 1974, ht_ tied the I_)me run record of George Herman (Babe) Ru ;h; Be il! hereby R_ 'olvec_, That the United States '_ena_e expl _sses its congratulations t0. Han!_:Aaron on [ lttlng home run number _14 on _eAtlanta date ofB _pril 1974, the game betwee_. aves 4,and theinCincinnati P_;ds, ai;Clncinna_i Ohio. Mr. TALMAD( E. Mr. President, will the di._;tinguished Senator from Minne-' sots yield? Mr. iE_[UMPHRt _. I am happy to yield. Mr. I congratulate Georgia question. (Mr. T_LMADG_._ be made th_il_ Stnatc_r TALMAD( on his If E. dership in submittingthe ).sending The PRESIDING OI_ICER. Withoul_ the re,'_;ohition, m I am happy to be a objection, it is so ordered, conspcnsor ther_ Mr. ROBERT C. BY]_D. And I ask A few moment_ go we heard remarks unanimous consent that there be a tim_._ on the Senate_o_ _ congratulating Hank limitation on the amenchaent by the dis... Aaron. I ur_ge e Senate to approve tinguished Senator from Georgia (Mr, overwhelmingly tl _e resolution that has TALMADGE) of 30 minutes, to be equally been submitted by the distinguished Sendivided between Mr. T_:;_avs_. and the ator from Minne: _ta (Mr. Hm_pHn_¥), manager of the, bill, or if the :manager o:1: of which I am pr md to be a cosponsor. tlbe bill suppm'ts the amendment, then Mr. [_!iUMPHRE /'. Mr. President, as in tlhe time in opposition thereto be under many _:_ther insta: .ces in my life, I have the control of the distingaiahed minority' received inspirati_ n and guidance from leader or his dt,_igne_, ar.d that the time the distinguished _enator :[rom Georgia. be equally divided. In this instance, I /lid so again. The SenThe PRESIDING O_ICER. Withoui: ator from Minnes ,ta, who loves baseball objection, it is so ordered, night c,r day, win ,r lose, has had wholeMr. ]._OBERT C. BYRE,. Mr. President,. ihearted cooperati, n from these remarkI suggest the absence of 't quorum, able men of the S_ nate, who are baseball The PRESIDLNG OFFICER. The clerk :_a:ns-_,ur two fri_ _ds from Georgia (Mr. will call the roll. T_LMAm_W.and M. NUNN), the distind The assistar_.t legislative clerk pro_, guishe¢! Senator from Michigan (Mr. ceeded to call the roll. _RIFFIIq'), and the distinguished Senator Mr. ItOBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, from '_;Vest Virg: cia (Mr. ROnER_ C. I ask unanimmm consent tha_ the order BYRn). forThe the PRESIDING quorum call be re,:cinded. Without OPFICEIt. objection, it is so ordered. Mr. HUMPPZREY. Mr. Pre,;ident, will the Senator yield? Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I yield to the distinguished _.mator fra_ Minnesota. '_ ,_][K_ _ AARON4'i][]_ HOME RUN RECfRD Mr. HUMPHF_EY[ Mr. President, we lightened with great [interest--_and I did with excitement--to[ the announcement Erode by our dist_gttP_hed colleague HANK ,,_ent Mr. that l?resident, ask toummimous conwe prol i _ed the considera_;ion of the resolW proved. The PRESIDI MCCL_E). IS ther fret consideration There being no tio_ (S. Res. 303 :_greed _o. Mr. C_RIFFIN. :monsly. '['he PRESIDIN¢ ord will so reflect. on and that it be ap- 'G OFFICER (Mr: objection to the pres_f the resolutic, n? )bjection, the reS°lu was considered a.nd was agreed to unaniOFFICER. The rec- SENATE FLOOR ON 33044 APRIL 5, 1974 April 5, 19 74 CONGRESSION, KECORD -- SENATE export these crop_ nd earn tahe foreign exa "political of the White House"; change necessary t6 ,urchase needed Import8 less than 1 after the coup, the United and to strengthen ' _ dollar." I should add States approved credit sale of wheat to the that, as of late De e_ber, the Agriculture new Chilean go_ nmen; in an amount eight Department had n ; l_bllcly factored the times the total ,mmoc lty credit offer?d to world energy crisis lntd_lts projections of Chile in the A1 _ae years. Oil s_a_es, nowworld demand for AJ _erlca_l_ food. ever, with their _h and small populations-Agriculture's sens_ of ne_.strpngth is also and their oll--I not similarly vulnerable, apparent in the Am_ cican _:p_oach to trade, Plainly, it depen 3. particularly in the General l[kgreement ou Until quite re( mtly, nonetheless, the idea Tariff_ and Trade (GJ _7'r) negot_tions which of feeding hungl foreigners was fading for began formally last Sept_mber._ithin the other than polit _al reasons. The chairmen Agrleulture Departn lent there is_ certain of the two agrlc lture (_mmittees, Senator residual bitterness _hat in the _ennedy Herman Talmad_ and RepreSentative W-. R. Round the i_terests __ agriculture we_i_ given Poage, are know_ for their cor_;ervative phisecond billing to thot _ of indic'try. Nov_howlosophy and the national, as opposed to ever, Paarlberg point _to recent export fil_ures international, ou ook; they both have proto show "what our $armers and marke_.ng nounced themsel .'s content with America's system might be a_ I _ todo consistentl _past and present performance on food aid. several years down tl_., road but with great_ Food for Peace is 'a drain on American dolprice stability--if m__y of t__e artificial bar-\lars," Pc_ge said, "and :It should be treated rlers to import dem _a I in o hter nationswer e _s just another kt i of foreign ald like mealreduced." American _ :-ricul urt e, he said last _ne or printing ,resses." The Agriculture fall, now seeks "a _aJor, perhaps decisive Dl_artment, whos Secretary has been known role" in the GATT ti lks. "Our resolve must to _arn darkly "alarmists," has conslsbe to Put increasing international pressure tentl_ played the possibility of famine, on those foreign tr_ e barri set' hwich preplayl_]_ up the ul influence of good ven_ one of the mo,, _ efi_cien_ U S_ indusweathe_ kand poi_ to the "international" tries---one af the wor a's most efilcient farm nature d_, the wi f_d problem without sectors--from bringir; its weight to bear to offering i_tiative leadership. Even in the improve our trade a_ _ payme_is position." State Depai_tmeni the attitude was growing Our policy is easy t_ summarize: food for more negatl_. ": for Peace was based oath. on the ethnoc_tx idea that we could pacify FOOD: FOR PEA_E OR POLITICS? the world b fi_l)d a State Department olltWhile commercial _xports have climbed cial said to me1_ summer at a time when toward $20 billion, ._ elpments under Food Bangladesh was b_ [nhlng, largely in vain, for for Peace have drop _ed below $1 billion, a trickle of wheat, our thinking is that "The future mechan sm for aiding foodfeeding the world international probdeficit countries is," e _ Agriculture Departlena, maybe one United Nations. The merit publication no_ s dryly, "uncertain." worst thing we a country would NOW it iS _true that _or recelplents, Food be to put lt ona That would for Peace has not al_ ays been an unmitljust give it the solving its gated benefit: it has sometimes depressed own problems, Then their agriculture and xes involved political Secretary of State and psychic costs. It h _ also become true in a faint call in his for "an recent years, as Butz _old me in an interover-all review of )olicy view, that P.L. 480 "l no longer primarily in relation to its on our _istanee to a surplus disposal pro_ 'am. It's for humanlthe LDC's ," but no tarlan purposes and f( .' national security-one answered and own did to help Infuse purcha., ng power into courtnot follow up. tries on our defense p rimeter. South Vieta FOO:DRESEEVE nam is a case in pol_ _." Indeed, last year mOs_ 480 supplies wet to Vietnam and to In fact, Food for must these other countries in varying all but defunct. _,nly last summer a degrees, as segments the American "de"new" idea appear ,'or a program or fenSe perimeter": Korea, Israel, Paknlsm to fill Its chle: _urpose of lstan, and Indonesia. hunger. The idea w .s a "world food Nonetheless, through dec/glee, Pood and it came from _ H. Boerma, the Dutchfor Peace and its programs have rna n who is Dlrec _r General of the U.N. fed hungry millions, have nourished Food and Agrtcult re Organl_,,ation. To be our better instincts as a sure, the idea of a p _nned resez_e is not new. :For three decades, American A report prepared I [ the Senate Agriculture diplomats have I as a political tool: Committee recalls that, as early as 1912, to relieve the misery of friends, to spare Henry A. Wallace _ed the Biblical story of them the cost of food on the open Joseph storing gra_ _ against famine, and market, and to help keep popular disthe Confucians' cr, etlon of a "constantly content within poll manageable normal granary" In China, in order to urge bounds; to show off productivity a similar food storal e plan upon the United and generosity; to in for other beneStates. As Secretary of AgriculLture, Wallace fits; and so on. I_ is thin this tradition steered into law in 13 ,prssslon America astorof food diplomacy that ofia- age program inten¢ .'d to protect American clals now suggest that may stop selling farmers' income. A Bri_ish-Araerican Cornfood to countries won't sail us oil. bined Food Board 'ovtded so,ne experience It is perhaps worth here that while in internationalizin i food cooperation in coUntries in duress appreciate---someWorld War II. In li _5, John Boyd-Orr, the food larFood and Agricultu_ Organization's (FAO) gesse, they tend to reaCt the first chief, proposed plan for purchase and overt use of food aa -political weapon, storage of lnternatic al food reserves, Durhig a period of relationS in 1964, His plan f0undere( on the same rocks that for instance, President of Egypt de.havo endangered a like proposals since, nounced the for failing to prowhether the reserve be meant for the dovide emergency food and told the mestlc or lnternatio _al market. That is, esUnited States to "go i sea water." Dur-: sentlally, the fear o: producers everywhere lng another bad period i_ 1966 he declared: that at some poinl t:ae reserves will be "The freedom we have bought with our dumped on the-mart _t, thus depressing the blood We shall not sell _ wheat, for rice, prices. In the Unitig StateS, the farm blOC Or for anything.' before Preslfor many years.had the strength not only dent Allende of overthrown and to induce the goverr aent to buy. surpluses killed last fall, his said that the but to keep them o: t;he :market. Farmers, to Sell it, for cash, though politically _ :aker now, make the vitally needed supplies wheat, because of samo appeal, the m _re so In a period of S, 5325 strong market maud and high pricE._, "Food rE_serves by i,overnment can never be perfeetly _lated from the market." Butz w_ned in "Farmers should not be fooled that a system cILrL be designed to farmers from a pre.. mature release f stocks. Any set of rules would certainly k _subject to changc especi.ally in light of pressures like those which Prevailed in 1973. pressures which forced this Adm_ to impose court.. terproductive controls." And even those officials , are indifferent to the wel.fare of :Carmers slowed by the high costs of buying and food for a reserve and by 'the idea, by the Agriculture De]; United States has done plenty in the and that other developed countries, to say of the developing countries should do more now. Now, Boerma, offering his proposal in July, helped lictze the great need to which his ' was addressed. The "nonaligned" nations in Algiers in September, made a lke appeal. At the same time, t:ae Institution sponsored a report focusing reserves and agricultural trade _mong America, the Europeaax Economic _lty, and Japan. A British economlLst, Jesllng, published a widely circulated paper on international grain reserves, for reserves was in the air, like, if will, a gas. But given the polltiea_ and econ_ facts of life in Washington, a spark needed to give the idea life wit:_ln the _'-overnment. Such a spark could be struck by people outside the. agricultural establishmerit. T_m ST_OY This was done ;september 11, at the former'_ hearing, by Secretary of State Kissing and Senator Hubert Humphrey. first started talking about reserves in Senator Edward Kennedy, among i_ow brin_.s publiclty and support to idea, but Humphrey has been the figure among the handful of with not only an internatlonaltst _k and a con_lence but with f_wm ex_ert[_ As chairmau of the Senate'_ Foreign Ag] cultural Policy Subcommittee, he has a l_rodiglous public record on issues world food sec_rity. As a member of Relations Committee, he conducted colloquy with Klesina city boy gh: Hurrr_Ee. initiate, after conwith the of Agriculture, Secretary of and obviousl_ discussion amongst the _s and the main importas to we are going to do in year to conditions of human some areas, famine, In the light food supply situation? I_SSX_gOE_ Senator Humphrey, that yo'ar runs counter to all our traditional with respect to agriculture. HlYMPHREY. I_SSX_OEa. We idea of commodity-ty0e because we wanted to have the opportunity for the expert of and we thought we enough ' to take care of all needs. I,_ the experience of the last has been a challenge' to all assumptions. We recc,gntze that ' in a new wc_ld. We have recently mental study of TI_ proposal you make Is one some of us_i[_ere discussing informally lier this year;_t that time it did not too much fair because a_ the weight ,rsvious assumlJ_ons. Ail I can say, _g the completlo_ of that study, is that _e approac:h you have _ted is needed, a_i[ we will look at it with greatest sympathy.'N 401 S 5326 That "inberdepartrr_ntal CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --- SEI,i[ATE study," concluded, a project ca_,,_ : _SSL_S,_PL_y world The Soviet Unlo nee_ a separate wor:L lZ)6tente has broug t the Russians into t2:_,_ world grain marke . Their resources allc',;z 1;hem to make h_ ;e Impact anyon other world stng:e sui:,_ ]>lies and prices. ,_ Mr _ than J_actor, it was the B xsslan purchases of 19UI_ which left the l[$_xtt d Stat_s able to respor d only stingily io nergeI.cy appeals fro:n West _frica and. _ngladesh. Those comL_ tries cx)uld well ha , concluded that d_ten;e is a conspiracy of 1 Le rich against the poe'.:', The 1972 purchm sherealso and co:atributed _:;o boostlrLg food prlce,, elsewhere. Y_t lkhe Russians still play an lrresponslb:io loner's game. Take carryc.ver stocks: the[:c size indicates whet ler a country facing a of the Natlenal Security CouncU, In essence, that altl[ough the food Outlook is uncertat_ tho lqnlted States should now ws_s promoting issuesan interaational explore approach I to of related of food aid arid develollment. Those fmmtllar with the IqSC study rlport that it, and KISsinger's personal tmiletus behind it, proyoked a thorough an_ .continuing review in the downtown depar_nents and made the bureaucracy focus o_ tho new vistas of world food. In turn, _lhe review helped educate Kissi_ger, who at his confirmation hearing, was apeakh g strictly off a staff briefing. He was init _lly outraged that in 1973, almost overnlg t, tho United States had to stop seUing c rtain farm commodltles---wit_ troubleson foreign it policy consequence/_q[n markel which had spent five years trying to e ,and. He is described now as soberly hsedfl of the Interrelationship of agriculture s d diplomacy, and as determined not to lei le policy tn that area to. "economists." a woanr roe coNrrar_cr Loss than two week_ after his confirmation hearing, Kisstnger we xt to the United Ndtions and proposed a ' forld Food Conference along the precise lira _ suggested by Humphrey. This was, I a_ _ prepared to believe, moro than a gesture tc show the Third World gallery that the Unib d States is Interested in more than countriE _ big and rich enough to be part of the hal race of power. It was an acknowledgement, more meaningful for having been made in _ political forum and in the expectation of indefinite food shortages, that the United S _tes regards the world food situation as an u gent issue demanding an international solu_ .on and transcending the complex ongoing questions of agrlcul_ral trade. The Conf fence will be held in Rome next November Jnder the auspices of the United Nations, wi h technical assistance by the FAO. It was pm under the United Nations rather than the ?AC because the U.N. has a universal mere ership (the Ruaslaus dc,n't belong to the FA )) and because grainexporting c_untries te Ld to look at the FAO as a club (in both sen; ._s) of the food-deficit countries. The Conic ience will consider a range of issues chos,!n, or so the United States hopes, for bela g particularly amendble to intetu_attonal ¢_Operation--pest control, disaster relief, technical assistance for self-help programs, an I so On. But an international foc_l reserve _malns the key issue. 'As usual, an international timetable is forcing naticmal decisJ _ns. Ktssinger has appointed a c_>rdlnatorposit _o of the American on oversee at the the Worldshaping Food Conference. The fact that the Conference will be under the Ur lied Nations, not the FAO, facilitated his eft jrt to put State rather than Agriculture in c] _arge of the American position. The Agricultt re Department named The Senate I)ad harvest or an mexpe:ted surge in dl_mand will on the nformatlon world market. secret. The Rm;._ slans keep go ste_k N(_ even the bilateral : evict-American agricu_., tural agreement slg led at the second surf_. mit obliges the:rd t, repozt in that critic;al i_rea. (That agIee_ ;nt wi,s slf,ned, by tlc way, before Ktsalng_ start._d getting wise t.t} agriculture.) Nor d the Russ:laos take sn organized part 1_ ntern:_tlon;_l efforts to feed the hungry. _ ey shnn the FAO. Prt... sumably, the Worl_ Food Conference will help smoke them cu. Just what w[tl ct me out next Novembe_, _t the Conference, _ hart[ to say. I wou]_:t guess that we sro ialy at the beginning c_:_ composing a natlo: al policy consistent _._: once with our I_s' [nstinrts, with our procLucer's interested, id with our gatherini_; _ware_ess that we re In a world which may force us into new ,items both of coopers ._ tlon and competitio in order to assure om .... selves the resom'ce_ necessary for our n_ tlonal life. Until non our thinking and polic'.F on resx>urces h_ve _sumed either an ad_.. quato domestic su fly or adequate forelg:_x s_cess. In thin condi _ion oJ plenty, we couL:i indulge a casual ar d unlalanned approach. But we seem now o be _;nterlng a perlod_ cd shortages, world >r nat: coal. George Mr... Corem, a farm eta_; politician and forme_: _ Food for Peace ;_dm nistra';or, told the Sen .s,te last August: We have chosen cc miner( ial sales of whes t_ to the Soviet Union over gua_,Etees of aJ::L adequate diet for thc,se lml,overished Amer_ .... cans who subsist o _ surl; lus comm_xtlti_.. _'e have chOSen, at least indirectly, to fee:_ 2aneriean llvestc_k--in support of our tast_, _or meat over grain-dnstesd of :meet/ng de_.. _,erate human need in West _frica, Sout:!:._ _la and elsewhere. We axe fo_ed to sue:!l results because we st nply have no policy fcic' choosing which nee_ s to fill and which t,':, _gnore 'when we cam vt fill them all. The country .... is no_ CONCLU_;IO_ starting to choose. Mr. MANSFIEL ). 3/13'. I_'esident, i/here further moll lng busim._s? sure of his own, on I _tz, from what might be called the left fia_ kr. They seem 'to have The ACTIN<] P! ;ESIX_ENT gore. Is there furtt ._r morning pushedposit,each in_ )_es.a mutually ble ion other on rese] Butz now acceptaagrees that the government j s well as private traders will have to hold reserves. Boerma has _[f not, deputy coordinat or. The bureaucratic mornir_,_ _ Ac'r tough, able, and out cock, and thc_e who Fa dian1; thl_t tn Jolnlng t_ get, he is quttte up to ture's---and ._,ricultu properly served, 402 Senator The assistant by tttle, as legislative follows: closed_ '_hielh the clerk read The amendment Georgia of TaL- (Mr. votes, they, too, can be :put over until l_.[ondv,y under the previous agreement. CLOTURE _i[OTION Mr. President, at to the desk a cloture moti011 and ask that it be read. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro ternpore. The cloture motion having been presented under rule XXlI, the Chair, within:ti objection, directs the clerk to read the motion. The assistant legislative clerk read the Mr. iMANSFIELD. this time I send lrr_otioll, as follows: We, :ho undersigned Senators, in accordance w!th the provisions of Rule XXII of the Standi]_g Rules of the Senate, hereby move to brins to a close the debate upon the pendlng bill S. 3044, a bill to amend the l_ederal Electio:c_ Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public _inaneing of primary and general election ca_apaigns for Federal elective office, and go ame,:td certain other provisions of law relating ,_o the financing and conduct of such campaigns. John O. Pa.store. Harri:_on A. Williams, Jr. Cllffcrd P. Case. Abra]:.am Rlbicoff. Then ms F. Eagleton. Jose_,a R. Blden. Alan Cranston. Btrck Bayh. Dick Clark. Fran]: Church. Quem;tn N. Burdlck_ Jame_ Abourezk. Gale W. McGee. Edm_md S. Muskle. Phlll]_ A. Hart. Edwacd M. Kennedy. Floyd K. Haskell. Itoward M. Metzenbaum, Jaco_ I1[. Javlts. Marlcw W. Cook. Edwa_t W. Brooke. Ted _;tevens. Mr. !!_OBERT C. BYRD, iMr. President, I sugg(_st the absence of a quorum. The ACTINO pore. The clerk PREISIDI/INT will call tl_e pro roll. tern- The assistant eeeded to call the legislative roll. pro tern the Senah_ clerk the I_:ADGE.. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, tt is my uEderstanding that that amendment will not be voted on until Monday. It is rrty hope that other amendments which may be available will be offered this alt(:rnoclq, and if there are to be rollcall order for the quorum business, OFFICER. from O:F 1974 t:he unfinished will state. State repre/_r polk:y "Inter of pollcy fo 1.!; pro tern business', PRESiT_ENT lays before the consideration is on CAMPA/IGN of Agrlcult_m_e resenting a group, forelgn process the question E[_ECTION The ACTINO pore. The Chair _ ate---Agriculture repi domestic interest _is pending AMERD1VIENT;] be controlled tnternat anally, rather than by each participating ns ion. Over-all, the inevitable and healthy , lfference in viewpoint and powerf _es_ resumed the bill. The PRESIDING Mr. dent, FEDERAL eased off his earlier p eference that reserves _ O:[ 5, 19 74 Joseph M. Montoya. Hugh Scott. Richard S. Schweiker. Henr:, M. Jackson. Hube:t H. Humphrey. OF _VIOR_-i'NCr [BU_c [NESI_ byplay is, by consens' briskapplying but positive, The FAO's Boerma hss is,been pres- the Aprit ;lng a more abstract st'--ensures a lively mul_tlon. Butz is a bill tht_ poken man, a game. ow him weU are coati;s proce_ with Kisstn;nsuring that agrXculo's,---interests will be A bill (S. 3044) to am;nd the Federal[ Election Campaign Ac t of 1971 to provld_:_ for public financing of prir_ary and genera eY.ec_on campalg'ns for Fe¢:eral elective of.. rice, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating tx) the financing and conducv, c_ such campaigns, clerk proBYRD. MI'. Presicor_sent that the t_OBERT C. I ask unanimous The ACTINO pore. ¥/ithout call be rescinded. PRESIDENT pro temobjection, it ts so ordered. Mr. ]!_OBERT C. BYRD..Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Talmadge rarily amendment until the close bu_ine.,_,s on Monday. The ACTING pore. Without Mr. I:¢,OBERT [ ,_mggtxst the The ACTING be laid aside tempoof routine morning PRESIDENT objection, C. BYRD. absence ipore. _'_he clerk of pro tern- it is so ordered. a PRESIDENT Mr. President, quorum. pro tern- will call the roll. April 5, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL The assistant ceeded to call th_ Mr. ROBERT C I ask unanimous for the quorum ce The ACTING pore. Without ob. Legislative clerk proroll. BYRD. Mr. President, _nsent that the order t be rescinded. RESIDENT pro ternetlon, it is so ordered. R] Mr. ROBERT C I move that the .' subject to the call The motionwas a.m., the Senate t the call fo the Chs The Senate recc called to order i dent pro tempore, CESS BYRD. Mr. President, enate stand in recess of the Chair. ,,greed to; and at 10:44 ak a recess subject to r. vened at 10:47, when the Acting Presi- FEDERAL ELECTION AMEND_ CAMPAIGN OF 1974 ACT The Senate with to theamend con,sideration of thecontinued bill (S. 3044) the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing of primary and general election campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating to the financing and conduct of such campaigns, The ACTING PI_S_ .pro ternpore. The Chair recognizes the senior Senator from Virginia. ' Mr. HARRY F. BYRD, JR. Mr. Presi= dent, I wish to commend the difficult and lonely fight being made by the distinguished Senator from Alabama (Mr. ALT.EN) against an unjustified raid on the Treasury of the United States. The Senator from Alabama has led the fight a_ainst taking tax funds to finance political campaigns, As one Senator, I shall not vote to take money from the pockets of the hard working wage earners of our country and turn that money over to the politiclans. The polls show that politicians these days are not in very good standing, Yet many in Coilgress say, "Oh, the people want us to vote this money. They want us to take tax funds for our campatgns." I do not believe that. I do not believe that the wage earners of the country want to have the House and Senate dip into their pockets and take money from the hard-working people of the country and turn it over to the pollticians to use as they wish. So I commend the able Senator from Alabama. I hope he will prevail in his difficult struggle against this new program for an additional use of tax funds, The record shows that whenever Congress gets into something, the cost increases. This campaign financing bill will not decrease the cost of campaigns; it will increase the cost of campaigns. That is the whole history of congressional spending, That is the whole history of Congress. Whenever Congress gets involved in a ma_-ter, the cost goes up. ! say that the cost of campaigns is too high now. What needs to be done is to put a tight ceiling on campaign expenditures and a tight ceiling on the amount of money that any individual can contribute to a campaign, RECORD -- SENATE S 532'7 I hope congress will do just that. But I hope that Congress Will _eject dipping into the pockets of the wage earners in order to get money from the Federal Treasury to turn over to the politicians of our Nation. Mr. President, X ask unanimous con-' sent that I be permitted to speak out of order on another subject, The ACTING PRESIDENT pro ternpore. Without objection, it is so ordered, Mr. HARRY F. BYRD, JR. First, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may yield to my distinguished colleague from Wisconsin (Mr. NELSON) without losing my right to the floor, The ACTING PRESIDEI_2 pro ternpore. Without objection, it is so ordered, Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak very briefly out of order. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro ternpore. Without objection, it is so ordered, Mr. HARRY '. BYRD, JR. I do not want to object the request of my distingnished from Wisconsin, and I shall not object, hope that if aspects of it are that should be considered Committee on FinancE.,, the Sen:ator Wi,,;eonsin would urge that it be to the Finance Cornmittee at the time. Mr. i_fELSON. : am not sure whether there are. It not really occurred to me until the .c tor raised the question as to whether not there are Finance Committee problems involved. There is jurisdiction in both the ce Committee and the Committee on Judiciary, because it would Commerce Act, but it also antitrust provisions as well. It hasto goso: and as I say, I would no objection--and to make any objection anyway--to committee that has _ TION OF A BILL S. 3318--INTRO_ TO AMEND _1 INTERSTATE COMMERCE A, _T jurisdicl;id_ over ject propriate time, bill to that Mr. NELSON. Mi. Presiden_t, I send to the desk a bill to Lmend thE. L_terstate Commerce Act and _rovide for regulation of certain anticom etitive developments in the petroleum ndustry, and I ask unanimous consen that'the bill be referred to the Con_ littee on Commerce. Mr. GRIFFIN. M . President, I reserve the right to object, The ACTING PI ESIDENT pro ternpore. The Senator from Michigan reserves the right to c iject, Mr. NELSON. If ,he Senator will permit me to commen, there is dual jurisdiction over this ] ill. It has antitrust provisions in it, ar 1 it amends the Interstate Commerce ,ct. Either committee could handle it. Pr( bably bot:h will want to before any actio_ is taken on the bill. I ask unanimous resent that initially it be referred to the Committee on Cornmerce, The ACTING P_ ESIDENT pro ternpore. Is there objecl ion.? Mr. HARRY F. B /'RD, JR. Mr. President, reserving the .qg:ht to object, may l ask, is the Financ( Committee involved in this legislation? Mr. NELSON. It] ink it could be. The bill would amend : ae Interstate Comreel;ce Act. It provi( es for divestiture of certain- activities o: the oil companies, divestiture of refinil g if they in fact refine, produce, and _ ngage in other activities. So Z would not be surprised if Finance, Judiciary, and Commerce ail have legitimate jul Lsdiction over parts of the measure. Mr. HARRY P. B3 RI), JR. Irrespective of the merits of t_ _ proposal, ][ would hate to see the Fini nee Committee by' passed on a matt r which is within its jurisdiction. W( fid. the Senator be inclinedto let Mr. NELSON'. I )uld like to have it referred to the Corer Lit'_.eeon Commerce, although I am sure ' hat any other cornmittee that desires _t any stage could have its own hearh gs, as is very frequently done, or ha, e Jit referred for its own consideration .'hat wmfid be perfectly appropriate, _s frequently happens here. Mr. Iq_RRY F BYRD, am not seeking work'for JR.theI Finance committee, but I would not like to see it bypassed on a ect in which it has jurisdiction. I have no to the request of the Senator Wisconsin. Mr. ORl2'_'ll_l President, reservlng the right to I do not know that except to observe that there is an Subcommittee of the Committee the Judiciary which is chaired by my colleague from Michigan (Mr. . It would seem that, since the clearly is directed to the matter of laws, it would be a little unusual, least without consuiting--and the distinguished Senator from has consulted and cleared with other committees, particularly the Committee, which I would would have primary jurisdiction_to that committee by unanimous on the Senate floor. Perhaps there be joint referrsd to both the 7 Committee and the Committee on Mr, I_rELSON. President, I have no objection to It Is perfectly clear that there is jurisdiction in the JudJiciary Many years do not know the date--on a simil: problem, which involved the railroads from hauling products t they owned, which is similar to this the Commerce Committee i that problem. But there clE._riy is Ljurisdiction. I ask consent that the bill be referred to the Committee on the Judiciary the Committee on COmmerce. I haw_no object to Finance,either. I am nol_ sure is a primary Finance Committee tion, but ff there is, and the Senator rom Virginia or the chairman Committee asks for jurlsdictlon, I have no objection to that. Mr. C_R_'_'zzq President, as the request has now phrased, I have no objection. As ,'_enator from WIS- aspect of the that, at the subapa referral of the 40:3 $ 5328 CONGRESSIONAL not only do we have of the Combut it is very experts in the field, wise for the Senate and send it to Commerce, on which, is not Particularly questions, that the Senator an mlttee It would to bypass the I serve, but experienced So I am has his The pro ternpore (Mr. rout objection, the bill will be referred jointly to the Commerce and the _e on the Mr. Mr. Mr. ABOUREZKand I joined lng this on entitled Free Enterprise in Pe Act. Massive of evidence mulated over past quarter indicate that major oil engaged in the Whole process of oil management and control from drilling to retafiing, are in fact monopolistic, anticompetitive,; destructive of free enterprise t'n the, industry. This legislation is to eliminate this kind of monGpoHstic by requiring dfvestiture cf ;ically integrated oil companies, The legislation three prohibitions. First, it pipeline cornparties engaged interstate commerce from petroleum products wlxich it or manufactured. Second, it oil refiners from engaging in or production of petroleum and, third, it forbids refiners fr marketing finished petroleum These prohibitions do not apply to refiners defined as those buy three-fourths Of their crude oil sell most of their products at the rei The prob]lem of practices in the oil the proposals is not new nor are it. In July of 1937, introduced similar legislation and in every decade since Members of both have proposed legislation aimed the same problem. These proposals borne the names of both Houses such as Borah, Gill Nye, Harrington, and Roosevelt. legislation concerning this is pending in both Houses. It time for Congress to act. to Mr. President, can no longer be any doubt that a of this kind is needed.abuses causedThere can petroleum no doubt industry of the by which is and monopolistic. :to figures in a Govermnent Committee print entitled of the Petroleum Industry," that has in certain respect become more concentrated and top-heavy m _69 than it was in 1960. The top oil companies together accounted 50 percent of the domestic ne$ crude production while the top 20 had 70 percent. In 1960, were 43 and 63 percent, respectively, by themselves, four of New Jeresy, Texaco,. Gulf, Shell--accounted for 31 percent in 19t while in 1960 they 404 shared 26 compa:nles proved domest_ic eight had 64 had 37 percenL shares of l:[ne refining q_e top four eight had 57 shared 86 In hearings t_oosevelt's before Senator rnittee_ and in own staff, the sistently brought short [[eases for cancellations, variances, which are parties,, and on l:_st month, in the Milwaukee 3,600 inde had ,State list RECORD -- SEb;I'A.TE t.In I)70,the top 20 fo:: 94 percent otl r_sera'es, the top arid the top tom:' 1970, the company crud_ oil and gaso _ere as follows: 33 p_rcent, the to]'., _,nd the top 21_ ; before Congressmaik_ in the mid-1950'_,; lengthy study by my facts have been con Th_ abuses include unwarranted'_ induced priori2 trinket "give-aways" only to the off corn .. on. As :recently a._: front page article ir._ it was state(i retail gasoline cone _rted efforts t :, o[ this sort. The, abuses includintl: such things a_: from the major;_ by the majors, monopoly has had _, effect on retail gaso-, before the Sen.. Monopoly Subcommit.._ Comnittee, Mr. H.C.. of the National. Retailers, hs_:;: position a;i; serf rathe:l:, business., 1970, testi., the_ station k; each year, abou:; at pric_ The oil truly devas line dealers, ate Antitrust tee of the Judicie Thompson, Congress of described the "largely that of t:han that of man." In his mony, MI'. turnover in 25 to 35 50,000 to 70,000 The has no_ been branch, to to bring p,etition in the industry. In his speech on this ect last July 12, distinguished enator from South Dakota (Mr. A_ traced the his. tory of Federal. cs_;es i:a this are;:_, since the case )f Standard Oi;!', Company o/ Jersey _,. U_ited $tate_,_ 221 U.S. 1 in 19.'[1 April 5, 1974 that t_:tere con_[nuesto be a petroleum cxtsis, _,'ven tho' gh its immediate effects may l_Ve been _ lsed by the recent lifting of' the off emi)/ 'go. This is a bill whose tLme has come. Mr. _Presidenl I ask unanimous consent that the [11 and its summary be p]finted, in the P.CORDalong with an excerpt ,ff my rE Larks on this subject in 1971 and the tl xes newspaper articles that I have Just ] _ferred to.. There being n objection, the material was or:tered to printed :in the R_.coa_, aa follows: _. 3318 A bill _:. amend , Interstate Commerce Act and :o provide _or regulation of certain antlc-_mpetitlve levelopments In the pctrole'Lmlndustr_ Be i_ enacted t _ the Senate and House o/ Rep'_'esentative_ o/ tl_e UniteaT States o/ m_eric_zi_ Co_gre_ assembled. s_ ,RTTITLE SECTL)N 1. This icl may be cited as the Free Ez terprlse in 'etroleum Act of 1974. F _DXNaS SEC. :_. (a) The Congress finds: (1) that Paragraph (8) of ; _ction (1) of the Inters_te Cc;mmerce Ac (49 U.S.C. 1 (8)) which dlvorce._ the buslne _of transporting by rallroad comomditles n interstate commerce from t:_eir manuf.' thereby should avoiding the ter_dency to d _'ture, ;crimination, be amended to apply t_ "pipeline companies", as that term is define_ herein; 2) that the industriai organizatio: of the petroleum industry in _ts present: does not serve the public :!:aterest; (3) industry is characof capital-ottremendous si_.e; are engage_ in (4) that t refining, companies but are interlocked at various I_ of industry operalion to 'the degree the national policy of competitive free is frustrated; and (5) that by of intercompany arrangem_;nts and integration of refiners into the of crude oil, the transpc_tation 'ude oll and product_and of of finiah_d finished producus, these refiners have acquired and hold monopoly power over lnterst_e and forei commerce in petrosum, adversely the _btlity of the States to a rational energy or conduct its relations prop._:important are_ Congress finds that an of at reasonable cost to the and .that are a very slgntficant supply. Current ar_l lmpcxts from foreign serious consequence:; to the defense and foreign licy health of the States, to economy, the stability pce_nd _e domestic to the competitive itlon of this Nation in worp.t trade, to th_ _urchaslng power of United States curren¢ ,_tnd to the welfare ot its citizens. X (c) t_; is therefore e ;enti/_that action be taken (,_ an amergen 7 basi/_to reorganize the struLcture the ] _troleum_Elustry, to reatore the freeof ente_ 'ise syster_ln energy development, to assur an adequa_ flow of capital rotc exploratlo: and develolm_ent of secure and environr .entally safeg_rded sources and to accord investors, consd_ers and ta:_:payers adequa' , protection in r_ation energy hereund, develop: .ent tures torvquired r. and the dives_t_ An examJnatlon of thi!_ whole problem recently been corn pleted it is a 141ent_itled "Corn.. plaint Prediscovery State.ment," 2::, 19'J4, and is i_:_ support of the complain_: in In the of Ex, on Corporation et al. _ffnis docm _ent is discussed in tw:: recent newspape articl_, The first is an trticle by Morton Mint_': Lu the Washir_, on Pos_, -Ferry 2_:_ 1974, fred the s, cond is f_he Wa_l [;treet Journal, ] ebruar_ 2_:_ong th_i_ remedies it pl_)t sses, the FTC suggest!_ refinery and pit ;line divestiture, Unfortunately proceedings of this sorll; take w_ry much _ _ne. Mr. Mintz suggest_ a final resolutlo_ is 8 to 10 years awa_._ Given the preset; state cf our petroleum supply arrd the ,, _te of 12_eoil industr_,,_ DEFINr] iONS I sugg(_t that w cannot wait that lon_;. structe_l SEC. a. or (a)operated "Refineryfo the means a plantof conpurpose sepWe can no lc n :er put off legislation Oil arating or converting Ii [uid hydrocarbons to t:his sort as be_(n, premsture or ill-con._ finishec. -products or unfinished oils for sidereal. Nor ci_n we hid_ from the fac_l_ further refining; April _1_74 CONGRESSION, _L RECORD -- SENATE S 5331 Secretary I_YMMARY_'[O_\I_EE ENTERPRISE IN P_rROL_t ACT O_ 1974 Section 1 con_lnsX_/the short title of the measure _'X Seotlon 8 ma: es necessary allowance for operations durir ,, the period before dtvestlture. canbe acc _mpllshed. It permits cornpames o_nerwme subject to the prohibitions word, Mr. CongressSectl°n concerz[in_:2 recit}_!etalledthe °_S_itol°nn £or_'San6 of the Act to continue an_a_Dro_rlate_c e year priorplanto with the filing of vestment the Se- sent mond RECORD. applicabIlltyfindings by theof a sectiondivorces of the t_eintestate Act-_rreaI_ltl_s.ra_du which bu_ness Commerce of transporting e r m'l_:change the periodCommission, required for and the by railroad, conn_odltle_ln interstate corn- c_ns,_r_t,_n _ merce from their [nanufa_iure---to the pedrosuch '_ ,7 nob ' _ proval and effuctuation of leum industry; t[xe presez_ highly concenR_ _iP_a _ ,_ te Commission. t 1 s eft c _ :_:' _ '"'_ _es penalties for the violatrated organizatic[a of the ii, us ry, t c .t lion of th A t frustrating the $ational po_cy in several _s nnn fn e _, _o consist of a forfeiture of ....... is in violaareas' ' the policy [of compitltl_e fre_ ent.'-e_ T.' - _pro_ lay a company _on. -_ also this forfeiture can prise capitaTlismgSnerally b eae- cl a r ecl'' oy a plication Mes that to a United States -_l . - _'_,_ner_ . _' policy previsions for .-an alapie ...... ·- .. supply -- .- oi\petrolenm . _-. _s_r_c_ Cour_ a the request of the United products at reasonable costs in Mnterstate --......comr4erce; _ . - carrymg_0n_ - . x - _or _a_es or any c_ _tomer or competitor of the and foreign_------..--_--.--..m z ....... _- o .x company or ox ..ny other person affected by elgn policy In important areas; and i_mainth e v'ola'tlon 1 I_ raining the stab'l_tv and _urchaslne_ower b rivat inter the event suit is brought of the U'--nl-ted'S_es currency. This°SeCtion y pi .e . .sts, an appropriate inform- _:- _ :-_-_- -._ _-z. x t er's _e_ _s to oe ,aid, calculated as are thoee also fin. ds thttla t is therefore essential_to fees allowable _x customs oz' tax matters, reorgamze the petroleum, industry, in _u_ Costs and expo sos of suit _re also to be a manner as to e_ pos _lble effective pollc_ -i decisions -ill ........... _le-_ are as w at-t-he'sa[ne _ aitowea a succe. _ful private party. time protecting interests of investors. _ ---=_-_-_--Section 2 the critical terms used V_IT1 THE SO_ET UNION In the legislation. It defines- the term "amliate" a company as includin_ Ai_. RHODESIA parents, or companies under BYRD, JR. Mr. Presicommon control with such companies, Americans, the Richwhether such reis is established by ownership, direct or indirect interlocking a newspaper pubdirectorates, by or by any Other lished of Richmond, Va., is means. It also defines an "lndedeeply c( over the du_l standard pendent refiner," company excepted from employed State Department. The the divestment visions of other sections ' editorial of Wednesday, of the Act, as a a refinery April 3, "No and Yes," disof which not than 9.5% of the total cusses the ms of trade with two uainput crude oil produced by or is forderived such or any.affiliate,ana which sells at half of its total finished products through ,ther than owned or controlled marketing Section 4 integration in_o pipeline transportatio_ This is accomplished by tions and the laartment. The Union The State trade con this very an amendment to Act to prohibit line from trans or commodity line or any amllate to the the Interstate Interstate Commerce common carrier pipecrude o11, other liquid products, if the owned by thc pipeThis provision is 3imltar clause" provisio_x of Acts'Imposing lira- cate8 an Rhodesia. amendmentltatl°ns on to that Setcion a refinery, from owning or exploration for, tion of crude oil bons, Including }rovision.and Is tn form an any company operating . an independent refiner. any lnteres_ tn of or producother liquid hydrocar- chrome. Ail ported, There are world with and those Africa, deposits are to Section marketing 6 is a pany operating a forbidding prohibition any relating comother than an inowning, controlltz_g s for the sale of finished those facilities neces- chrome is embargoed, that means _t the United States must rely for the la rgest part o:r its chrome needs upon R_ssta; yet, it is because of Russia, it is l_ecause of the potential or products, other sary for sale of refinery, toSection accomplish 7 makes the which would of the provisions of utility holding Exchange receive and by fntegrated findsthe such plan as by in its protection to be In accord with it is authorized to directly from the forof procedures properties be held in violation Act. As wlth public the Securities and is authority to plans filed If the Commission be fair or andas equitable modified investor Interests, and _oses of the Act, the plan and dl- rect Its Pending approval of any plan, the Commission is dlrectedpetroleum to prescribecompany and regulatiOnswhlch wlllf°r effectively segregate costs, both capital and operating, approprlately allocable operation, This emb: is advocated bargo would become Russia for a vi threat to worl, that the Ameri tug some $80 bi Thus, to mar Of the State sense. It says want to omb: of tlhe State Deare the Soviet advocates Russia and _artment advotrade on trade though with Rhodesia an emStates _endent on war material: U.S. needs im- three nations deposits of are Rhodesia, The largest of Rhodesia. an t peace posed by Russia, can taxpayers are spendUion a year for defense. y Americans, the attitude _epartment makes little _n the one hand that we go trade with Rhodesia, which by no cmceivable stretch of the imagination ca n be considered a threat to world peace but, on the other hand, we want to giv_ special trade concessions to Soviet Russi a which we all recognize is a potential t areat to world peace, Incidentally, rotary of atari,' peared to test 0_'1Finance. I said this to In your Judgu world peace? I put this question to SecKissinger when he apfy before the Committee Mm: ent, is Rhodesia a threat to is Edward publishe~r Ktsslnger's reply I ask editorial was unanimous from One con- the Richthe page of theprinted editorialin The chairman Tennant Bryan. is There was ordered as follows: In other acterlstics and icies? Well, no and no objection, the editorial be printed in the RECORD, No AND its YEa official views toward the United States be by their domestic charinternal governmental yes. "No" in the easepol-of the Soviet tiny Rhodesia. tary of State the Senate Fire response to but "yes" in the case of in effect, is what See.reA. Klsslnger admitted to Committee recently in g questlonsfrom Jr. Mr. Klssinger had appeared before the committee _ort a trade bill _hat would give most nation treatment to RUbsis, a concession by some congressmen who object to the Soviet Union's refusal to permit it: Jewish citizens to emigrate more freely. Calll the concezston a "pracsecretary argued that Russia's internal should not be a tical necessity,". decisiw. , factor in :formulation of SovietAmert, At that point, '. Eisslnger found himself in a trap slallfull set by Senator Byrd. As all Am,_rlcans _ld be, the senator is offended by the )licltous attitudes of Ntxon administration-who favor trade concessions for R_sia, one of world's moat oppre_stye dictatorshi_s a continuing menace to international p_ anti a trade embargo against Rhodesia, is a threat to nO other countrY. Spol by the United Nations, the embargo conceived as punishment against _ia primarily because of its internal racial licies. Havin_ heard the secreta:_ of that Russia's Internal affairs not influence American policy toward the S: Union, Senator Byrd was eager to ustlficatton for support of the embargo agalr "You recogn 'ize action in embargoing trade with as being Just?" Senator Byrd asked "Yes/' "Do you regard th Soviet Union as being govermM by a tight by a very few persons Over a teat number of individuals?' Sen_ator continued. "I consider the Union, yes, as a _l_tatorshlp of nature, that'is, of_ small number people tn the Polttbur_" replied Mr. I_ "Ifi_our Judgment, Rhodesia a threat to w°rld]¥ ace?_: "No,'_nswered Mr. "In l_a_l_ judgment, ts Russia a potential threat to _orld peace?[ 'z th:mk,'_said the [ecretary, "the Soviet Union has tl_ mIlita_ capacity to disturb the peace, yes._ / "In your Ju_ment,[does Russia have a more democratl_ gov_lrnment than Rho"No," Mr. Ktssin _(_ ceded. desia?'' One can almost see_C_h_ secretary squirming in the witness chair. A_he questioning contlnued, Mr. Kisslnger fi_ally offered a flimsy excuse :for the embargo. [_kwas not motivated by Rhodesia's internal _cles, he smd, rO much :m by "the fact _aa_a minority has established a separate state ._.." "Well, then," Senato{ Byl_ concluded, 'you say It is because IRhode_a seeks to establish her own government. ][_ that not what the United States _id In 1_67'" Despite Mr. Klssinger[s efforts _ find other :reasons to Justif[r the bo_otting 405 S 5332 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SE]_,;I'ATE April 5, 1974 against Rhodesia, inspired by foreign internal racial poi stltute an overWh4 desia's population, trolled by whites _ discriminatory poll ;he truth is that it waz disapproval of Rhodesia's :les. Though blacks con_dng majority of Rhoits government is cond is accused of pursuing :les against blacks. But tit is tmPorta_l 'to not,; that a resolu_ tics has been., gned by 34 Senator% pledging that t h_ will l]0t support sue]!1 I_proposal. many of the very gos the Rhodesian policies endorse d intimacy with Ru its people' under tarianism. me people eminent plomatic Ma, which :e brutal with Panama Z submit that zleq _hi aires body a Lwo-thirds will not votevoteo b:lr '_ two-thirds nla )rity t_ give away th_l_ Panama CanaLI believe that ;he State Department lion, of any person to Federal omce or or election, as a Presidential or Vice-Presidestial elector; or '"(ii) Influencing the result of a primary election held for the selection of delegates Whether Rhode _'s internal policies are good or bad, they .re Rhodesia's own bustness. Besides, ff practical necessity" is, as Mr. Kisslnger ;uggested, a paramount factor in shaping kmerican foreign policy, there is one compe Ling practical reason the United Stat_ shouli not support an embargo against Rh_iesia. major source deof chrome, a metal vi ]; al.isto a the American is out of touch _ lleves the Senat approval to chan sate U.S. soverei Canal. It seems to m the sooner the Ps this, the better to a national of aa political party nominating or for the convention expression of preference for thff nomination of persons for electioz:, to the office of President; "(B) means a contract, promise, or agreement, _;vhether or not legally enforceable, to make a contribution for any such purpose; "(c) means a transfer of funds between political committees; and fense industry In particular and to our domestic econom_ in general. Denied Rhodesian c:hrome Lsa result of the embargo, we I_.-come tepenclent upon---of all nations--Run,sis, th major potential threat to Amerlca's.survlw _:_' THE PAI_ AMA Mr. HARRY F. dent, the Virgi adopted a resoluti_ of the United StatA who Itscastigate for racial and economic keeps all of heel of totalt- CANAL 3YRD, JR. Mr. Presitia Legislature has n urging the Congress sto-- Reject any encro:.chment upon the soyereigntY of the Un _ed States of America over the Panama C_ aal and insist that the terms of the Hay-E anau-Varilla Treaty of 1903 as subsequent] amended be adhered to andretained, The patrons Senators Barnes Campbell of Hano' Caroline County; mond city. Senato: is the President p ginia Senat_._---an( this re_olution are _f Tazewell County; er County; Means of md Willey of RichWilley, incidentally, _tempore of the Vir;he senior member of that body. Senators Hopkir Aldhizer of Rock_ chanan of Wise Co glnia Beach; Bur Truban of Shenam son of Halifax C s of Roanoke city; !ghanl County; Bumty; Canada of Vir'uss of Lynchburg; oah County; Ander,unty; Thornton of Salem; Goode of Franklin County; Townsend of Ch_ apeake; Warren of Bristol; Parkerson Henrico County; and Michael of Cha of lottesville. The resolution _s agreed to by the Senate on Februa_ 22, 1974, and by the House of Delegat_ )n March 8, 1974. ][ applaud the ad bios of the Virginia Legislature. In my _dgment, this represents the thinking i,f the people of Virginia. Zt is. unfortunate partment seems deb U.S. soverei_,mty cvs. which sovereignty _ petuity by treaty 71: The Secretary of ln Panama recently amians to believe t_. that the SSate Dermined to give away the Panama Canal, as obtained in perears ago. _tate in a ceremony _ncouraged the Panzt the United States is committed to a ( aange in the treaty which would ellmi rote U.S. sovereign perpetuity, If the State Ii)eps -tment had its way, such would happen, But any cl_nge t_ the current treaty with Panama must _ submitted to the Serlate for alpProval, The Senate, in _ approve slR_ a agreed to by Secre_ 4O6 judgment, _nge as ry _inger. will not has been That means dead, because ti any az F chan such proposal Is ;e in the treat:ir th rea:iity when it be.will give two-thirds ,_ing a treaty to elimi.,_ty over t:ae Panam;_iL _, Mr. President, thalL lamarnans understand ff both countries will _ ' _ Q_'O] ',U1VIClkLL Mr. HARRY F. dent, I suggest th4 The PRESI[DI CR^NSTON). The c The legislative BYRD JR. Mr. Presiabsence of a quorurr. _G OFFICER (Mr_ erk will call the roll. lerk c _lled the roll. Mr. CLARK. ] unanimous conse] the quorum call b The PRESID1N Ir. Plesident, I ask t that the order fo_:_ rescinded. } OFYICE:_. Withouil; objection, _ered. it is so _. lion Commission established under section 502: "(3) 'contribution'-"(A) means a gift, subscription, loan, advance, or deposit of money or anything of value, _._Ladefor the purpose of__ "(i) influencing the nomination for elec- "(D) t_mn means the payment, by any commitperson other a candidate or political tee, of compensation for the personal services of anot_mr person which are rendered to such candidate or committee without charge for any such purpose; but "(E) does not include-"(i) {except as provided in subparagraph (r))) the value of personal services rendered to or for the benefit of the candidate by an individual who receives no compensation from a_:_.yperson for rendering such service; "(11) payments under section 509; "(iii) newsstorles, commentaries, and editorials on broadcast stations or in news- papers, :cnagazlnes, and other periodical publi¢'.ation.,_ .(other than a publication of a political party, a political committee as de_DE-_fiL ELI_:CTION CAMPAIGN AC_] fined in section 591(d) of title 18, United AMENDMENTS OF 1.974 States Code, a candidate or an agent of any of the :oregoing);non-partisanregistration The Senate continued wills the con.. and gei;-out-the-vote activity; communicasideratlon of the bill (S. 3044 _ to amen(il tlons by an established membership organithe Federal Election Campaign Act o!:! zatlon (other than a political party) to its 1971 to provide for public financing o:[ members, or by a corporation (not organized primary and general election campaign:_: for purely political purposes) to lts stockfor Federal elective office, and to amend holders certain other provisions of law relatintil: "(4) expenditure' means-to the financing and conduct of such "(A) a purchase, payment, distribution, loan, advance, deposit, or g_rt of money or campaigns, anything of value, made for the purpose of-AME]¢DMENTNO. XOS_ "(1) influencing the nomination for elecMr. CLARK. ;Mr. Pres Ldent, I call UI:, tics, o_ election, of any person to Federal my amendment No. 1067. office, or as a Presidential and. Vice-PrestdenThe PRESIDING CFFICER. The tial elector; or "(ii) Influencing the result of a primary amendment will be stated, held for the selection of delegates to a uaThe legislative clerk prece_ied to rea([ tional ]_ominating convention of a political t_ae amendment, party cc for the expression of a preference Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, ][ ask for the nomination of persons for election unaninlous consent that [urther readint_: to the _ffice of President; of the :amendment be dispensed with. "(B) a contract, promise, or agreement, whether or not legally enforceable, to make The PRESI_,ING OF]FICER. Without an expenditure; and objection, it is so ordered; and, without "'(c_ a transfer of funds between political Objection, the amendmen; will be printeci committees; in the R_.CORD. "(5) 'Federal office' means the office of The amendment is as follows: P_sident of the United States or of Senator ,ar Repz_sentative In the Congress of the On page 3, begtn.ning with line 6, strike ou'; United ;_;tates; through line 4 o:a page 25 _.nd i_sert in liet!L "(6) 'general election' means any election, thereof the following: :including special elections, held for the elec"TrTLE V--PUBLIC FII_'ANCING OF tics of :_ candidate to Federal office; FEDERAL ELECTION OAM]?AIGNS "(7) 'major party' means a political party "_FXNrrXONS 'which, i_xthe preceding general election nora"SEc. 501. Whe:a used In t._ls title--[nated :_.candidate who--"(1) 'candlda_." means an individual who, "(A) received, as the candidate of that s_._ks nomination for electi(n, or election, t(_, .ps;rty, 25 percent or more of '_he total numl_ederal office, whether or t ct h_ is elected, ber of popular votes cast for all candidates a_d, for purpose.,; of this p_agraph, an indi:for election to that office; or vidual seeks nomination for election, or elec-. "(B) received, as the candidate of that tion, if he (A) takes the action necessary party, the largest number or second largnnder the law of a State to qualify himselli est number of popular votes cast for any canfor nomination flor e]ectior, or election, t<_ didate for election to that or, ce; l%_deral office, (B) receives contributions or "(8) 'minor partY' means a political party makes expenditures, or (C) gives his consenl which i,_ not a major political, party; for any other person to rece _ve contrlbution.,_ "(9) 'political party' means a committee, or make expenditures for the purpose o_i association, or organization the primary -- bringing about his nomination for election_ or electlon, tosqch office; "(2) 'Commls_on' means _he Federal Elec. purpose of which is to select and to support lndivldrials who seek election to Federal, 8t_te, sod local office as the candidate of Aprit 5, 1973, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD _ SENATE S 5333 that committee, association, or organization; "(10) 'primary election' means (A) an eleclion, Including a runoff election, held for the nomination of a candidate for election to Federal office, _CB} a convention or c_ucus of a political party held for the nomir_tion of such a candidate, CC) an election held for the selection of delegates to a national nominattn4g convention of a political party, and CD) an election held for the expression of a preference for the nomination of persons for election to the office of Presldent; "(11) 'Representative' includes Delegates or Resident Commissioners to the Congress of the United States; and "(12) 'Sta_ ° means each State of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any terrltoryorposseselonof the United States. "F_n_mAL ZtECTION COMMISSION affiliated with the Same political party. The Vice Chairman shall act as Chaix_nan in the absence or disability of the Chairman, or In the event of a vacancy in that office, "Cb) A vacancy in the Commission shall not impair the right of the remaining menhers to exercise all the powers of the Cornmission and four members thereof shall conetttute a quorum. "(c) The Commission shall have an official seal which shall be Judicially noticed, "(d) The Commlsslon shall at the close of each fiscal year report to tile Congress and to the President concerning the action It has taken; the names, salaries,, and duties of all Individuals in its employ and the -money it has disbursed; and shall make such further reports on the matters within its jurisdiction and such recommendations for further legislation as may appear desirable. "(1) to make, pursuant to the provisions of chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code_ any rules necessary to carry out Its functions under this Act, including rules defining: terms used in this ACt and rules establish-, lng procedures fo!' gathering and certifying: signatures on petitions :required under thl,'; title; "(2) to make rules governing the manner of its operations, organization, and per-. sonnel; "(3) _> require, by special or general, orders, arty person to submit in writing re-, ports and answers to questions the Corn-, mission may prescribe; and those reports and, answers shall be submitted to the Commie-, sion within such reasonable period and under oath or otherwise as the Commission, may determine; "(4) to administer oaths; "SEC. 502. (a) (1) There is established, as an Independent establishment of the execulive branch of the Government of the United States, a commisslozr to be known as the Federal Election Commission. "(2) The Commission shall be composed of seven members Who shall be appointed by the President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. Of the seven menbers---, "(A) two shall be chosen from among individuals recommended by the'President pro tempers of the Senate, upon the recommendatlons of the majority leader of the Senate and the minority leader of the Senate; and "(B) two shall be chosen from among indivlduals recommended by the Speaker of tho House of Representatives, upon the recommendatlons of the majority leader of the House and the minority leader of the House. The two members appointed under subparagraph (A} shall not be affiliated with the same political party; nor shall the two menhers appointed under subparagraph (B). Of the three members not appointed under such subparagraphs, no more than two shall be affiliated with the same political party, "(3) Members of the Commission shall "(e) The principal office of the Commis.sion shall be In or near the District of Columbia but It may meet or exercise any or ail Its powers in any State. "(f) The Commission sh_ll appoint a General Counsel and an Executive Director to serve at the pleasure of the Commission. The General Counsel shall be the chief legal officer of the Commission. The Executive Director shall be responsible for the admlnistratire operations of the Commission and shall perform such other duties as may be delegated or assigned to him from time to time by regulations or orders of the Commission. The Commission shall not delegate the maklng of regulations regarding elections to the Executive Director. "(g) The Commission may obtain the services of experts and consultants in accordance with section 3109 of title 5. United States Code. "(h) In carrying out its responsibilities under this title, the Commission shall, to the fullest extent practicable, avail itself of the assistance, including personnel and facilities, of the General Accounting Office and the Department of Justice. The Comptroller General to and Attorneyto theGeneral are authorized make theavailable Corn- "(5) to require by subpena, signed 1oy the Chairman, or the Vice Chairman, Vas attend-. ance and testimony of witnesses and the production of all documentary evidence re-. latlng to the execution of its duties; "(6) in any proceeding or investlgation, to order testimony to De taken by deposi-, tlon before any person designated by the Commission who has the power to admin-. islet oaths, and to compel testimony and the production of evidence in the same manner as authorized under paragraph (5) of this subsection, "(7) to pay witnesses the same fees and. mileage as are paid in like circumstances in the courts of the United States; "(8) to initiate (through civil proceedlng_ and through presentations to Federal grand Juries), prosecute, defend, or Commission appeal any court action in the rtamE_ of the for the purpose of enforcing the provisions serve terms-offirst seven years, except that, or the for members appotnted_ "(A) two of the members not appointed sion penas under subparagraph (A) or CB) of paragraph C2) shall be appointed for terms ending on the April 30th first occurring more -than slx months after the date on which they are appointed; "(B) one of the members appointed under paragraph ,(2)CA) shall be appointed for a term ending one year after the April 30 on which the term of the member referred to in subparagral_ CA) of 'this paragraph ends; _(C) one of the members appointed under paragraph (2') (B) shall be appointed for a term ending two years thereafter; _(D) one of 'the members not appointed _under sUbparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (2) shall be appointed for a term ending _hrse years t_aere_fter; 'J(E) one of the members appointed under paragraph (2)(A) shall be appointed for a term ending four years thereafter; and "(F) one of the ,members appointed under paragraph (2)(B) shall be appointed for a term ending five years thereafter, "(4) Members shall be chosen on the basis of their maturity, experience, integrity, Inpartiality, and good Judgment. A member may be reappointed to the Commission only once. "(5) An individual appointed to fill a vacancy occurring other than by the expiration of a term of office shall be 'appointed only for the unexpired term of the member he succeeds. _ vacancy occurring In the office of' a member of the Commission shall be filled in the manner In which that office wes originally filled, "(6) The comm_ion shall elect a Chair·nd a VIce Oha_[l_J_an J_rom among its members for a term of two years. The Chair* man and the Vice Chairman shall not be such personnel, facilities, and other as- sistance, with or may without reimbursement, as the Commission request. "(i) The provisions of section 7324 of title 5, United States Code, shall apply to menhers of the Commission notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (d) (3) of such _ection. "(J) (1) When the Commission submits any budget estimate or request to the Presldent or the Office of Management and Budget. it shall concurrently transmit a copy of that estimate or request to the Congr,ess. "(2) Whenever the Commission submits any legislative recommendations, or testimony, or comments on legislation requested by the Congress or by any' Member of Congress to the President or the Office of Management and Budget, It shall concurrently transmit a copy thereof to the Congress or to the Member requesting the same. No officer or agency of the United 'States shall have any authority to require the Commisslon to submit its legislative recommendalions, or testimony, or comments on leglslation, to any officer or agency of the United States for approval, comments, or review,, prior to the submission of such recommendations, testimony, or comments to the Congress. "(k) In verifying signatures on petitions required under this title, the Commission shall avail itself of the assistance, including personnel and facilities, of State and local governments to the extent those governmerits have already established programs to verify signatures on petitions. The Cornmission may make agreements with State and local governments to reimburse those governments for such assistance, "Po-_iL_ "SEC. 503. (a) the power-- oF The COMMISSXOI¢ Commission of this title and of sections 602, 608. 610, 611, 612, 613, 614, 615, 616, and 617 of title 18_ t'nlted States Code. and to recover any' amounts payable to the Secretary of the, Treasury under section 510, through Its Gen-. eral Coun_el; and "(9) toother delegate of its tofunctions er powers, than any the power issue sub-, under paragraph ":ELXGIBII,rI'Y shall have (5) to any officer of the"(b) Connmisslon. Arty United States district court with-. in the Jurisdiction cf which any inquiry is; carried on, may, upon petition by the Commission_ case Connnisslc,n of refusal toIssued obey under a subpena or "(1) order ino:_the subsection (s) of this section, issue an order requlring compliance therewith; and any failure to obey the order of the court may be punished by the court as a contempt thereof; and "(2) nlcon the request of the Commission, convene a special Federal grand Jury to investigate 'possible violations of this Act. "(c) No person shall be subject to civil liability to any person (other than the Cornmission or the United States) for disclosing, information at the request of the Commission. "(d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Commission shall be the primary civil and criminal enforcement agency for violations of the provisions of this title, and of sections 602, 608, 610, 611, 612, 613, 614, 615, 616, and 617 of title 18, United States Code. The, Attorney General shall prosecute violations of this Act or those sections of title 18 only nlmn the req'uest o! the Commission. "(e) Ul_n application made by any indlvtdual holding Federal office, any candidate, or any po'.tltlcal commlttce, the Commission. through lis General Counsel, shall provide, within a :reasonable period of time, an advisory opinion whether any specific traneaction or activity ,nay constitute a violation of any provision of this tltle or of any provision of title 18. United States Code, over which the Commtsslon has primary Jurisdiction under subsection (d). "SEc. 51)4. (a) candidate shall_ FOR Each _'NANC][NG political party and 407 S 5334 CONGRESSIONAL RI;CORD --- Sli{NATE A:p_il 5, 197¢ "(1) agree to obtain and to furnish to the Commission any evidence it may request about the, expenditures by that party or candidg_te; "(2) agree to keel) and to furnish to the Commlssic.n any records, books, and other information it may request; and "(3) agree to an audit and examination by the Commission under section 509 and to pay any amounts required under section 509. "(b) Each political party and candidate shall certify to the Commission that-"(1) the candidate will not Incur expendi_ lures greater than the limitations in section 506; and "(2) no contributions greater than the limitations on contributions in section 615 of title 18. United States Code, have been or will be accepted by the party or candidate, "(c) To be eligible to have the Commts_ sion make any payments under section 508, a candidate shall file all agreements and certifications required under subsections (a) and (b) wlith the Commission before the date of the relevant election at the time required by the Commission. "(d) To be eligible to have the Commls.sion make any payments in connection with a major party primary election campaign un .... der section 508. a candidate who seeks the nomination of that party must in addition to the requirements of subsection (c), file witl_ the Commission not later than two hundred and ten days before the date of that primary ,election-"(1) a declaration that the candidate is seeking the nomination of a named major party for election to the office of Representa.tlve and a petition in support of his can.didacy signed by a totl_l number of people in excess of 2 per centum of the voting ago population. (as certified under section 506 (f) } of the congressional district in which ho seeks election; or "(2). a declarat4on that the candidate ls seeking the nomination of a named major _'ENTITLE_S ill tt,e preceding general election, or (3) re"SEc. 505. (a) (1) A candidate who is el:igP ceived more than 25 per centum of the total ble for Federal financing of his -camp_4,i2n aurar)er of popular votes cast in the precedunder section 504 is entl tied to payment bi_' lng general election for that office shall be the Commission of exper.ditures he incurs in consl:dered to be the camlldate of a major connection wi.th his campaign for nomlnapart!,, for purposes of thlssectlon. lion by a major pollttcE.l party. "(d) (1) Every politic, a] party which is "(,q) 1_1ocandidate who seeks the nominal, eligible for Federal financing under section lion of a major party is _ntltled to payxrent 504 Js_entitled to payment by the Commis~ of his expenditures by th_ Coramtsslon ur de:c sion of expenditures it incurs in connection this subsection in excess _f an amount wblct_ with Federal election activities such as voter is equal to the amount the candidate is ]'.,er_. registration drives, get-out-the-vote drives, mltted to inc_xc in connection with his pr]_. and :tominating conventions. mary election campaign under section ,"ie6 "(2) No political party l_ entitled to pay(a) (1) or (b), as applicable_ meat of its expenditures by the Commission "(b) (1) Ew:ry candld_.te nominated b:i;' _. under this subsection in excess of-political party who is digible for Federal fi_ "(_) 20 per centum of the amount of paynancing of his campaign under section 504 men_ by the Commission to which the Prestis entitled to payment by the ComrnlssiorL (:4' dent_al candidate of that party is entitled expenditures ihe incurs tn connection v,ith under subsection (b), in any year in which his general election campaign, a regular quadrennial Presidential election "(A) No candidate of u major party is en_ Is heid; or titled to payment of his expenditures by the "(11) 15 per centum of the amount of Commission ur..der this ,,ubsectlon in excess'-: payment by the Commission to which tho of an. amount which is equal to the amoun Presidential candidate of that party Is enthe candidate is permitted to incur in con. title¢, during a regular quadrennial Preslnection with his campaign for election ur,de:: dentlal election year under subsection (b) section 506(a) (2) or (b). in ary other year. (B) No carLdidate of _. mir.or party Is E_r.."(el l_otwithstanding the provisions of titled to payment of his _-xpendltures by the sub_ectlon (b), no minor party candidate Commission under this · ubsectlon In exc.ess or independent candidate ls entitled to payof art amount which is equal to the grey,re:' meat by the Commission of any expenditures of-_nde_' this sectlon which, when added to the "(i) an am¢,unt which bears the same rstotal amount of contributions received by tie to the amount of p, yments to whlci:_ E_ him n connection with his campaign, exceed candidate of a major pazty for the same o:[- the amount of expenditures he may Incur In Ilce is entitled under th!s subsection as i;he connc,ction with that campaign under the total number of popula _ votes received b y proviz;lens of section 506. the candidate of that minor party for tha': "Exr'ENm'ru_r LI[MiITATIONS office in the p::eceding general election be.ars "Sl_:c. 506. (a) (1) Except to the extent that to the average number ¢,f po;pnlar votes :_such mounts are changed under subsection ceived by the candidate of a major party _2:_:: (e), uo candidate, other than a candidate that; office in the preceding general electior, for tl_e office of President, may incur any or "(ii) an at, cunt whi:h bears the s_me expenditure in connection with his primary ratio to the amount of p_yments to which ..[_ election of-"(A) Incampaign the case inof excess a candidate who seeks party for election to the office of Represents.live in a State whicl_ is entitled to only one Representative, to the office of Senator, to the office of Vice President, or to the office of President, and a petition in support of his candidacy signed by a total number of peo.. pie in exc_ss of 1 per centum of the voting age population (as certified under section 506 (f)) of the geographic area in which the primary election for that office is held. "(e) (1) No candidate is eligible under _Ubsectton (d) until the Com2mlsslon verifies that the petition filed by the candidate meet_ '_he requirements of subsection (d) and candidate of s. major pazty for the same of, flee is entitled under thts subsection as I;he total number of popula:: votes received bi' the candid,ate in the orr rent general elco.-, tlon 'bears to the average number of popt_iar votes received by the candidate of a m_dor party for thai. office in -;he current gem_ral election. "(2) (A) Every indepenlent candidate _;'ho is eligible for Federal fir.ancing of bls c*m-. palgr, under section 504 is entitled to pay. meat by the Commission of e:rpenditures :h_ incurs In com_ectlon wilh hh_ general elco..lion ,campaign. nomination for election to the office.of Senator. the greater of-"(1) 15 cents multiplied by the voting age population (as certified under subsection (f)) of tB_ State in which he seeks nomination for election; or "(L) $175,000; "(ll) in the case of a candidate who seeks nomination for election to the office of Representative-- that-"(A) the signatures on the petition a_; ,alld; tlo_B) the individuals who signed the peti-, are eighteen years of age or older; "(C) the individuals who signed the peti-, tion live In the geographic area in which tho general election for the office thc candi-, _late seeks is held or are qualified to vote in the primary election under the laws of the State in which that election is held; and '' (D) no individual who signed the petition has signed a petition required under this section of any other candidate for the same office. "(2) The Commission shall approve or disapprove any petition filed under this subsection not later than one hundred and. eighty days before the date of the primary election in connection with which that pelflion is filed, "(ti) an amount which bears the same fa.. tie to the amount of p_',yment to whict:_ ..a candidate of a major part_ for the same off:ice is entitled under this sulasection as the tot;al number of popular votes received by the :in.. dependent candidate in the current, general election bears to the sver_:e number o_ (f)) :'f or "(i.) "(][;) scek_:_g atlv_-- _t;_f) make To be have Ceramist. any eligible'to payments under thesection 508_ a political party must, in addition to the requirements of subsection (c), file with the Commission, at the time and in the manner the CommiSSion prescribes by rule, a declara_lon that the political party will nominate candidates who will actively campaign for election in the next regular general election, popular votes for received by the candidate cf a popu:!atlon (as certified major party the sam_ office in the cur.(f)) :'f the State in which under he seekssubsection election; rent general elec'tion, or "(e) A minor party candidate or an in,:ie.. "(1:.) the limitation under subparagraph pendent candidate who 1) was the can,:ii.. (A) il! the State in which he seeks election date of a major party for the same office in ts entitled to only one Representative. the preceding general election, (2) received "(IQ) {1)-No candidate for nomination for the largest or second largest number of lm:_p., election, t_ the office of President may incur nlar votes cast for a candidate for that off.ie,_ wtth his campaign in exce._ of the amount 408 "(t} 25 cents multiplied by the voting age population (as certified under subsection (f)) of the congressional district in which he se_:ks nomination for election; or "(B) No independent candidate is entlt:ted "(1.) the limitation under subparagraph to payment of his expencltures by the Cc,:m.- (A) lt. the State in which he seeks nominamission under this subset tlon in exces_ of a_:_ lion _:s entitled to only one Representatve. amount which is equal to the greater of-.. "(2) Except to the extent that such "(t) an amount which bears the same r_.tl,:: amo_ uts are increased under subsection (e) to the amount of. paymer, t to which a cam:ii., no candidate,'other than a candidate for elecdate of a major party for the same office i:._ tlon to the office of President, may incur entitled under this subs_ctto:a as the tgta] any {xpenditure in connection with his gennumber of popular votes received by the [u.. eral election campaign in excess of__ dependent candidate as s candidate for ti:ta't "(A) in the case of a candidate who is office in the preceding ge:aeral election ben,rs seektr_g election to the office of Senator, the to the average, number of popular votes '.m.. great_r ofceived by the candidate ¢f a major party :[o._ that .office in the preceding general election; "(i) 20 cents by the subsection voting age population (as multiplied certified under or the State in which he seeks election; $250,000; in the case of a candidate who is election to the office of Represent- "(1) 30 cents multiplied by the voting age April 5, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL which a candidate for nomination for electl0n, or election, to the office of Senator (or for nomination for election, to the orifice of Delegate, in the case of the District of Columbia) may incur within that State in connection with his campaign for that nomination or election, "(2) No candidate for election to the office of President may incur any expenditure in connection with his general election campalgn in excess of 20 cents multiplied by the voting age population las certified under subsection (f)) of the United States. "(3) The Commission shall prescribe rules under which any expenditure incurred by a candidate who seeks nomination for election to the office of President for use in two or more States shall be attributed to that candldate's expenditure limitation in each such State based on the number of persons in each State who can reasonably be expected to be reached by that expenditure. "(4) The Commission shall prescribe rules under which a candidate for nomination for election to the office of President may authorIze his national campaign committee to incur expenditures in connection with his national campaign in an amount not in excess of 10 per centum of the amount of expenditures which he may incur in connection with his primary election campaign in a State under this section. The expenditure limitation appl!cable to that candidate for such campaign in that State shall be reduced by an amount equal to the amount the candidate authorizes under this section, "(c) (1) No candidate who is unopposed in a primary election may incur any expenditure which is in excess of an amount which is equal to 20 pe.r centum of the limitation applicable to that candidate under subseclion (a) or(b) of this section. "(2) A candidate in a primary or general election runoff election shall have an expendlture limitationwhich is 50 per centum of the limitation in subsection (a) or (b) of this section, aa applicable, "(3) A candidate who seeks the heroinstion of a political party which selects its nominee by means of a convention or caucus system which does not include a popular election or elections shall have an expendlture lhnltatton which is 10 per centum of the limitation in subsection (a) or, (b) of this section, as applicable, Expenditures behalf of '(d) any ii) candidate are, for incurred the purposeon of this section, to be incurred by that candidate, considered _(2) For purposes of this subsection, an expenditure Is considered to be incurred on behalf of a candidate if it is incurred by-"lA) an agent of the candidate for the purposes of incurring any campaign expendilure, (B) anY' person authorized or requested by the candidate to incur an expenditure on his behalf, or '*(C) in the case of the candidate of a political party for President, the candidate of that party for Vice President, or his agent, or any person he authorizes to incur an expenditure on his behalf, "(e) (1) Per purposes of paragraph (_)_ '(A) 'price index' means the average over s calendar year of the Consumer Price Index (all items---United States city average---published monthly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and "(B) 'base period' means the calendar year 1973. "(2) Atthe beginning of each calendar year (commencing in Iir75), as necessary data becoma awe!able from the Bureau of Labor Statistics ef _ Department of Labor, the Secretary of La'ocr shall certify to the Cornmisstgn and .pUblish tn the Federal Register the perc_ dtlTe_ence between the price index _or *_he twelve months preceding the beginning of such calendar year and the price RECORD w SENATE index for the base period. Each amount determined under subsections (a), (b),and (c) shall be changed by such percentage differonce. Each amount so changed slhall be the amount in effect for such calendar year. "(f) During the first week of January 1975, and every subsequent year, the Secretary of Commerce shall certify to the Commission and publish in the Federal Register an estimate of the voting age population of the United States, of each State, and of each congressional district as of the first day of July next preceding the date of certification. The term 'voting age population' means resident population, eighteen years of age or older. "rETrrIoN DroVeS "SEC. 507. (a) Except to the extent that such amounts are changed under subsection S 5335 (d)-"(1) no candidate who toseeks majorof party nomination for election the aoffice Rep- "PA],rMENTS BY THE COMMLSSION "SEC. 508. (a) (1) There ls established on the books of the Treasury of the United States a fund to be known as the Federal Election Campaign Fund. "(2) There are authorized to be approprlated to the fund such amounts as are necessary to carry out the provisions of this title. "(3) On the day after the effective date of this title, the Secretary of the Treasury shall transfer to the fund any moneys in the Presidential Election Campaign Fund established under section 9006 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954. "(4) The Secretary of the Treasury may transfer tx) the general fund of the Treasury any amom_ts from the Federal Election Campalgn Fund which he del_rmines, after consultation with the Commission, are in excess of the amounts which are necessary to carry resentatlve may incur any expenditures in connection with his petition drive to meet the requirements of section 504 wlhich exceed an amount equal to 2 cents multipUed by out the provisions of this title. "(b) The Secretary of the Treasury shall transfer to the Commission such amounts as the Commission certifies to the Secretary the voting age population (as certified under section 596(f) of the congressional district in which he seeks election; or "(2) no candidate wt_o seeks a major nomination for election to the office of party Representattve from a State which is entitled to only one Representative, Senator, or President, may incur any expenditures in connec- from time to time are necessary to mal:e payments under tlfis section. "(c) (1) The Cotmnisslon shall create on its an account eachpayments political under party and books candiidate eligiblefor for section 5(_t. "(2) The Commission shall allocate the funds it receives from the Secretary of the Treasury under paragraph (1) among the accounts of each political party and candidate according to the amount to which each tion with hisof petition to meet the requirements sectlon drive 504 which exceed an amount equal to the greater or- population" (A) 1 cent(asmUltipliedcertlfiedbY underthe votingsectionage50§.party and candidate is entitled under section "(3) The Commission shall credit all con506(f) ) of the geographic region in which trlbutlons which a political party or candihe seeks election; or "(B) $?,_500. date sends to the Commission under section "(b) (1) No person may make a contribu615 of title 18, United I_tates Code, to the tlon to any candidate for use in connection account of that party or candidate. with the petition drive of that c_ndldate to "(d) (1) A candidate who seeks the nommeet the requirements of section 504 which, inatlon oia major political party may conwhen added to all other contributions made tract for goods, servlces, or other expendiby that person to that candidate in contures in connection with his primary elecnection with the same petition drive, exceeds tion campaign only during tile period be$100. ginning one hundred and eighty days before "(2) No candidate may knowingly accept the date of the primary election of that a contribution from any person made in conparty and ending on the ([ate of that primary nectlon with the petition drive of that canelection. dldate which, when added to all other con"(2) A candidate may contract for goods, trlbutions from that person made in conservices, or other expenditures In connection nection with that petition drive, exceeds with his general election campaign only during the period beginning on the date on $100. For accepted purposes by of any this person paragraph, a conwhich he is nomln_ted by a major political trlbutlon who makes party for that election and ending on the any expenditures connection is considered with the date of that general election. A minor party petition drive of 'a incandidate to be accepted by that candidate, or independent Candidate may contract for "(c) No candidate may make may expendisuch goods and services only during the lure or accept any contribution in connerperiod beginning one hundred and eighty t_on with his petition drive except during the clays before the date of the general election, period beginning three hundred days before .or on the date on which a major party norathe date of the primary election of .the major lnates a candidate for the office the minor party whose nomination the candidate seeks party or independent candidate seeks, whichand ending two hundred and ten days before ever date is earlier, and ending on the date that date. of the general electinn. "(d) (t) Each candidate who files apetl"(3) A political party may contract for tion with the Commission under section 594 goods, services, or other expenditures In conshall report to the Commission the amount nectlon with its Federal election campaign of each contribution he receives in °°nnecactivities only during the period beginning tlon with his petitlon drive, the identity of two years before the date of the next geneach contributor, and any other information eral election in which it will nominate canthe Commission requires at the time and in didates and ending on the date of that genthe manner the Commission prescribes, oral election. "(2) If a candidate meets tt_e require"(4) The Commission may void any conmerits of section 504, the Commission shall tract made by a party or candidate under pay an amount to each person w:bo contrlbthis subsection which is lraudulent or lllegel uted to the petition drive of that candidate before performance of that contract begins an amount equal to the contribution made according to procedures it prescribes by rule. by that person under subsection (b) to that "(e) (1) The Commission shall pay all excandidate, penditure.<_ incurred by each poUtlcal party or "(e) Each amount under subsection (a) candidate by contracq_ created by that panty shall be changed at the beginning of each or candidate under subsection (d). The Corncalendar year by the percentage difference mission may not pay any amount in excess between price indexes as determined under of the amount to which that political party section 506(f). Each amount so ch:anged shall or candidete is entitled lmder section 505. be the amount in effect for theft calendar "(:_) If a candidate becomes entitled to an _ear. increased amount of payments'under section 409 S 533G CONGRESSIONAL RE,ZORD SE_lAtE At)ril 5, 197'4 505 (b) (1) (B) or (b) (2) (B) because of the' number of votes he receives In an election, the Comml!_sion shall pay the amount of that increase in payments to which the candidate is entitled on a pro rata basis directly to the persons who contributed to that candidate in connection with that election. "(f) (1) SI'he Commission shall make all payments under this section directly to the person with whom the political party or candtdate contracts for goods, services, or other expenditures. Except as provided In paragraph (2), no political party or candidate shall pay any expenditures which it Or he incurs in connection with a Federal elcotion campaign except through payments by the Commission under this title, "(2) A candidate may maintain a petty Cash fund out of which he, or one Individual he authorizes in writing, may make expenditures not In excess of $25 to any person in connection with a single purchase or transaction. A candidate for Vice President or President may maintain one petty cash fund ill each State. Records and reports of petty cash disbursements shall be kept and furnlshed to the Commission in the form and manner the Commission prescribes, '"EXAMrrIATI[ONS AND AUDITS; REPAYMENTS "(4) No payment shall be required from a political party or candidate under this sub.. section in excess of the lotal amount of ali payments by $_ae Commission for that patty or c_andidate under sectior 508. "(e) No notification sh _11be made by the Commission under subsection (b) with ce.. spect to a Fed,_ral election more than thc_ yea_s after the day of the election, "(d) A candidate for _'hom the Corem is-. sion has made payments und,_r section 508 in an amount which is less than 25 per centum of the amount to which that candl._ date is entitled for aprimaryorgeneral else.tion under section 505 may withdrawn a.,_a candidate in that prlm_'y or general election at any time up to ;he forty-fifth ¢'ay before the dat_ of the p:lmary election, or the +_drtieth day before the date of the gcn_ eral election, _a connection wtth which the Commission n_de those payments. A candi-, date who withdraws under this subsection shall pay to th_ Secretary of the Treasury an amount equal to 50 per centum of the ps_y-. ments which the Commission made for hLm under _ction 508. "(e) All payments receLved by the Sects-. tory under subsections (b) and (d) shall be deposited by him in the lund. :_ ma i;erlal fact, or to falsify or conceal any evldm_ce, books, er information relevant to an examination and audit by the Commis:Dionlmder this title; or "(B" to fail to furnish to the Commission _my r_cords, books, or information required by him for purposes of this title. "(2_ Any person who violates the provisions of paragraph (1) shall be fined not more than $50,000, or imprisoned not more 'than :i_Lveyears, or both. "(c) (1) It is unlawful for any person know_agly and willfully to give or accept any kickback or any illegal payment in connection with any expenditure Incurred by a cax_didate or political party which the Commission pays under section 508. '(2) Any person who violates the provision,_ of paragraph (1) shall be fined not more than $50,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. "(d! (1) Any person who violates any provisiom,_ of this title or of section 602, 608, 610, _111, 6i2, 613, 614, 615, G16, or 617 of title 18, Untte:_. States Code, may in addition to any other penalty, be assessed a civil penalty by the Commisqion under paragraph (2) of this, subsection of not more than $10,000 for each violat on. Each violation of this title and "SEC. 50_. (a) After each Federal election, the Commission shall conduct a thorough examination and audit of the expenditures incurred by every candidate, "(b) (1) ii[ the Commission 'determines that portionpartyof or thecandidate payments under it makes for a any political seC- "REPORTS TO CONGRESS; INVESTIGATIONS_ RECORD_ "S_:c. 510. (a) The Commission shall, _m soo_ as practicable after e_ch Federal elsericE, submit a full report to the Senate aad House _etting "(1) oftheRepresentatives ex];,endltures incurred forth_ by each tlon 508 was in excess of the aggregate amount of the payunents to which the party or candidate was entitled under section 505, it shall so notify that party or candidate, and the party or candidate shall pay to the Secretary of the Treasury an amount equal to the excess amount. '(2) If the Commission de_min_s thafs any amount forof aany payment by the Commission political party made or candidate political party and candidate which recelv_ a payment under section 508 in connectl0rt with that election; "(2) the amounts paid by it under section 508 for that political party or that candidate; and "(3) the amount of payments, if a_y, required from that political p_rty or can(_i-. date under sec';ion 509, a:_d the reasons Ior each payment required. _'._ch _[ay of noncompliance with an order of the 0ommia_ion shall constitute offense,. In determining the amounta separate of the penaltg the Commission shall consider the perso_::'s history of previous violations, the appropriateness of such penalty to the financial resources of the person charged, the gravitg of the violation, and the demonstrate_l good faith of the person charged in attempting to achieve rapid compliance after notification of a violation. under other "(A) "(B) were (other tures "(b) The Commission may conduct examinations and audits (in a_dltlon to the ex-. aminatlons and audits u:lder section 50[I)_ investigations, and requir_ the keeping and submission of any books: records, and in-. formation necessary to csrry out the runerices and dutles imposed vn it by this title., section 508 Was used for any purpose than-to pay expenditures, or to repay loans the proceeds of which used, or otherwise to restore funds thar._ contributions to pay expendlwhich were received and expended) which were used, to pay expenditures, it shall not_,fy the party or candidate of the amount so used, and the party or candidate shall pay to the Secretary of the Treasury an amount equal to such amount. "(3) If the Commission determines that a major party candidate for whom it has made payments under section 508 recelved_ "(A) a total number of popular votes _ the primary election, in connection with which the Commission made payments for that candidate which is less than 15 per cen_ turn of the total number of popular votes cast for all candidates seeking the same office that candidate seeks in that primary elsericE; "(B) a total number of delegate votes in the nomlr_ting convention in connection with which the Commission made payments for that candidate which Is less than 15 per ce_tum of the total number of delegate_ votes cast for all candidates seekingthe same office that (_Xdidate seeks in that convert-. ricE; or _(C) a total number of popular votes in the general election in connection with which the Comm_sion made payments ior that candidate which is less than 25 per centum of the total number of popular votes ca_t for all candidates seeking the same office that candidate seeks in that general election, it shall notify that candidate and the candidate shall pay to the Secretary of the Tressnry an amoun_ equal to the total amount of payments which the Comml_lon made for hhnunde_sectlon 508. 410 '"_DICIALRL_r_w "_c. 511. (a) Any age:_cy _ction by the Commission made under the provisions of this Act shall be subject to review by the United States Court of A[peali_ for the D_strier of Columbia Circuit upon petitionfiled in suclh court hY any lnte:_ested person. Any petition filed pursuant to this section shall be filed within thirty day_ aft_;r the agency action by the Commission for which review Is sought, "(b) The Commission, i. political party, a candidate, and indlvidua)s eligible to vote in an election for Federal oTtce are authorized to institute any action, including actions for declaratory judgment or injunctive relief, which are appropriate to i_pler, aent any provision of this title, "(c) The provisions of ci_apter 7 of title 5, United. States Code, apply to judicial revl_w of any agency action, as lefin,_d in section 551 of title 5, United Stratos Code, by the Commission. "PENALTI_ "SEc. 512. (a) Any perso:_ who violates the 'provl_lons of section 506, 307, or 508 of th ts title s:_all be fined not more than $50,0_0, or imprisoned ior not more than five year_, or both. "(b) (1) It is unlawf_ for any pers<,_ _owingly and willfully-"(A) to furr. lsh any false, fictitious, or 2raudulent evidence, books, or information '_o thc Commission nndex thitt title, or ';o include in any evidence, _ooks, or inforn_, ,_ion so furnished any ml_representatlon of "(2_slmll A civil penalty only under tion be assessed after thisthe subsecperson charged with a violation has been given an opportunity for a hearing and the Commis_ion has determined, by decision which inc.lude_ findingS of fact, that a violation did occur, and the amount of the penalty. Any heari_,g under this section Shall be held in accor_tanoe with section 554 of title 5, United State_,_Code. "(3) If the person against whom a civil penalty is assessed fails to pay the penalty, the Comr-xtsslon may file a petition of enforeement of its order assessing the penalty in an.v appropriate district court of the Unite_i States. The petition shall designate the person against whom the order is sought to be enforced as the respondent. A copy of the petition shall forthwith be sent by registered or Certified mail to the respondent and his attorney of record, and thereupon the Commission shah certify and file in such court the record upon which such order sought to be enforced was issued. The court shall have jurisdiction to enter a Judgmeet enforcing, modifying, and enforcing as so modified, or setting asid_ in whole or in part t_e order and decision of the Commission or it may remand the proceedings to the Commission for such further action as it mai_' direct. The court may determine de nero all issues of law but the Commission's findings of fact, if supported by substanthd evidence, shall be conclusive. "R_LA_rO_SHX_ TO OTHER FEDERAL ELECTION Laws "SE(:. 513.. The Commission shall consult f:0om time to time with the Secretary of the Senatt, the Clerk of the House of Reprosentatlves, the Federal Communications Comm_ssion, and with other Federal officers charge_l with the administration of laws relatint; to Federal elections, in order to develop as much consistency and coordinat_.on with the administration of tho_e other laws as the provisions of tlhis title permit. _e Commission shall use the same or compm_ab_e data as that used in the administratlon oi such Other election laws whenever po_lbto. April 5, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL _A_r_oam_Txo_ OF ArPROPRXaTXONS "SEc. 514. There are authorized to be appropriated to the Commission, for the putpose of carrying out its functions under this title, such funds as are necessary for the fiscal year ending July 30, 1975, and each fiscal year thereafter.". (b) The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 is amended by-(1) striking out "Comptroller General" in sections 104(a) (3), (4), and (5) and insertlng "Federal Election Commission"; (2) striking out "Comptroller General" in section 105 and inserting "Federal Election Commission"; (3) amending section 301(g) (relating to definitions) to read as follows: ',(g) 'Connnission' means theFederalEleclion Commission;"; (4) striking out "supervisory officer" in section 302(d) (relating to organization of political committees) and inserting "Cornmission"; (5) amending section 302(f) by-(A) att/king out "appropriate supervisory officer'' in the quoted matter appearing in paragraph (1) and inserting "Federal Election Commission"; (B) striking out "supervisory officer" in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (2) and inserting "Commission"; and (C) striking out "which has filed a report with him" in paragraph (2) (A) and insertLng "which has filed a report with it"; (6) amending section 303 (relating to reglstration of political committees; statemerits) by-(A) strtki .ag out "supervisory officer" each time it appears and inserting "Commission"; and (B) striking out "he" in the second sentence of subsection (a) and inserting "it"; (7) amending section 304 (relating to reports by political commit-tees and candidates) by--(A) striking out "appropriate supervisory officer" and "him" in the first sentence of subsection (a), arid inserting "CommL_lon" and "it"0 respectively; (B) striking out "supervisory officer" where, it appears in the second sentence of subsection (a) and in paragraphs (12) and (13) _f subsection (b), and inserting "Cornmission"; and (C) striking out everything after "filing" in the second sentence of subsection (a) and Inserting a period; (8) striking out "supervisory officer" each place it appears in section 305 (relating to reports by other than political committees) and section 306 (relating to formal requirements respecting reports and statements) and inserting "Commission"; · (9) striking out "Comptroller General of the United States" and "he" in section 307 (relating to reports on convention financing) and inserting "Federal Election Commission" and "it", respectively; (10) striking out "SlYPERVISORT'OFFICER'_ ill the caption of section 30.8 (relating to duties of the supervisory officer) and inserting "COMJ_SSXON"; (11) striking out "supervisory officer" In the first.sentences of subsections 308(a) and 308(b) and inserting "Commission"; (12) amending section 308(a) by-(A) striking out "him" in paragraphs (I) and (4) and inserting/'it"; and (B) striking out "he" each place it appears in paragraphs (7) and (9) and insertlng "it"; (13) amending subsection (c) of section 308 by-(A) striking out "Comptroller General" each place it appears therein and inserting "Commission _, and striking "his _ in the second sentence of such subsection and inserffing'It_"; and (B) striking out the last sentence thereof; (14) amending subsection (d) (I) of seclion 808 by-- RECORD -- SENATE S 5337 (A) striking out "supervisory officer" each place it appears therein and inserting "Cornmission"; (B) striking out "he" the first place it ap- On insert On insert page 64, line 14, strike in lieu thereof "312.". page Une 23, strike in lieu64,thereof "211.". out "319." and out "213." and pears in the second sentence and inserting "It"; and (C) striking out "The Attorney General on behalf of the United States" and insertlng "The Commission or the Attorney Oeneral on behalf of the United States"; and (15) striking out "a supervisory officer" in section 309 (relating to statements filed with State officers) and inserting "the Commission". (c) (1) Section 5314 of title 5, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following paragraph: "(60) Members, Federal Election Commission (7).". (2) Section 5316 of such title is amended by redesignating the second paragraph (133) as (134), and by adding at the end thereof the following new paragraphs: "(135) General Counsel, Federal Election Commission. "(136) Executive Director, Federal Election Commission.". (d) Until the appointment cf all of the members of the Federal Election Commission and its General Counsel and until the transfer provided for in this subsection, the Comptroller General, the Secretary of the Senate, and the Clerk of the 19ouse of Representatives shall continue to. carry out their responsibilities under title ! and title III of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 as those titles existed on the day before the date of enactment of this Act. Upon the appointment of all the'members of the Commission and its General Counsel, the Comptroller General, the Secretary of the Senate, and the Clerk of the House of Representatives shall meet with the Commission and arrange for the transfer, 'within thirty days after the date on which ali such merebers are appointed, of all records, documents, memorandums, and other papers associated with carrying out their responsibilities under title I and title III of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 as it existed on the day before the date of enactment of this Act. (e) Subtitle H (Financing of Presidential Election Campaigns) of the Internal Revehue Code of 1954 (relating to financing of Presidential election campaigns) is repealed, (f) The amendments made by this section shall take effect on January 1, 1975. On page 42, beginning with line 1, strike out through line 16 on page 59. On page 59, strike out lines 18, 19, 20, and 21, and insert in lieu thereof the followlng: Szc. 207. Section 398(a) (6) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 is amended to read as follows: On page 60, beginning with line 13, strike out through line 9 on page 61. On page 61, line 12, strike out "SEc. 210." and insert In lieu thereof "SEc. 208.". On page 61, line 14, strike out "redeslghated as section 314 of such Act and". On page 61, strike out lines 16, 17, and 18. On Page 61, llne 19, strike out "(2)" and insert in lieu thereof "(1)% On page 61, line 24, strike out "(3)" and insert in lieu thereof "(2)". On page 62, line 6, strike out '"211." and insert in' lieu thereof "209.% On page 62, line 8, strlke out "redesignated as section 315 of such Act and'. On page 62, strike out lines 12 and 13. On page 62, line 15, strike out "212." and insert in lieu thereof "210.". On page 62, beginning with :line 18, strike out through line 5 on page 64. On page 64, line 7, strike out "318. _ and insert in lieu thereof "311,". On page 64, line 9, beginning with ", title V,", strike out through "Code,'" on line 10. On page 71, line 20, strike out "(1)% On page 72, line 1, i;trike out _would be limited under section 504" and insert in liea_ thereof "is limited under section 506". On page 72, strike out lines 2 and 3 a_Ld ii_sert lu lieu thereof "Campaign Act of 1971.". On page 72, line 4, strike out "(2)" and insert in lieu thereof "(b) (1) ". On page 72, line 7, strike out "(3)" and insert in lieu thereof "(2) ". On page 72, line 12, strike out "(4)" and insert in lieu thereof "(3)". On page 72, line 21, strike out "(5)" and insert in lieu thereof "(c)". On page 73, beginning with line 3, strike out through line 4 ¢,n page 75. On page 75, line 6, strike out "(a) (5)" and insert in lieu thereof "(e)". On page 75, line 11, strike out "(a) (4)" and insert in lieu thereof "(b) % On page 75, beginning with line 19, strike Out through line 8 on ·page 77 and insert in lieu thereof the following: "(a) (:L) No person may make a contribu-lion to a major party, to a candidate who seeks the nomination of a major party, or to the candidate of a major party for use in connectiion with a primary election or gen-eral election campaign of that party or can-diddle. "(2) No major party candidate who seeks the nomiation of a major party, or candi-date of a major party may knowingly accept a contribution from any person in con,nection with a primary election or general election campaign of that party or candidate. For purposes of this paragraph, a contribution accepted by any political commi_.tee which makes any expenditures in con.nection with the primary or general election campaign of a major party or the candidate of a major party shall be considered to be received by that party or candidate. "(b) ]_o minor party may accept contrib'u.. ttons in connection with its Federal election campaign actlvitie.,_ in excess of an amount which, when added to the maximum amount of payments by the Federal Election Com.mission to which that party is entitled under section 505 of the Federal Election Campaign i_ct of 1971, exceeds the amounts of payments by the Commission to which a major party is entitled under section 505 of such Act. "(c) (i) No candidate; who seeks the nornination of a minor party may accept total contributions in connection with his primary' election campaign which exceeds the amount of the limitation on expenditures which ap_ plies to a candidate in a primary electimx campatt:n under section 506 (a) (1) or (b) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971. "(2) (&) A candidate of a minor party or _n independent candkiate may accept contributinns in comlect_on with his general election campaign only .during the period begimli:ag one hundred and eighty days before the date of the general election, or on the date on which a major party nominates a candidate for the office the minor party or independent candidate seeks, whichever date is earlier and ending on the date of the ge:aeral election. "(B) No candidate of a minor party or independent candidate may accept total contxlbutions which, when added to the ma::imum amount of payments by the Federal Electior, LCommission to which that candidate is eatlt]_ed under section 505 of the Federal ElectiouL Campaign Act of 1971, exceed the limitati,_n on expenditures which applies to a candidate in a general election campaign under _ction 506 (a) (2) or (b) of such Act. 411 S 5338 CONGKESSIONAL "(d) For purposes of this section, a contrlbution accepted by any political committee which makes any expenditures in connection with the primary or general election campaign of a minor party, a candidate who seeks the nomination of a minor party, a minor party' candidate, or an independent candidate, t.,s considered to be accepted by that party or candidate. "(e) (1) No person may make a contribution which, when added to all other contrlbutions made by that person to the same party or candidate in connection with the same campaign, exceeds $100. This $101] limitation applies separately to contributions made in connection with a primary election campaign and with'a general election campaign, ''(2) No party or candidate may knowingly accept contributions in connection with its Federal election campaign from any person which, when. added to ail other contributions accepted by tha t party or candidate which were made by that person in connection with the same campaign, equals an amount in excess of $I00. This $100 limitation applies separately to contributions made in conneetion with a primary election campaign and with a general election campaign. For purposes of this paragraph a contributlo_a accepted by any political committee which makes any expenditures in connection with the primary' or general election campaign of a candidate shall be considered to be acceptedby that candidate. "(f) No person mary make a contribution which, when added to all other contributions made by that person to all political parties and carLdidates in connection with any primary election or general election campaigns during the preceding twelve months, exceeds $1,000. -(g) All contributions which a party or candidate shall bein sent to t_he Fedoral Election.receives Commission the manner and RECORD --- SENATE April 5, 19 74 of total public ILqancing of Federal ele(> tions. It is a proposal to eliminate the dominance of the private dollar in tko ment, is to put public infiue:ace of campaign requires total public actions beyond the contributors. That financing of elec- public's business, The introduction of this amendment in 110 way reflects a lack oJ support for the public financing legislation t:hat Senator ]._OWARD CANNON and Senator CT.AmOR_:E ]?ELL have managed so ably over the last week or so. If anything, my support for t[ons, and absolutely no reliance on ptivate contributors. Mr. President, my amendment would remove the influence el private money in public elections. It is the only proposai _vhich does so. It provides for total Federal financing in primary and gen- the Rules Committee bill has grown during the debate as the Senate has con.. ,ddered the ar_luments cf the opponen_;s I;O public financing, But the introduction of this amend[.ment does reflect a fur damental belici that S, 3044 does not go f:tr enough. Given the incredible abuse of the po]iticalproc.- oral elections for all Federal offices. It is the only proposal which allows candidates to qualify for public financlng ix; primaries by d_monstrating the only legitimate evidence of public support--the petition signatures of registered voters. This is a far more sarisfactory and representatiw. · way of deter- ess, given the skepticism and doubt of the American people, a _ystem of public financing that is either p;_rtial or optional .'dmply will not be enough, Over the last few days, the, Senate has heard hours of debate over public fl.rlancing, and in all of that ti:me, we have mining public support than continued reliance on private contributions. All the peopl_ should control the access to public offices, not just those who have enough money to devote part of it to politics. And for those people concerned about the chance of public financing attracting gotten lost in the complexities of amend.ments and counterprop)sals, and there ].'las been a tendency to :[ergot about one central point.' the present system of fi.nancmg political campaigns simply docs ]3et work. It is beyond, reform, bike an old tire too many candidates, the proposa! provldes 6hat the candidate must obtain a minimum percentage of the vote-to avoid reimbursing the Fed. erM Treasury far the cost of t_ _, -'_,m-aign. The plan would distribute campaign funds in primaries equally to all candi- with too msmy miles and too many patch(_, it cannot be repairc_l. It has to be changed--and that ¢hange must in.elude :more th_Ln partial or optional pub-]ic financing, The Senator from Ah_bama (Mr. Al.... ]3EN) has argued at leng'h that the pub-. dates _vho qualify. Everyone should have an equal chance at the public's attraction. Matching a_d mixed plans of privote _.nd public financing simply reinforce, at public expense, the candidate preferences of those with enough money to contribute to political campaigns. The with any information about the identity of the contributor which the Commission prescribes by rule. "(h) (1) No person shall make any expenditure advocating the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate or political party during any calendar year (other than an expenditure made on behalf of a candidate, a_ defined in section 506 (d) (2)) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 which, when added to all other such expenditures made by that person during that year excesds $1,000. "(2) For purposes of paragraph (1), 'clearly identified' means-"(A) the candidate or political party is named; "(B) a photograph or drawing of the candidate appesxs; or "(C) the identity of the candidate or political party is apparent by unambiguous reference, (1), 'person'"(3)doesFornotpurposes include ofa paragraph political party. tic financing proposal now before the Senate has its own problems and lnfirm_-ties. Perhaps it does, but whatever tho_,:e problems and infirmitie:;, it is definitely ]preferable to the current system..As tko Clear Rapids Oazette ob;;erved in an ed_[-. torial just yesterday: "incumbency advantage" inherent in all matck:[ng plans for public financing is significant, and the only way to elimAnato ii; is to eliminate the use of private funds as a measure of public support. The terrific advantages that Incumbents now have over their challengers There is no great reassurance in the idea o:_ tax monies paying for the self-centerE_d blandishments of political candidates. Bn_ distasteful as the propo_ al may seem, It beats the daylights out of the present abuse.prone :financing system, Arid total public finarcing of l_)litical (;ampaigns beats the daylights out (ff partial and optional public financing (ff political campaigns, Total public financing would eliminate many of the questions that; the opp¢;.., nets of S. 3044 have raised. There would not be loopholes available for anyone to arise chiefly out of the system of private lq_rlallctng. Incumbents hays a built-in advan{;age in raising campaign funds. Only i)y eliminating the need' to raise private funds can that advantage be substantially reduced and the campaign contest balanced. Matching plans not only fail to reduce the advantage, but tend inevitably to increase it. Decreasing the k_Lal amount of private funds required means candidates have to raise less money, but incumbents will always raise it quicker. Putting a ceiling On the size of contributions means the number "(1) For purposes of this section-_(1) 'contribution' does not include moneys collected for a petition drive under section 507 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971; and "(2) 'major party' and 'minor party' have the same definitions as under section 501 of the Federal :Election Campaign Act of 1971." Mr. CL_K. Mr. President, this amendment is offered as a substitute for title I of the Senate Rules Connnittee bill (S. 3044) now under consideration, and the amendment is identical to the Comprehensive Election Reform Act (S. 2943) which I introduced in Pebruary. The legislation goes beyond the provisions of S. 3044, and far beyond anything previously considered by the Senate, but there is no question that this is the time and the place to again raise the concept funnel private money to candidates for Public office ii' only because candidates Would have no need for private ffloney, _rld every citizen would have the same influence, the same acco as, the same de .... gree of representation from public offi-, rials. Each of its could rote, each of r_s could volunteer in a campaign, None of us could use money and wealta to buy public c,ffice or political influence, There is an inherent Inconsistency in relying on private fund.'; in any way to suppo1% election to publJc office. As long _ candidates have to depend on private funds---howew_r large or small the amount--the potential for abuse will remain. And the people know it. The only way to dissipate their doubt ired distrust, the only way to restoie faith in the integrity of popular govern-, of 412 cor_tributors is increased. And here again, incumbents have an enormous advantage because of their network of friends and supporters. Finally, this proposal provides for elfeetiw_ enforcement of campaign finance laws. '(Inlike any other bill, it creates a commission which covers al] permissible political expenditures--gm.ods, services, and aaiaries. And it charges them against the candidates' accounts mainrained by the commission. Perhaps the central lesson of Watergate i_,;that we must carefully guard, not only t_.le sources of campaign contributions, but their use. The Commission established in my amendment would police expenditures before they are made, rather than simply audit them after they a_._ m_o,de--when it is too late either to April 5, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE S 5339 prevent the harm or to remedy its cons_quences. The threat of punishment alone is too weak a deterrent when so to spend money in disseminating his personal expressions. As for parties and candidates, the public contributions. subsidy would The merely opportunities replace the prirate to House: Primary: 25¢ x YAP (or Senate amount if state h_3 only one Congressional district); GeneraZ: x VAP. Plow 30¢ QVJALIFY much political power is at stake, _rle cost of my proposal is necessarily higher than the cost of the committee bill but at most, it will take $250 million a year to fully finance all Federal eleclion campaigns. That amounts to less than one-tenth of I percent of the annual budget of this Government. It amounts to less than one-fifth of the cost of one Trident nuclear submarine. It amounts to about $1 a year from every American. It amounts to an awfully small price to pay to restore trust and confidence in our political system, and to return to a government tIq_ly responsible tO ali the people. Many contend that _e must encourage, not discourage, small individual contributions to political campaigns. There is an argument that encouraging small contributions increases participation in the political process, But only a tiny percentage of the American people now contribute in any amount to p01itical campaigns. Fewer than than 2 percent of those who voted in 1972 contributed to either Presidential campaign, and less than one-half of 1 percent of any constituency ever contribute to an individual candidate. When they do contribute, it is usually by virtue of their wealth and education. If we continue to allow private contributions, whatever the rules or limits, we will inevitably continue to favor that tiny group and discriminate against the vast majority of Americans. I believe very strongly in increasing political participa- travel, to buy space or time in the media, to leaflet and advertise, would remain. The relalive size of expenditures by one or another candidate might be affected, but the First Amendment has. never been supposed to guarantee those able to raise the most money the greatest opportunity for organized polltical expression, A "constitutional right" to use Wealth in the political process is a right that only destroys the rights of others. The ellmination of private contributions and the substitution of public financing of politicai campaigns is both legal and desirable. In 1976 this country will celebrate its 200th birthday. I hope the Senate passes a bill that will enable us to cleanse polltics of the real and perceived corruption that haunts the country, and that will encourage our citizens to renew their faith in the institutions of self-governmont. That is the only way to enter our third century with heads lmbowed by shame, confident ill the future. We can not afford to do anything less. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in th(: RECORD, a summary of my amendment, There being no objection, the summary was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: COi_PREHENSIVEELECTIONREFORM ACT oF 1974 Provisions: CANDIDATESAND ELECTIONS COVERED President: Primary and general (lncorporates Presidential check-off fund) Congress: primary and general, tion, but only in a way that allows everyone to participate equally. This proposal would encourage equal involvement--with the provision of an income tax checkoff--and involvement on a volunleer basis where coqnsideration of economic status is not a factor, Others have suggested that to outlaw private contributions would somehow violate the first amendment right of free- TYPE O]_'FUNDINa Automatic full funding of ali qualifyin_ major party candidates with partial funding of minor and independent candidates on basis of vote performance. Campaign bills paid by and through Federal Election Cornmission. Candidates agrees to :ale all necessary records and comply with audit requirements, certlfyin_that he or she will not exceed spending and contribution limits. President: Primary: Petition signatures of 1% of VAP in each primary state must be filed with Commission 210 days before pr_mary, to be validated by Commls,s, lon within 3o days. General: partyfunding. candidates automatlcally qualifyMajor for full Senate: Primary: Petition signatures of x% of VAP in Sta_e must be filed with Cornmission 210 days before primary. General: Major party candidates automatically qualify for full funding. House: Primary: Petition signatures of 2% of VAP 1210days in district 'before :must primary be filed(1% withif single Commission district state). General: Major party candidates automatlcally qualify for full funding. National party: Automatically quallfies for funding based on a percentage of the presldential candidate entitlement. CANDma.rr SPE_hlDIIqGLrl_'IT Same as total entitlement allowed major party candidates (see "Amount of Fundlng"). Irt presidential primary, candidate can authorize his or her national committee 1:o spend u:p to 10% of his or her total allowable limit in states entered, reducing own spending by that same amount. Unoppose_d primary candidates mag spend only 20% el amount allowed opposed candidate. LX_XTS ON INDIVmUAL PRIVATE CONTRIBUTIONS No private contributions can be given to or accepted by major party candidates or major parties in primary or general elections. (Exception for $100 maximum contributions allowed in petition gathering, all contributions to be refunded later from primary entitlemerit). Limit of $100 on contribution to minor party, independent candidate (sep-. arate limit for primary, runoff, general). Minor party, independent candidates may accept private contributions up to overal_ spending limit. Lnwrr.,; olay CoN_am_FIONS BY ?OLITICAL dom of expression. But in a number of cases, the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently affirmed the existence of another basic right---the right of citizens to be free of wealth distinctions in the political process--and the court has further implied an affirmative obligation to eliminate the influence of wealth on political campaigns, Prof. Archibald Cox, whose combination of scholarly and practical knowledge of this issue is unique, made the case convincingly in the March 9, 1974 Saturd_y Review/World. He wrote: The objection is sometimes raised that prohibiting private campaign contributions violates the freedom of speceh guaranteed by the First Amendment. Money is indeed necessary in order to make speech effective. Those of few or modest means can make themselves heard only by pooling their resources. Even so, spending money is one step removed from speech, and the contributor is a second step away because he is using money to promote not his own speech but anothers. Nor can it fairly be said that ideas would be suppressed or opportunities for speech be restricted. Everyone would be left free to speak and write as an individual. E_cept for the very wealthy, everyone would be left free P_T_ ORGANIZATIONS COVERED National party (major and minor) automatlcally receives funding in presidential election year of up to 20% of amount allowed Its presidential candidates. In all other years, it's up to 15% of that amount. Party may spend public funds for election activities such as voter registration, nominating conventions, get-out-the-vote drives. Bills paid directly by Federal Election Commission. now AD_INISTEREI) Seven member Federal Elections Commtssion, appointed by President with consent of Senate to serve staggered seven year terms. Two recommended by Senate leadership, two by House. No more than four of :seven of same political party. Responsible for administerlng, auditing, enforcing federal campaign finauce program. Has full investigative, subpoena, prosecutorlal powers. Commission respouses to Executive Branch. Executive Branch prohibited from censortug Commission comments or testimony, Commission sets up accounting system for each qualified candidate, pays all bills djrectly, except for petty cash expenses of $2§ or less. A_OUNT OF FUNDIN(_ Preside_t: Primary: 15_ x VAP * in each state; General: 20¢ x VAP in each state, Senate: Primary.' 15¢ x VAP (or $175,000 if greater); General: 20¢ x VAP (or $250,000 if greater), *VAP--voting age populatio_L , COMMITTIEE TO CANDIDA?_I No contributions allowed to major party candida_;es or to major party. $100 limit on contribt_tlons to minor, independent candl-. dates. T]_EATMEi_WOF _IINOR AND NEW PARTIES/CANDIDATES Entitled to a fraction of major party fund-. lng on ratio of minor/new didatebasedvotes received to average party votes can-. re_. -ceived by major party candidate. May raise proportionately more in private funds up to spending limit. Can receive additional funding--up to total funding--after el_,ction on basis of per.. formance. , SPEC_7iC RE_ITRICTIOIqS Major party candidate must repay full eh.tltlement if he or she receives less than 15% of votes in primary or 25% in general elec.. lion. Candidates may wlt:hdraw under certain conditions, repaying half of entitlement re.oeived. Post election audit can require repayme:a_ of excess funds received by candidate. Minor party camtidate or his or her far,a.. ily can spend $1,000 on primary or general election (treated separately); n,.aJor party candidate or family canspend $1,000 in con-. nection with petition drive. All private contributions to minor, ils.. dependent candidates must be sent to Elee-. tion Commission, fully identified. Full reporting of petition drive contrlb_l.. tlons. 413 S 5340 CONGRESSIONAL Spending limits for petition drives: House: 2¢ x VAP. Senate: 1,t x VAP or $7,500, whichever is more. Limit of $I00 on individual's contribution to petltlon drive. TAXINCENTIVESFORSMALLCONTRIB'JTIONS Increase tax credit to 100% of contribution up to $I00 ,[$200on Joint return). Provides automatic income tax payment to Election Fund of $2, unless taxpayer specifically deslgnates"no." OTHERPROVISIONS Repeals Sec. 315 "equal time" requirements of Communications Act for all fecleral candtdates, Bans any use federal cf frankelection. for mass mailings 90 days before Directs Postal Service to establish special rates for all federal candidates, PENALTIES Up to $60,000/five years. CivU penalty: Up to $10,000 per day per violation, ESTIMATED ANNUALCOST $250 million (assumes three candidates in each party primary for every Federal office), Effective Date: January 1, 1975. Mr. PEI/L. Mr. President, I eongratulate the Senator from Iowa on the eom.pleteness fairness that of his an for theandthought hasamendment gone into it. It is, as he suggests, a very innovative and major suggestion. It would involve substantialexpense, substantial amounts from the public treasury, perhaps twice or three times as much as is foreseen in. the bill that is presently under consideration. This matter was not considev3d in the deliberations of the_ subcommittee. It was not adequately con- RECORD --- SENATE been erected that block full democratic :participation by all Americans in our ,Government and politic.,;, We have made some great strides JXl _he last 25 yE._rs, however, in reducing 1_nd eliminating these barriers. Unconsti_ tutional voting require._ents posed by 'the poll tax, literacy requirements, re_idency laws, and some 01!the more subtle racially motivated obst:_cles, have been removed. And, we are m,_kingsome prog:['_SSin facilitating vot_.,r registration--a Step of grea_ importance in increasing democratic participation in our Governmeat. Yet there is more tha', we can, should, :_nd must do, In the name of true popular democracy, to bring the mas.,; of the peopie into the political system of our Na_;ion. Mr. Preside:at, accorcing to a survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureav., 51.2 million ei_igible Arr ericans did no'_ vote in the general elections in Noveml_er 1972. That number repre;_ented a full 37 percent of the voting-age population in this country at thai time. Many of these people have been ,ienied this basic :right of citizenship because of hard-to_ :find registration offices and a full day's work. The amendment I su]cmit today woultd eliminate one of the major obstacles ":o fuller voter ps,_%icipatio:x in elections. It would assure that millions of American working families are not deterred from excercising their fran-.hise in Presidential and congf'essional elections, My amendment make_ election day the :.qrst Wednesday after the first 1Vt0nd_Ly April 5, 19 74/ a job from keeping the 80 million Americans who work in factories, on farms, and lxxthe businesses of this Nation, from the voting booths. Mr. President, I believe this amendment,--providing a legal election holiday every 2 years beginning in 19?6--would incre_se voter participation for the most important office in the land: The presidency of the United States--an open day so that every citizen will have all the time in that day available to consider the candidates and exercise his franchise. And tlhe same, of course, would apply to the officesof U.S.Senator and Mereber of the House of Representatives. I send to the desk my amendment, for myself and for Mr. G'OLDWATER, and ask that it be printed. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be received and printed, and will be on the table. Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I might ask the acting manager of the bill, since this amendment has passed through the Senate twice with overwhelming votes, as to whether or not he would just like to accept the amendment or let is go over so we (:an vote on it. It wil2 be adopted again, I am sure, unl_s the Senate has completely changed its mind. Mr. PELL. Mr. President, I would like to ask, in view of_the fact that, as the Senator has suggested, I am the acting floor manager, that it go over until next week, when the floor manager will be here. Mr. HUMPHREY. Very good. sidered at that time. the Finally, there is 2n November, and also creates a legal the of what rule question in connection with courts the Batwould out holiday on that day. Sew._ral other Na';ions--Denmari_, prohibition on private contributions. Italy, l_'ance, Germany, and Austria_~They might be willing and already have which enjoy 85 to 95 pel'cent voter turn.supported a limitation on the amount out in nearly every election have desig., an individual can contribute. To pro- noted election day aholiday, hibit him from contributing anything These are nations that are industriabmight be a violation of his constitutional ized. They fir_d that the workers pa:'._ rights, ticipate freely openly, and in much For these reasons, as the acting manlarger nmnbers when there is an electic,n ager of the bill, I would be compelled _aoliday. not to support the amendment of the I believe that it world substantially Senator from Iowa. Mr. President, I move that th,_ amendimprove participation in om' elections, a,s well. EXECL_ Mr. ROBERT C I ask unanimous ate gc into execut certain nominati, reported today by Judiciary. The PRESIDIN objection, it is so c ment of time. the Senator from Iowa be tabled at this The PRESIDINQ OFFICER. The ques- will sl:;ate the firs ( _rkreadthe nomination. nominaThelegislative ti.on o:i!S. John Co tone, of Pennsylvania, to be 'U.S. attorn_ V for the middie district 011Pennsylvax ia. The PILESIDIN ?, OFFICER. Without objection, the nol dnation is conSidered and confirmed. tion is on agreeing to the motion of the Senator from Rhode Island. The motion was agreed to. AMENDMENT-NO. 156 Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. 1President, today I submit an amendment for myself and my distinguished colleague from Arizona (Mr. GOLnWATES) that would make the day on which Federal general elections are held a legai public holiday. While I have been successful in each of the last :2years in winning Senate approval of similar amendments, neither of them have been enacted, for various reasons unrelated to the substance of this proposai. I hope that this time it will be passed 'by the Congress and become law. The logic of this amendment is just as compelling today as it has been for years. Under our present electoral syst_m, a number of serious obstacles have 414 Workers who commute long distances _E SESSION BYRD. Mr. President, :onsent that the Senve session to consider ns which have been the Committee on the } OFFICER. :dered. U.S. A 7TORNEY The PRESIDIN4 OFFICER. Without The clerk t_) work often leave home before polls open and return after t2ey ihave close4, ]People working irregular shifts in a shop or factory are also discouraged from voting. In some areas rush hours at the polls a longgetwait in ]line many mean who must to _ork, andcausir_.g mar_.v others who are tired fl om a full day's labor, to give up their granchise in dc_ U.S. DIS_ gICT JUDGE ,';pair. Mr. President, it is time we put an erd The legislative ( erk read the nomina_,0 this obstacle to democracy. The ti.on cf Murray ]_i. Schwartz, of Delaamendment 1'. am intreducing tods:y ware, to be a U.S. district judge for the would achieve this goal, it would elim_b_ district of Delawa_ ate the work day as an obstacle to ex_ The PRESIDIN ] OFFICER. Without panding suffrage, objection, the no_ dnation is considered The right to vote sho'_ld not be ham.and confirmed. pered by any economic 3ons:ideration. 2_ :is too important to the survival of our U.S. A ?TORNEY system of gow.q'nment.:in the 19th cer_.._ ,;ury we eliminated property ownership The legislative ( erk read the nomlnarequirements for voting in this country, tJion of Mr. WiUia: x J. Schloth, of Gcoi'.is we enter the last qu_rter of the 20th gia, to be U.S. at orney for the middle century, it is time for us to act to prevent distric_ of Georgia April 5, 1971_ CONGRESSIONAL RECORD _ SENATE The PRESIDING )FFICER, Without objection, the nomix rotten is considered and confirmed, U.S. DISTR] _r JUDGE The legislative cle{ : read the nomination of Joseph W. M ,rris, of Oklahoma, to be U.S. district {u lge for the eastern district of Oklahoma. The PRESIDING _ )FFICER. Without objection, the nomir _tion is considered and confirmed. U.S. MK sHAL The legislative cleft: tion of George A. Loc · to be U.S. marshal for of Washington. The PRESIDING t objection, the nomin and confirmed, read the nominace, of Washington, _he eastern district LEOISLATIV] Mr. ROBERT C. BI I ask u_ntmous con ate return to the con lative business. ' There being no ob. SESSION ZD. Mr. President, ent that the Senideration of legis- business. resumed the consider _PPICER. Without _tlon is considered ,,ction, the tion Senate of legislative S 53411 PROGRAM to Senate Res Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mi. President, mark of rest on Monday, the Senate will convene at Georges Pom] the hour of 12 o'clock noon. After the two French Repub leaders have been recognized under the adjourn. standing order, there will be a period for The motion the transaction of routine morning busito; and at 11 ness of not to exceed 30 minutes, with journed until statements limited therein to 5 minutes 12 noon. each, at the conclusion of which the Senate will resume consideration of the unCO_ finished business, S. 3044. Executive n At that time the pending question will the Senate Apr be on an amendment by Mr. TALMADGE, DEPAR_ on which there is a time limitation of 30 minutes. Any rollcaU votes on the Talmadge amendment or other amendments, motions, et cetera, will not occur until the hour of 3:30 p.m. The leadership would expect several rollcalls on Monday. Mr. President, if there is anything in my statement of the program that has not been previously ordered, I ask unanimOUS consent that it be done. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it Is so ordered, c_ ADJ__!__.MENT Mr. ROBERT C. ]_YRD. Mr:President, if there be no furt]_er business to come before the Senate, ]]move, in accordance with the previous _rder, and, pursuant ,lution 304, as a further ;ct to the memory of idou, President of tho lc, that the Senate now was unanimously agreed 33 a.m. the Senate ad_onday, April 8, 1974, at ?IRM. ATIONS ninations confirmed 5, 1974: _.ENT O_ by JUSTICE william J. Scl Loth, of Georgia, to be U_9. attorney :for the middle district of Georgl_ for the term of 4 Fears. s. John Cott¢ le, of Pennsylvania, to bo u.s. attorney for bhe middle district of Penn-. sylvania for the I .rm of 4 years. George A. Loci ton for the marshal forterm the (The above i subject tx}the n. spend to reques; fore any duly c( Senate.) IN _, of Washington, to be U:S. ,f 4 years. .astern district of Washing-aminations were approved minee's commitment to reto appearcommittee and testify astituted of be-. the HE JUr,ZCZAR_r Joseph Judge W. Morf ris, the of Oklahoma, to be U.S. district eastern district o/ Oklahomm Murray M. Sc] wartz, of Delaware. to bo u.s. district Jl age for the district of Delaware. 415 SENATE FLOOR. DEBATES ON 33044 APRHL 8,1974 April 8, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL ration and recons' :action stage (e.g. to avert the recurrence h( _efully of such disasters) may not be avaH_ble. Without a reasonable assurance of co: tinuity of food supply, the voluntary age: cy programs of rehabilitation and developr ent may have to be abandoned or greatly _duced in many of these instances. The voluntary iencies pointed out these problems in test tony presented last year before b_th Sena ;e and House Agriculture Committees relat ve to the extermion of PL 480. They decl_ red at that time "... we voice our concern'. ;st, in the face of continulng and expandinl need, there be failure to implement or to fund the programs ndequately." In repl_ PL 480 was remandated by the Congress f( _ an additional four years. In addition, the 'oreign Assistance Act of 1973 declared it t_ be the sense of Congress that in assessing f ,od production, levels, "the expected demands for humanitarian food assistance through such programs as · · Public Law 480' _e included and that increased flexibility 0e provided through consideration of legi_ latlon to amend Section 401 of PL 480. In he same Act the sense of Congress also was :pressed that "The United States should p_ ticipate fully in efforts to alleviate currei and future food shortages which threat_ the world." The volUntary agencies conc_ fully in this position, it is the partic_ _r plea of the American Council of Volun_ _ry Agencies for Foreign Service, and parti, _!larlythose of its mereher agencies operi _ing relief, rehabilitation and development programs overseas that especially now wit Lrenewed Foreign Assistance emphasis on ievelopment and the irapending food cri is which confronts the world, the Congr_ _s should take whatever steps it deems ap ropriate to give material substance to the 'shove "sense of Congress" provisions to the e_td that insofar as possible a continuing and :.egular food resource will be available to the voluntary agencies under PL 480 for their overseas programs. CONCLUSI( N OF MORNING BI SINESS The PRESIDi NG OFFICER (Mr. HATHAWAY). The time for the transaction of routine morning business has now expired. Morning busi_ _is closed, FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1974 The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order the Senate will now resume the consideration of the unflnished business, S. 3044, which the clerk will state, The legislative clerk read as follows: s. 3044, to amend khe Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing of primary and general election campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating to the financing and conduct of such campaigns. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I believe that the distinguished Senator from Iowa (Mr. CLASK) is prepared to call up his amendment on which the yeas and nays have already been ordered. It is my understanding that when debate is completed on his amendment, if completed prior to 3:30 p.m. today-which I am sure it will be---the vote on the C!ark amendment will occur at the hour of 3:30 p.m. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct. Mr. Chair. Mr. ROBERT RECORD -- SENATE C. BYRD. I thank AMENDMENT NO. _lS2 CLARK. Mr. President, the I call up S 5411. turea foi' these cormnit,%ees--with the sky as the lhnit." In response, Senator B_oc_ said: our average contribution was something my amendment No. 1152 and ask that its reading be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered, and the text Of the amendment will be printed in the RECORDat this point, The text of the amendment follows: on the order of $23.75 ii1 the Republican party . . . by no definition can that $23.75 _ sufficient to in_uence the election or the vote of sa individual running for the Senate. Perhaps the ,average contribution to the Republican Party is $23.75, but that certainly can't be the average contribu- On page 78, after the matter appearing below line 22, insert the following: REPEAL OF CERTAIN EXCEPTIONS TO CONTRIBU, TION ANDEXPENDITURELIMITATIONS SEC. 305. Section 814(c) (3) of title 18, United States Code (as added by section 304 of this Act), and section 615(e) of such title (as added by section 304 of this Act) (relatlng to the application of such sections to eerrain campaign committees) are repealed. Section 615 of title 18, United States Code (as added by section 304 of this Act), is amended by striking out "(f)" and inserting in lieu thereof "(e)". tion to the Campaign Committees of the House and Senate. The ticket price fol' the Republicans' annual fund-raising dinner is $1,000---for the Democl:ats, the price is $500. And many of those tickets are purchased in blocks by various groups. No one should confuse national political parties, SUpl×,rted as they are by Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the name of the Senator from Illinois (Mr. STEVENSON) be added as a cosponsor of my amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without quired about: The maximum amount that could be received from any contribufor by one of the "in-house" Campaign Committees. Senator Bsoc_: said: The same limit that would apply to giving to a campaign or to the n_tional committee, s would apply here. objection, it is so ordered. Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, last Wednesday, .with only a handful of Senators in the Chamber, the Senate passed amendment No. 1102 by voice vote. The amendment exempted the House and Senate campaign committees of the two I am not at aH sure that's Under S. 3044, an individual to givir_ $3,000 and a group giving $6,000 to any single campaign. But an individual limited only by tile $25,000 major parties from the contribution and expenditure limitations of the campaign financing bill now before the Senate. In my judgment, the amendment opens an obvious loophole that will allow massive amounts of private money to influence congressional campaigns, serionsly compromising the excellent legislation that Chairman CANNON and the rules committee have brought to the. floor, The amendment I have introduced ing in contributing to one of these committees, and for groups there would be no limit at all. What this amendment has done is exerupt _e House and Senate Campaign Committees from any effective restrictions. Individuals could contribute to them almost without limit. Groups could contribute completely withou%limit. And, unlike any other political committees, these committees c_uld contribute un.limited amounts directly to the candi- would repeal sections of the last bill added by the the amendment passed Wednesday. In offering that amendment, the distinguished Senator from Tennessee (Mr. BROCK) said: xt is important that our parties not be weakened. But strengthened, by whatever action Congress takes. I would hope that in writing this particular bill we can provide that sense of purpose with this amendment, (Pg. s. 5189 CONGRESmONAL RECORD, April 3, 1974). dates---with ceilings the candidates' expenditure as the only total effective restraint. In the case of a Senate race in California, it would mean that the legal limiration on what the Democratic and COP senatorial campaign committees could give would be $2,121,450 in the general election. In Iowa, it would be $288,000. In Temlessee, it would be $406,500. It .'ts apparent that last Wednesday the Senate set aside ally effective limitation on contributions. This bill had just that "sense of purpose" already--without the Brock amendment. The committee bill as reported provided a major role for both the State and national political parties by allowing each of them to contribute an additional 2 cents a voter to a campaign, over and above a candidate's expenditure My amendment No. 1152 would repeal the provisions added by amendment No. 1102. I would not lightly raise an issue that already had been considered. But :if the Senate allows amendment No. 1192 to stand, it will be compromising the very integrity of this campaign financing legislation. limitation. The amendment approved last Wednesday deals not with the role of political parties, which have millions of supporters and thousands of small contributors, but with the role of the "InHouse" campaign committees of both Houses of Congress. During the course of the debate, Sen_for A'.LEN expressed some concern about "leavlng--contrlbutlons and ex!0endi- Let-me provide an example. Suppose that in 1976 the Democratic or Republican senatorial campaign committee has pinpointed 10 key Senate races. An organizatiorL--and there are many that would be willing and able--decides to give $100,000 to the campaign committee, which in turn passes along $10,000 to each of its 10 "key" candidates. Now there would be nothing illegal thousands of people giving in $5 anc%$10 amount_;, with the Senate and House Campaign Com/nittees. There was another confusing aspect of the amendment which Senator ALLENin- the case. is limited is limited to candidate's would be overall ceil- 417 S 5412 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SIL IA rE April 8, 19 7/, about that transaction--the money would not have been specifically earmarked for ally particular candidate. But the effect would be clear. Each of those candidates would know how they got that $10,000 cheek, and its real source, The ru:tes committee has withstood virtually every challenge to S. 3044 so far. Amendment No. 1102 is the one glar- Misuse of Public Fun_; .... "from the Saturday, March 30, 1974, issue of the Chicago Tribune, and an editori_l,, "Mired in Molasses," from the Wednes-, day, April 3, 1974, issue, of the Birming-. ham Post-Herald. I ask unanimous consent that these, editorials be printed in the RECORD J[0:l:' the edification of all S_,nators. :molasses and not be seen or heard from again -until 1975. Tht reason for this dismal curre:_xt disagreement among prediction the House, is the the Senatt; and President Nixon over what needs to be done to curb excessive spending and :Loose bookkeeping in congressional election campaigns. /ludging by its past lack of enthusiasm, the :_Ious{ would like to do nothing---or at least lng exception. As the Washington Post reported last week. It is the frst substantial b_:each in provisions of the bill that limit individuals to a $3,000 contribution to any one candidate There being no ob:ection, the e_[.., torials were ordered to be printed in thc, RECORD, as follows: [From the Chicago Tribune, l_[ar. 30 1974 I A MISlJ;Sl. r OF PLVBLI; FU_IDS . .. do uti;hint to make it easier for challengers to Rep. ou_;t Wayne incumbents.L. Hays, D-Ohio, the man in charg:_ of reform legislation, is adamantly dpposed to setting up an independent elections commission. Under present; law, the House and An irresponsible majority of the United. States Senate has twice defeated attempts by Sen. James Alhm to remo-e public financing, of political campaigns lrom the Senats's campaign reform bill. q'he :measure now seems assured of Senate passage, The House soundly defeated a similar meastLre last jear and is not happy about this year's entry. Presidenl Nixon has warned that he will veto the bill- if public financing is included. Five of the se*eh members of t_le Senate Waterg_[te Committee, reformwhoselegislation mission it was to draft campaign and Senate police their own campaign prattices, which is like sending a barkless dog on bnc'glar patrol. The Senate has been much more responsire, 9Rasing a reform bill last July that would have set limits on campaign spending and c_.mpaign giving; outlawed all cash eontribuiions of more than $50; required full disclo_ure of a candidate's assets and income; encouraged television debates among major candidates; funneled each candidate's spendlng reports one centralelections committee, aBd s_t up through an independent cpm- for the Senate, are strongly opposed campaign financing. Still its supporters pers:st. Their strategy is to keep battering away opposition begins to crack It must missi( n. Nov- the Senate is on the verge of sabol:agin_: its own bill by Insisting that tax moue,/ be used to help finance all congresatonal and senatorial election campaigns, organizations The amendment day directly that we to a $6,000 contribution. passed last Wednes- contradicts have been the working basic toward goal over the past '_ weeks---the cleansing of our political process: It should be repealed. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quolqlm, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. ROBERT I ask unanimous for the quorum The-PRESIDING objection, C. BYRD. Mr. President, consent that the order call be rescinded, OFFICER. Without :it is so ordered. MESSAGE FRC A message sentatives by _ Public: threat THE from he House Mr. B try, one HOUSE of of its Repreread- lng clerks, announce 1 that the House insists upon its ame] dments to the bill CS. 2770) to amend :hapter 5 of title 37, United States Code, Lo revise the special pay structure relatil g to medical off/cers of the unJJ[ormed services, disagreed to by the Senate; agrel _ to the conference requested by the Sen tie on the disagreeLug votes of the two louse thereon; and that Mr. S_R_VrON Mr. _IeHOLS, Mr. HUNT, Mr. HI_BEHT, Ltqd Mr. BRAY were appointed on manager the part iof the conference of the _ _]_e. campaign financin2 poses to this country's tv'o-party, to pub:Ho, apparer>t u_ntll the not cr_::!r an insidio;ts maJorit_'_ ruleAs system the President of government and many' others ha_'e noted, the bill is designee to eliminate pr_ rate contributions, and thus deny to voters the right to give financitl support to t:ae candidate of their choice. Instead, their tax money would be used to support all candidates, including those they opposed. Black taxpayers, for example, could be supporting the candidacy ,Df Oov. Ge>rte Wallace. True, the scheme would curb the appalUng cost of Presidential electi)ns, shown in t_t:e accompanying graph, but in congressional campaigns, spending mi_:ht well increase, Congressmen who have been reelected easily with campaign treasurie:_ of only $20,000 would find themselves wit:_'$90,000 to spend. Ax sen. Howard Baker, vice chairman of the Watergate committee noted, public :2_ both ]:rimary Th_; is a and bad general proposal. confid._nce in paJgn system refor'.ns. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, one of the greatest dangers of congressional service is that some Members get so imbued with what, they read and hear in the Washington news media that they tend to forget that the greatest number of Americans and the bulk of our country lie beyond the Potomac River. I fear that this is the case in consideration of S. 3044, the bill for public financing of campaigns. The pell-mell rash to support public subsidies for pollticians, as is proposed in this legislation, is being led---or should I say misled?-ill part by the Washington news media, But there is a rising chorus of opposition throughout the rest of the country to this proposed raid on the Public Treas- cies would multiply likt, rabbits. Special interest organizations like t:ae Americium% Civil Liberties Union, Na:ler's Raiders, t]ae gun lobby, Co_[mon Cause, cdr]borate asso¢:tations, and labor unions could become politicai parties in their own right. The two major parties and the two-party, majority-rule systern could founder. Chaos could result. In the words of Mr. Baker: '%Ve are burn_ lng down the barn to get _id of the rats." (Mr. ]!_[ANSFIELD). Th_ PRESIDIB Chair (the Senato: _ANSFIELD, in the absence of a quoru: Th_ second assk, proee,_ded to call th Mr. MANSFIELD CAMPAIGN BILL ury. And as newspaper editors in the 50 States understand the implications of this proposal, they are writing editorials opposing public The heartland but I feel that financing of campaigns. of America is speaking, some Senators are still not listenh_g, · Mr. President, lng public outcry, 418 as examples I have an of this editorial, ris"A [From the Birmingham Post-Herald, Apr. 3, 19_ 4] Mm_:_ nq Mo_,_ssr.,_ Despite all the lofty rhetoric, it will ta_e some fancy legislative maneuvering to get an effective campa:lgn reform bill 1;brough Contress this year. A more likely prospect is that campaign r,_form will disappear in a v_t of electlon-¥_,_r would make real money baseavailable of support. to candidates It would who provide have too no much money in some places, too little in others. Even if it passes t:ae House, which is unI[kely, the President, who opposes public financing, is expected to veto it. 'Thai; would leave the reform campaign [)ack v, here it started--with no limits on how much pressure groups can give to candidates; no limits on how much candidates can spend, and n:, independent commission 'to blow the whistl_ when necessary. Th_: is fine and dandy for lobbyists and specia interest groups, who stand ready to pour :nillions into political campaigns this year, :nuch of it aimed at keeping good old Jack "he'll take care of us") in office for another term. But it's a stPange way to restore voter nancing would give the government fisc_d control over elections. This could easily le:[d to ass'umlng regulatory control[, thus giving the party in power tremerdous influence. Public finauchlg has been rationalized as: a means to prevent corru[tion, but it go_s much farther than that. As Waiter Plneus. executive editor of the Net Republic, put it in a statement supporting the proposal: "Don't kid yourself that you back pub:dc financing to pm;vent wate :gates and eorrup_ tion. You do it -to change tae system." The scheme Would hand out public money to any and and Presidential all qualified comers in Candida_ congreasional primarle_. OPPOSITION TO FINANCE It a-much-abused that badly needs political some cambasic _ 'RECES_I Mr ROBERTC. I ask ananimous c_ stand in recess un' There being no ( the S_:nate took a wllick_ time the Sen called to order by I_TIL2P.M. BYRD. Mr. President, asent 'that the Senate L1 2 p.ln. today. 3jection, at 1:18 p.m. ecess until 2 p.m.; at _te reassembled when ;he Presiding Officer ._ OFFICER. from Montana, chair) suggests _. ;ant legislative _roll. Mr. President, clerk I ask unanimoUSquorum callC°nsentbe reset ided.hat the The, _OYA), Mr. )FFICER (Mr. MON_tion, it is so ordered. Mr. President, what is PRESIDING Without obj_ MANSFIELD order The Mr. the lot the the pending bus ness? The: PRESIDINC OF_.[CER. Amendmerit No. 1152 of t_ Senator from Iowa (Mr. Cf;LARK). Mr. MANSFIELD Mr. President, I ask Ullgnifnous consent ;hat the vote on the April 8, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL pending the at hour of 3: 30 p.m. today, The OFFICER. Without objection, Mr. thank the of a quorum, The will call the Mr. suggest President, the absence The The second the The objection, legislative quorum President, the order it isso 3 Mr. I ask unanimous ate stand in p.m. today. BYRD. when _alled Officer TRIBUTE JOINT REVENUE . TO HARRY ask insertion , recess Senate to P.M. Mr. that the until There being no the Senate took whereupon, the I clerk be rescinded, OFFICER. Without RECESS Mr. dent, clerk roll. proceeded to cal the tell. Mr. ROBERT ( . BYRD. Mr. I ask unanimous consent that for I by at 2:35 p.m. until 3 p.m.; reassembled the Presiding STAFF ON F. BARTLETT). ordered, OF THE INTERNAL JR. Mr. Presiconsent that an in the the distinguished Louisiana (Mr. Lo The President, the Senhour of 3 be permitted senior Senator OFFICER objection, by from (Mr. it is so The statement Senator LONG and the Washington article of April 4, 1974, by Spencer as follows: . ' _TATEMENT BY R. LON_ In connqction with entry into the Congressional Record of Rich's Aprll 4, 1974, Washington article on the Joint Committee on Revenue Taxation, I would like to add _ few brief comments, It is our privilege as Senators, to work with many committees and their respective staff Of ail those with whom I have had as a U.S. Senator, the professional staff Joint Committee on Internal Taxation must rank as one of the most in terms of professlonal expertise, imps and discretion on sensitive matters, this regard, I would, therefore, like' to commendations to the Committee for outstanding Job it has done in its and extensive examination of fhe tax returns, This is an of our Congressional Committee system general government operations at their finest. It certainly is my privilege and to be chairman of such a dedicated outstanding committee. IFrom the Washir (By _When members of edvice from Larry son old soft-spoken preacher, they listen respect. For the Joint Taxation Committee which has versal reputation as the very best, staff Post. Apr. 4, 197_] HILL get legislative the 56-yearOhio Baptist dworth, an qth special care and RECORD -- SENATE And the 40-membe worth has rldden her known as the able: savvy and pro: mittee aides most in Congl Few people on Cap one off the hlll--e_ partment and the p lobbyists---know muc mittee. Yet it is one. Congress, with tre_r legislation affectin The joint Revenue Act of 1926 the tax-writing and Means and manship alternates year is Sen. Russell Rep. Wilbur Mills For years the S 5413 staff over which WoodLfor the past 10 years is _, most discreet, most ._sslonal group of corn.'ss. The P:RESIE lNG OFFICER. will call the roi. The legislati 'e clerk proceeded tile roll. _ol Hill and virtually no _ept the Treasury Deirate tax lawyers and i about the joint cornf the most powerful in radons influence over lives of millions. _e, created _mder the of members of _--House Ways 1V_r. CLARE. Mr. President, unanimous co', sent that the the quorum ca] be rescinded. The PRESII ING OFFICER. : Finance. The chairthe chairman this Long (D-La.), with as vice chairman chalrman was Harry objection, it i clerk to call I ask for order Without ,ordered. FEDERAL ELECTION AMENDMENTS The The Senate confirmed sideraticn of the bill the Federal Election 1971 to provide for CAMPAIGN OF 1974 ACT with con.- the (S. 3044) to amend Campaign Act of public financing of Flood Byrd Sr. (D-Va), an arch-conservative in fiscal matters, The Joint provides the major staff for both chamb of Congress on tax matters, and right now--in addition to Woodworth, who hold tn public administration and an economist or a tax lawyer--iV 25 professional ztaff members, Including and clerical positions, the total staff is 40. The professional staff, members legislative counsels, six legislative six economists and a number of and tax-statistic analysts. Several of members have accounting training as The staff has been built up as a civil .vice-type staff--nonpolitical When a tax bill is either Ways and Means or Finance the floor of either chamber, it is the of the Joint cornmittee staff to draft legislation, to write the reports and to the side of committee members to and assist. Four or five staffers are always seen on the House and Senate whenever a tax blll is being considered, Woodworth gets $40._ a year, the highest possible staff Congress. With the committee since he is a master at trying to tailor and itch the proposals of members into a cohel mt whole. He is the model civU discreet, honest and hardworking, to members apd associates. He could p triple his sa1ary in private industr but he won't jump. SeCond in command the committee staff is Lincoln Arnold, 64, one-time municipal judge in Thief River Minn., who was an Internal Revenue y, senior legislative counsel for t House, and worked in private practice for t5 years with Alvord and Alvord. Another staff aide ith a major role on the Nixon tax is Bernard (Bobby) Shapiro, a lawyer in his early 30s with a trace of a (he's from Richmond) and training accountancy as well as law. Shapiro serves as a surrogate on the floor sn WoodwortY_ can't be there, Assistant staff Herbert L. Chabot, 42, who comes from York and got his law degree from provided staff work on pension bills when they primary and general election campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating to the financing and conduct of such were considered by th, Finance and Ways and Means committees, From the start, a team worked extensively and virtuall full time on the president's tax s. It consisted of Woodworth, Arnold, attorney Mark McConaghy, attorney Oosterhuis, ac- independent expenditure limltation. It is true that the State and national parties are also exempt from this limitation, but heads the staff of Internal Revenue issued a devastating a uni- countant Allan James wetzler. From staffers pitched in, anc the staff was working in shape, of the best, perhaps on Capitol Hill. Mr. HARRY dent, I suggest and economist to time, other at the end most of get the final report F. the JR. of Mr. Presia quorum, campaigns. Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, earlier in the debate, I discussed at some length the reasons that the Senate should adopt my amendment, (No, 1152) to repeal amendment No. 1102 passed by voice vote last Wednesday. That amendment' exempted the House and the Senate campaign committees of the major parties from the contribution and expenditure limitations of the campaign financing bill now before the Senate. In my judgmerit, that is the first loophole we have written into a very excellent bill. The committee bill as reported does provide a major role for both the State and national political parties by anowlng each to contribute an additional 2 cents a voter to a campaign--over' and above the candidate's expenditure lim- itation. The Wednesday amendment deals not approved with the last role of political parties, whiclh have millions of supports,rs and thousands of small contributors, but with the role of in-house campaign committees of the House and the Senate. This is the essential point: all other committees are limited to $6,000 in terms of what they can contribute to an individual candidate. This amendment lift3 that restriction leaving $25,000 as the only effective limitation on what an individual can give to a committee. P leaves a loophole al]owing committees unlimited contributions to the congl'essional campaign committees, and in turlq. allows them an unlimited amount ol money to give to individual candidates. There is another serious problem with the amendment passed last Wednesday. section 614(c), on page 71 of the Rules Commitl_ee bill The empted the senatorial campaign committees amendment ex- and congressional from the $1,000 they are subject to a 2-cent-a-voter ceillng on any contributions to or expenditures f01' a pm_icular candidate. The senatorial and congressional campaign cc,mmittees, however, are not subject to any restrictions. I am sure this is not the intent of the amendment, but its effect is certain. Mr. like to BROCK. Mr. President, take a few minutes to I shouhl explain the i 419 S 5414 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--- SENATE purpose of the amendment as it was of-. fered and as it was intended, Upon r_0ing the Rules Committee bill, we felt that perhaps by inadvertenee there were no safeguards to ma_tam the viabiMty of the various congressional com:mittees of the two parties. The bill as it was written would have effectively eliminated the operation of the House and[ the Senate campaign cornmittees of the two parties, respectively; and that, I think, is one of the things that I find dangerous in the proposed legislation, The bill, to my way of thinking, goes too far already toward damaging the two-party process. I believe it places that process very much in jeopardy. If we axe going to have an effective political system, we have to have some mechanism by wkdeh the parties not only mainrain themselves but also have some opportunity for internal discipline, amendment (I¢o. 1102) exempts the Senate and House from limits on independ_ ent expenditures. If it does, and counsel is checking tlris now, later an amendment could be offered to change that lx)ssibility and make it cleax that those committees were not exempted from subsection (C) (1) on page 74. But I think: the hazt_rd, [f it can be called a hazard, and I do not think it is a hazard, of larger con';ributions beths' made to these committEes--I think that was what was hoped fo:: by the amendment---was t:hat largo r contributions could be made to those authorized com_ mittees, and let them mi.ke contributions to the candidates which are within tile candidates' spending limits, obviously, and that this would help maintain the party structure by permitting the cantpaign commit':ees and rational commiLtees of both parties to make contributions to the respective candidates, The amendment was not drawn with the view of escaping the safeguards of the camp_dgn contribution ceilings. I said on the Senate floor during the debate on the amendment that we would still be ltrrdted, as I understood it, to a $3,000gift from an individual or a cornmlttee. Perhaps my impression is wrong. If it is, I would be delighted either to niodify the amendment or to accept other language that would so correct it. I am not sure that that is the case. However, I would be willing to make sure it is, not only by legislative history but also by specific language. But the Senator's amendment does a great deal more than that. In effect, it strikes all the language of the amendment; and, in effect, he would put us back into position originally reported by the Committee on Rules and Administration. I do not find that acceptable. I hope the Senate does not support the amendment as presently worded, The Senator from Nevada, the Senator from Texas, and a number of other Senators and I have discussed the thrust of my amendment at length. There is no So while I would be in31ined to support the amendment if it did not go as far as it does, I thin!{ under the circumstances I would be opposed to it here. If we need a perfecting amendment later that could be offered with respect 1o the limit. Mr. BROCK. I know the Senator's intention and I think he understands the situation. We are both ,,eeki:ng the same thing in this amendment; :and I think the Senator from Iowa has raised a valid point. But the amendment he has offered goes so far su_ not to permit the eommittees to do anything. TTLat is unacceptable, but I would ur,_e that language be posed to take care oi this concern on his part by offering an amendment. I appreciate the chairman's 2>osition in trying at least to keep the two committees :in operation. Mr. CANNON. I thinl: in the colloquy that took place last week it is clear what was intended by the SenatDr's amendment, and I would hate ;o see the Senate now take action to simi_ly reverse itself on the action that it took last week. Mr. BROCK. I agree, and I thank the disagreement as to intent. If clarification Senator. is necessary in terms of legislative his- ' Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I am pre_ tory, that is one thing, but to simply pared to yield back the remainder of my strike and, in effect, go back to the orig- time. inal position of eliminating these two Mr. CLARK. Mr. Pre:;ident, the probcommittees, which do perform a valuable leto with the discussion on the floor last function irt terms of supporting and servweek was that the SemLtors present aslng our candidates, would be self-defeatsumed, as did the Senator from Tenneslng and highly dangerous, see, that there, was a $3, )00 limitation (,n I cannot support the amendment, althe amount the congressional campai_,m though I do understand the concern of comrrdttee could receive and a $6,000 the Senator in raising the particular limit on the amount tae congressional point. I think he goes too far and I hope campaign committee co aid contribute _o the Senate does not accept this partican individual candidate. Clearly, that is ular amendment, not the case. It is unlir_ited. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, as has If 'we do not agree to the pending been pointed out, the Senate did adopt amendment, we will leave l_he loophole the Brock amendment last week. I do open. This is the first _lme so far that not share the concern of the Senator we have said to a political committee, from Iowa with respect to the one provl"You can collect as much money as you Sion that he contends opens wide the want, an unlimited amount, and give _ door. as much as you want--.up to $2 million I think the possible opening of the in the case of California--without limidoor here, if the door is open, relates to tatiorl." the paragraph beginning on line 8, page In this one case of seltatorial and con_4 which, under the bill, prohibits indegressional committees, _'e are saying that pendent expenditures in excess of $1,000. they can collect unlimited amounts of It does appear that perhaps the Brock money. The Committee ,)n Rules and Ad_ 4.20 April 3, 19 74 minis:ration was wise when it reported the bill without that loophole. As :t reported the bill, the committee said i::t effect that these "in-house" eommittees would be restricted exactly the same way as other political committees. My amendment would do one thing: It repeals the Brock amendment and takes us back to the bill reported by the Cornmittee on Rules and Administration. The committee's original judgment was correct. '}?o permit unlimited expenditures would be a serious mistake. The PRESIDING OFFICER. rrhe hour of 3:3(I having arrived, the question is on tlhe amendment of the Senator from Iowa (Mr. _]LASK). The yeas and nays have been ,>rdered, and the clerk will call the roll. Thc legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that _he Senator from Indiana (Mr. BAYH:,, the Senator from Texas (Mr. B£NTSEN), the Senator from Idaho (Mr. CHURCH), the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. EaSTLANr), the Senator from Arkar:sas (Mr. FULBRIam:) the Senator from Alaska (Mr. GRAW:L), the Serator from South Carolina (Mr. HOLLINGS]:, the Senator from Iowa (Mr. ItUGH_:S), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. KENNEDY), the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. IX)NS), the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. MCGEE), the Senator from Ohio (Mr. METZENSATJM),are necessari!y absent. Mr. GRIFFIN. I annotmce that the Senator frovn Utah (Mr. BENNETT), the S,nator from Arizona (Mr. FANNn_), the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Fora), the Senator from Florida (Mr. GURNEY), the Senator from New York (Mr. JaYErs), and the Senator from Idaho (Mr. MCCLE_Sr) are necessarily absent. I _dso announce that the Senator from L. SCOTT) and theVirginia Senator (Mr. fromWILLIAM Ohio (Mr. TAFT), are absen_ on official business. I voting, further the announce present and Senator that, from if Ohio (Mr. TAFT) would vote "yea." :' Thc result was announced--yeas 44, nays i::5,as follows: [No. 121 Leg.] YEAS--44 Abourc_zk Haskell Moss ,_J_en Hathaway Nelson Beau Helms Nunn Blden Huddleston Packwood Brooke HUmphrey rastore ]:;urdlcF. Inouye Pell Byrd, Proxmlre Harry F., Jr. Jackson Johnston Randolph Byrd, I'obert C. Magnuson Riblcoll Chiles Mansfield Roth Clark Mathlas Schwelker Cranst:m McGovern Stevenson D_meuiel Mclntyre Symington l_'glet_m Mondale Tunney l_[art Montoya Weicker NAYS--35 Alken Domlnlck Percy Baker _ Ervln Scott, Hugh Bartlei Ooldwater Sparkman Bible Griffin Stafford Brock Hansen Stennls Buckley Hartke Stevens Cannon Hataeld Talmadge case Hruska Thurmond c_ok _cClellan Tower Cotto_ Metcalf Will lams curtis Muskie Young r_le Pearson April 8, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-- SENATE S 5415 time. Many of these people have been dehied this basic right of citizenship because of hard-to-find registration offices one of ti_e few countries that does not; recognize the importance of election day by making it a national holiday. and a full day's work. The amendment before us would eliminato one of the major obstacles to fuller voter participation in elections. It would assure that millions of American worklng families are not deterred from exercising their franchise in Presidential and congressional elections, Several other nations fi`nd that workers participate freely, openly, and in larger numbers when there is an election holiday. In Denmark, Italy, France, Germany, and Austria, where election day is a holiday, voter turnout of 85 and 95 percent is normal. I believe it would substantially increase participation in our elections as well. Workers who commute long distances to work often leave home before polls open and return after they have closed. People working irregular shifts in a shop or factory are also discouraged from voting. In some areas, rush hours at the polls mean a long wait in line causing many who mustget to work, andmany others who are tried from a full day's labor, to give up their franchise in despair. Mr. President, it is time we put an end to this obstacle to democracy, In the 19th century we eliminated property ovnlershiP requirements for votlng in this country. As we efiter the last quarter of the 20th century, it is time for us to act to prevent a job from keeplng the S0 million Americans who work in factories, on farms, and in the businesses of this Nation from the voting Mr. President, I believe this amendment, which provides a legal election holiday every 2 years begining in 1976, would increase voter participation for the most important office in the land: the Presidency of the United States. It would be an open day, so that every citizen will have all the time in that day available to consider the candidates and to exercise his franchise. And the same time, of course, would apply to the offices of U.S. Senator and Member of the House of Representatives. Mr. President, I yield to the distinguished Senator from Arizona. Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. President, I am happy to join the distinguished Senator from Minnesota (Mr. HUMPHREY) in offering the amendment. I think it is a sad commentary on the electorate of I ahve thought about this proposal at great length. I think it would be desirable. In :fact, anything we can do to get; more Americans to be interested in our political system would be desirable. I am aware that what we have been going through during the past year is not thc; most pleasant thing in the world and makes many Americans wonder what is wrong with the system. But I have always told people that bad politicians are elected by good people who cannot vote. If we can make election day a bollday, and then ask the assistance of both parties in really trying to get out the vote, perhaps we will see an informed electorate by creating in this country a turnout of voters which will be in excess of 75 percent. I think this would be very healthy fox' America. It would be very good for everything that now ails the body politic in America. I am very happy that the Sen-. ator from Minnesota has offered this amendment. He and I happen to be. members of a very exclusive club. We have gone through this. and we haw; some understanding of what it is to ad-. dress millions of Americans, only to find that on election day only a relative hand-. ful will turn out. I suggest that while it could be a prob-. leto of the candidate in my Case, 'ii; certainly would not be in his case; so we sort of s_and each other off there. I hope very much that the manager of the bill will accept this amendment. ][ have not spoken to him about it, but this body has twice, as the Senator stated, passed this approach. I do not care to _askfor a rollcall vote, and I am sure my colleague does not. Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, I agree with what the distinguished Senator from Ar_.izona has said. I think this is _ very '_mloortant proposal, and I think we ought to have the yeas and nays to as-. sure that when the bill goes over there, the other side will know how we feel about it. So, Mr. President, I ask for the yea_; and nays. Mr. C_DOK. Mr: PrE_sident, before thc Senator does that, may I say I have no objection to it. This was in the b:ill thai; we passed last year, largely because of this country when we wehave find that Presidential elections been inelecting Its favor. Presidents by avery bare majority. While Mr. President, making election day a the last several Presidential elections national h01iday would move us still have been won by large pluralities, we closer to the ideal of popular democracy discover that the total vote has not been that all of us cherish. It would help to much in excess of 50 percent of the rotbring the mass of the people evan more lng population. Then when we look at into the mainstream of our national other countries that have patterned political system, themselves upon pretty much the same I would remind Senators of the inadeconcept of government and see that their quate level of participation in the 1972 turnout is 90 or 95 percent, it makes elections. According to a survey by the those of us who stand for election wonder U.S. Census Bureau, 51.2 million eligible what has happened in America. Americans did not vote, in the general The concept of maLing election day elections in November 1972. That number a national holiday is not new. Such a represented a full 37 percent of the votproposal has been passed twice by the lng-age population in this country at that Senate. I believe the United States is the tile Senator sota, actions and atof that time hefrom and Minne.. I had quite a colloquy about it, and if I am not mistaken we had a rollcall vote on that occasion. Mr. HDMPHREY. We did. Mr. COOK. I have no objection to havlng it again, but I did want to get into the RECORDthat we had quite an ex-. tensive debate on the floor on that biU last year. That is in the RECORDover on the House side, and this will be the sec-. ond time. I merely wanted the Senator from Wisconsin to know that. Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, having listened to the impressive argument o]: the Senator from Kentucky, I ask for the yeas and nays. Bayh Bellmon Bennett NOT VOT]k'qG---21 Fulbright McClure Gravel McGee Gurney Metzenbaum Bentsen Hollings Scott, Church Hughes William L. Eastland Javits Taft Fannln Kennedy Fong Long · SO Mr. CLARK'S amendment (No. 1152) was agreed to. Mr. CLARK, Mr. President, I move that the Senate reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to. Mr. JOHNSTON. I move to lay that motion on the table, The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. AlYIENDM_NT NO. 1156' Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, for myself and th e distinguished Senator from Arizona (Mr. GOLf)WATER) I call up amendment No. 1156, which is at the desk, and ask that it be read. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated, The legislative clerk proceeded to read the amendment, Mr, HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be discontinued and ·hat the amendment be printed in the RECORD. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment ordered to be printed ts the REcoRDis as foiI0WS: On page 86, between lines 2 and 3, insert the following new section: SEc. 520. Seotion 610S(a) of tltle 5, United States Code is amended by inserting between_ "Veterans Day, the fourth Monday in Oc- tober." and "Thankgtvlng Day, the fourth Thursday in November." the fonowlng new item: "Election Day, the first Wednesday next after the first Monday In November in 1976, and every second year thereafter.". Mi'. HUMPHREY. This is an amendmerit that has been agreed to by the Senate in each of the last 2 years. Unfortunately, for reasons extraneous to the substance of t.bls legislation, it has yet to be enacted. The amendment would make Federal election day the first Wednesday after the first Monday in November, and create a legal holiday on that day. I will not repeat all of the arguments for this amendment. I am sure that all Senators are familiar with them. The logic of the amendment is just as compolling today as it has been in the past, when this body voted overwhelmingly in booths, 421 S 5416 The Mr. CONGKESSIONAL yeas and nays HUMPHREY. have no further comment. the remainder The PRESIDING - tion were ordered. Mr. President, yield of my time. OFFICER. is on agreeing Mr. I CANNON. The to the Mr. I back quos- amendment. President, the yeas and nays were ordered; is that correct? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct. Mr. CA:NNON. Mr. President, as the Senator stated, the Senate has voted on this issue before. We are prepared to accept lt. I am not that one convinced, in my own mind, can force people to vote by sim- ply making election think the indications day a holiday. of our experience I have been that whenever a holiday comes aiong--ewm though, as provided in this bill, it may be in the middle of the week, which may eliminate the situation of a long weekend holiday--it probably will result in a fishing day. I yield back Mr. the remainder HErI_PHREY. of Mr. my time. President, I yield back: my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr, BARTLETT). All remaining time having b_en yielded back, the question is on agreeing to the amendment of the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. HUMPHREY) and the Senator from Arizona tMr. GOLDWATER). On this question, the yeas and nays have been ordered, and the clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative theroll. Mr. ROBERT C. clerk BYRD. I that the Senator from Indiana (Mr. BaYH), the Senator from Texas (Mr. BENTSEN), the Senator from Idaho (Mr. CHURCH), the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. EaST]_.AND), the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. EEVI_), the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. FULBRIGHT) the Senator ' from Alaska (Mr. GRaVEn), the Senator from Indiana (Mr. HARTKE), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. HOLLIN_S), the the Senator Senator from from Iowa (Mr. Massachusetts HUGHES), (Mr. KENNEDY), the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. LONa), the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. MCGEE), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. METZENBAUM) are necessarily absent. Mr. GRIFFIN. Senator Senator Senator I that announce from Utah (Mr. BENNETT), from Arizona (Mr. FANNIN), from Hawaii (Mr. FoN_), the the the the Nunn Pastore Pearson I_tennis Stevens ,'3tevens0n McGovern Percy Symington McIntyre Mondale Montoya Moss Muskie Nelson Proxmlre Randolph Rlblco/_ Roth Schwetker Sparkman NAYS---21 Aiken Domlnlck Allen Grlfiln Bartlett Hanson Byrd, Hatfield Ha_ry F., Jr. Helms cotton Hruska curtis Metcalf Domenicl Packwood NOT VOTING--2_ Bayh Fong Bellmon Fulbright Bennett Gravel Bentsen Gurney Buckley Hartke Church Hollings Eastland Hughes Ervln Javlts Fannln Kennedy So ment The agreed motion to. -----"_ that the BELLMON), SenatOr from the Senator Pell Scott. Hugh .qtafford :_hurmond _ower Young Long l_IcClure ]_cGee ]_etzenbaum EIcott, William L. Taft amend.. myself, S. 2495, Mr. a bill q. last M_s, to a reso to the solution of ¢ to create a surve_ nology resources a that time in Joint and have endorsed When by the monied that--- NASA and Spsce the objectives unanimously outstanding State of Co. cosponsor Utah,· of M ,ss cf W _nd prophetic speech _shi:lgton before the Man gement on March 22 NASA." Senator I coM-,, hfs been made _in _dous, but the prom-, ;tess here on earth l_ _d far more Imports:at. f solutions to the chal_, ere on our own platter thf.t the Technolc,gy d Applications Act is and Senator enti ,led ! loss delivered Association "The Future of expressed great from Virginia (Mr. W_tLXaM L. SCOTT), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. T_FT) are absent on orificial bus/ness, The result was annomlced--yeas 55, optimism for the future prospects NASA and the se: aspi,ce industry. optimism lay in t]e increased role NASA and the aero pac _ industry in nays lizing its pressing 21, as Abourezk Baker Beall Bible Biden Brock Brooke Burdick Byrd, Robert; 422 follows: [No. 122 Leg.] YEAS--_ Cannon Case Chiles Cook Clark Cranston Dole Eagleton C. Goldwatee Hart Haskell Hathaway Huddleston Humphrey lnouye Jackson Johnston Magmmon in for ard Mr. TUNNEY, ,ply ;he scientific _ad _rces of the country vme,,;tic problems a_ad of science and tech-, _d applications. Since hearings between the experl witaess_m, bill w_ introduced, colleagues 2495, _as I introduced Ae:'ona_tical Corn mer¢ e, bee: _ almost The progress the space is indeec[ tre_ ise it holds for pre far more incredible l It is to that promise lenges of life right in our own countr Resources Su_ey addressed. MY table President, l_[r. _ear, technological on tile F of Committees Sciences of S. 2495 on _----- September Boeing announce (Mr. lay MAGNUSO a veiny in the I also Oklahoma to Mr. and the BUCKLEY) (Mr. :ralmadgo :_unney Welcker Williams Humphrey-G_ldwater tectmologi domestic ml capability _rob[ems. such that I as]_ un:mira.one ordered t_ be printed in the Rte- (By Senn I gceatly appr_ 'with members s _UIanagement Ass( Tht_ name Boel 'the _,tate of Wa years, however, Boeing as well wi you employ there ihard-working an Cun_rllngs. Boeing assembl or FRANIC E. MOSS) -Ante this chance to meet _d friends of the Boeing 'Aatlon. g is always associated with hington. Over a period of have come to associate h Utah and t&e fine people headed by the competent, public-spirited, Mr. Jim utem._n Hill A: efilcle:_rt atoperatio: bone ICBM dete_ Anct I believe the caliber of 1_ Utah. I know th, our $_ate and L_ Force Base. For the years backthis ha_ furnished 'ent force for our Nation. hat Boeing is happy with _ple which It employs In t the Governor and all of al o/_ctals and our citizens generally apprecl your contribution sire aerospace an plex! .%e Boeing. Utah welcomes to her thrlviIxg and impreselectronic Industry corn- conse:_lt to have it prh_ted _ th_ RECOEm There being no/dbJection, the speech 3 and checks out the Min- Boeing people E erywhere should be proud of th¢:_ key role th ._y have played in achieving and maintain/nl American technological leadership. I haw often quoted a statement that V/ernher vol Braun made tn testimony befor_ my Aeron ,u%ics and Space Sciences Conm_ittee last f_ill. He said, "World leadership and technol_ _gical leadership are lnseparable, A third-r._te technological n_tlon is a thh'd-rate pow.,r politically, economically and socially. Wh_ _aer we like it or not ours Is a_eci_,nologicalelqlization. If we lose our nationa] resolve to k _ep our position on the pinn.acle of technolo1,7, the historical role of the United States cax go downhill." It is in this context t] _at only I want to discuss with you tonight the :uture of NASA a_ I see it. Predicting the certainty is nevel dlctio_s in the wi predicted events be p_cticularly f¢ at it. Thi_ other day was new to me. l._tghtU' future with any degree easy. Trying to make ke of the amazing and ,f the last few months )lhardy, but I'll take a saw a bumper said, "Cllicken sticker Little of preunmay stab that Was sure I'dtt_ many'have felt the sky wasI _n f:_.lling. hard-pressed to convince you that a fair , good-sized chunk of it didn't land right Sere in Seattle about four years ago. But t _ looking ahead with you tonight, rm goi_ g to use some admittedly rose-colored gla_ m, and say that the future of NASA and It aerospace partners looks brighter than it has for some time. First let me clt , some of the Uncertainties. _Rlght now th_ most apparent threats to t;he future of NA _A seem to be: (1) pending legislation to ct_l oge the role of NASA; (2) the attitudes of _ ae American people toward t_chnology; and 3) the Feder::_l interrelated t;hese tt & D f_ _nding. factors crisis orientation I'll briefly. dlscu_ The. first and m vst obvious factor the fv. ture of NA/A is the fact that currently before Congress nearly which would mo tffy the charter in one way or ant ,ther. The American of l_ave tended to _ ]_[is _ domestic social _ for tion. They are utiFederal money gl _2helr insistence to solve proposed legislati be some minor m the iradict there will b ns to the NASA in the fore Senator Moss cl, _rly showed portance of S. 2491 _in leading outstanding benefit_ which NASA holds for the American[people. The signhqcance of Senator lVI_ss' March 22 speech is April 8, 19 74 ORD, hS follows: THE l UTURE OF i[_A_A agreed to. THE S. New York absent, the was 'WaS Mr. HU1VIPHREY. NIr. President, ][ move that the vote by which the _mend-, ment was agreed to be reconsidered, Mr. COOK. Mr. Pre_,ident, I move to lay that motion on the table, Senator from Florida (Mr. Oua_rY), the Senator from New York (Mr. Jav_rs), the Senator from Idaho (Mr. McCLURE), Senator from are necessarily SE;NATE Mansfield Mathias McClellan called announce RECORD-- The future of N to the future atti lic. 'As a result, I cess of the techn each of o/ affecting there are 100 bills of NASA people cus more and more on the :oubles besetting this na* vwing more _lp resolve theselnSistehttroubles.that _ reflected in much of the n. But, although there may _-course corrections, I preno major redirections of ;eable future. SA is, however, closely tied _des of the American pubrmly believe that the suc:ogleal community in sell- lng the level lmportar s of maintaining quate of ac 'anced technology count:_'y is a sec_ td factor which anin adethis will pro- April 8, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--SENATE FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1974 The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill (S. 3044) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing of primary and general election campaigns fo_ Federal elective orifice, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating to the financing and conduct of such campaigns, Mr. COOK. President, I direct Isa question to the Mr, Senator from Kansas. he prepared to proceed with an amend· mont. Mr. DOLE. Yes. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The SenatOr from Kansas is recognized, Mr. HARTKE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. DOLE. I yield, Mr. HARTKE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that John Szabo and GUy McMichael III have the privilege of the floor, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I call up my unprinted amendment which is at thedesk, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated, The assistant legislative clerk read as follows: On page 39, between lines 20 and 21 insert the foll0wlng new subsection: · "(e) Any published political advertisement of a candidate electing to receive payments under Title I of this Act shall c0ntain on the face or front page thereof, the following notice: "'Paid for by Federal tax On page 39, line 21 strike insert in lleu thereof"(d)." funds.' '; out "(c)" and On page 40, line 3, strike out "(d)" and insert in lieu thereof "(e)." On page 40, line 11, strike out "(e)" and insert in lieu thereof "(f)." Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the amendmont. The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. DOLE. I yield, Mr. MANSFIELD. May we consider the possibility of a time agreement? Mr. DOLE. Five minutes? Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there be a time limitation on the amendment of 10 mtnutes, to be equally divided between the sponsor of the amendment, the distingguished Senator from Kansas, and the manager of the bill, the Senator from Nevada (Mr. CANNON). The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so orderech Mr. MA_ISFIELD. Mr. President, if the Senator from Kansas will allow me, I should like to call up a bill, with the time not being charged to either side. ! ask unanimous consent that the pending business be laid aside temporarily, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it -s so ordered. iN_J[_ VETERANS' ANCE ACT OF 1974 Mr. MANSFIEI_. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate pro- teed to the corn, ideration 700, S. 1835. The PRESI DING of Calendar OFFICER No. (Mr. (BARTLETT). Ti bill will be stated by title, The assistan' Legislative clerk read as follows: A bill (S. 1835 to amend title 38, United States Code, t_ increase the maximum amount of servlt :omen's Insurance to $20,000, _ provide Group full-time Lifecoverage thereunder for ¢ _rtain members of the Reserves and Natio the conversion of s_ al ch Guard, insuranceto authorize to Veterans' Group The Life Insur PRESIE nee, _qG and for other OFFICER. purposes. Is there objection to th request of the Senator from Montana? There being :.o objection, the Senate proceeded to ¢ resider the bill, which had been repot ed from the Committee on Veterans' A [airs, with amendments on page 1, line 4, after the word "of", strike out "197:" and insert "1974"; on page 4, line 20, s [ter the world "Reserve", strike out "or" .nd insert "of"; on page 1, line 14, afte_ the word _'the", where it appears the first time, strike out "Armed Forces' and insert "uniformed services"; in 1 ae 18, after the word "Servicemen's" ;trike out "Group." and insert "Group ] ifc Insurance to an individual policy under the provisions of law in effect pri(: to such effective date."; on page 11, line 2, after "(4)", insert "of subsection (a) "; in line 19, after the word "follows", strik cut "all" and insert "All"; in line 23 after the word "revolvlng", strike ou ' "fund"" and insert "fund."."; on p_ ge 13, line 2, after the word "actuaris" strike out "principles."." and ir ;err "p.qnciples." ""; in line 5, after the word "first", strike out "paragraph" an insert "clause"; after line 15, insert: (2) Subsection _) is amended by deleting therefrom the wo ds "this amendatory Act" and inserting in i_en thereof "the Veterans' Insurance Act of 1 _74". At the beginn ng of line 19, strike out "(2)" and inserl "(3)"; on page 14, line 8, after the word "new", strike out "seclion" and insert "sections"; on page 15, line 13, after ;he word "premiums", strike out "of" a; d insert "for"; on page 18, line 25, after _he word "than", strike out "five" and in ;ert "four"; on page 19, line 1, after the word "eligible", insert "within one year from the effective date of the Veterans' Group Life Insurance program"; on p_ ge 20, line 2, after the word "including' strike out "the cost of administration a id"; in line 4, after the word "disabilities, ", insert "The Administrator may esta] lish, as he may determine to be neees ary according to sound actuarial princip es, a separate premium, age groupings f _r premiums purposes, accounting, and reserves, for persons granted _insuranc _ under this subsection different from th_se established for other persons granted insurance under this section"; after li_e 11, insert: "_ 778. Reinstatem_ at "Reinstatement of insurance coverage granted under this mbchaptar but lapsed for nonpayment of p: 9miums shall be under terms and condi_ ons prescribed by the Administrator. After line 15, il sert: S 5419 "§ 779. lncontesth btlity "Subject this title, to the insurar provision of section :e coverage granted 773 of under this subchapter., lall be Incontestablefrom tho date of issue rein.,_tatement, or conver-sion except for Fraud or nonpayment of preminra." In the matter after line 23, after "777. Veterans' Grout IAfe Insurance,", insert:: "773. Reinstate: _ent. "779. Incontest: blllty.". At the top of ] age 21, insert a new sec-tion, as follows: SEc. States (1) 10. ChaptEr 19 of as title 38, Code, is al _ended follows: By striking out "Environmental ence Services Ad ilinlstration" appears thereof in settlor "Natim_al 765 and Oceanic UintA._d Sci- wherever it inserting in lieu and Atmospheric Admini_;tration". (2) By striking _ut "General operating ex,penses, veterans' kdministration" in clause 3 of subsection (d of section 769 and insertlng in lieu there( "General Operating Expenses, Veterans' _dministration". out "Bureau of the (3) By strtktn Bridget ' in settlor 774 and inserting in lieu thereof "Office of_] [anagement and Budget". At the beginnil g of line 14, change the section number I ._om "10" to "11"; and, on page 22, Ii: e 1, after the word "amendments"; i _ser't "made by sections 5 (a) (4) and (5) of this Act, and those"; so as to make the bill read: Be it enacted b_ tke Senate an_ Ho_se o/ Representatives o the United States of America in Congre_ assembled, That this Act may be cited as the "Veterans' Insurance Act of 1974". sec. 2.States (a) Tha 723 of 38. United Cod, section is amended as title follows: (1) The catchllr is amended to read a.'_ follows: "Vetera:as' Special ] fe Insurance". (2) Clause 4) ol (a) all is amended to reac as subsection follows: "(4) premiums and oth r collections on such lasurance and any I )tal disability 'provisions added thereto shal be credited to a revolvlng fund in the Freasury of the United States, wihch, togel aer with interest earned thereon, shall be a atlable for the payment of and any totalliabilities disabiUtyunderpi _uch _visionsinsurance added thereto, including payment of dividends and refunds of unearned )re:returns". (3) Clause (5) of subsection (b) is amended 9o read· as follows: "(5) ail preminras and othe: collections on insurance issued under this lbsection and any total disability income rovislons added revolving thereto shall be credited [rectly to the fund referred to i subsection (a) of this section, which, t _gether with interest earned thereon, stu be available for the -. 1;_ t paymen'_ of nabi,,.., under such insurance and any total disi llity provisions added thereto, including p_ vments of dividen(ls a;__f _. refunds of unearned premiums". (4) Subsections l) and (e) are hereby repealed.. (b) The analysis f chapter 19 of title 89, United ;States Code is amended by deleting "723. Veterans' spe( _1 term insurance." and inserting in Ilex thereof the following: "723. Veterans' Spec al Life Insurance.". SEC. 3. Clause (5) of section 765 of title 38, United States C¢te, is amended to read as fonows: "(5) 2[_e term 'mex _ber' means-"(A) a person on cttve duty, active duty for training, services or lnactI uniformed rant, or enlisted rani or midstfipman of th Academy, United yea duty training inwarth_ commissioned, . or grade, or as a cadet United States Military ;ales Naval Academy, 423 S 5420 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--. SENATIS: ' rV United State orce Academy, or the United States Co_t _uaxd Academy; "(B) a person _1_ volunteers for assignraent to the Rcad_eeerve of a uniformed service and J[s asstgr to a unit or position l_ which he may required to perform active duty, or for training, and each year will he to perform at least twelve duty trainlng that is creditable purposes under chapter 67 of "(C) a person or who upon application would assignment to, the Retired rmed service who has not the of retirement pay has not reached sixty-one years of and has _ted at least twenty years satisfactory creditable for purposes _der chapter 67 of title 10; "(D) a member, or mldsl_lpma the Reserve Officers Corps while tending feld or practice cruises." SEC. 4. Section 767 title 38, Code, is amended as (I) Subsection (al is amended to read as follows: "(a) Any policy purchased by the Administrator section 766 of this title shall insure against death-"(1) any member uniformed service on active duty, for training, or inactive by duty for in advance corapetent ]thorlty;scheduled "(2) any member the Ready Reserve of a uniformed service ficatlons set forth this title; and "rs) any meets the section 765(5) to, or who to,applicati°nthe RetiredW°Uld be or service who meets ;forth in section 765(5 in the amount of her elects in writing under subchapter, in the this amount of The insurance shall be of active duty or tho beginning of ape training schedule in authority, or' the first Ready Reserve meets forth in section 765 the first day a metal whether or not ass[ Reserve of a qualifications of sectioi title, or the date certifie upon set unless such memnot to be insured (B) to beor insured $10,000, $5000. the first day for training, or of inactive duty by competent ay a member of the qualifications set (B) of this title, or of the Reserves, to the Retired service, meets the _6§(5) (C) of this by the Administraduty tor to tlm Secretary co morned as the date Servicemen's Group Lte Insurance under this sUbchapter for the class or group concorned takes, effect, wlq ehever is the later date." (2) Subsection (b) is _mended by deleting "'ninety days" whereve{ it appears therein and inserting in lieu tlqereof "one hundred and twenty days", follows: (3) Subseetion (c) is _mended to read as "(c) If any member tecta not to be inau:red under this subehs ter or to be insured in the amount of $15,0{ , $10,000, or $5,000, he may thereafter be ins, red under this subchapter or insured in th, amount of $20,000, $15,000, or $10,000 undl: this subchapter, as the case may be, upon _rttten application, proof of good health, az I compliance with such other terms and ce rditions as may be prescribed by the Admint _trator. Any former member insured under V _terans' Group Life Insurance who again h comes eligible for' Servicemen's Group Life Insurance and declines such coverage sole1] for the purpose of maintaining his Veteran ' Group Life Inaur_-_nce In effect chat1 upon termination of coverage under Voters _s' Group Life Insurance be automatical y Insured under Servicemen's Group Life _suranee. if otherwise eligible _hherefor." 424 "(B) tion or least creditable chapter 67 pi[cation be assigned to th event the individual policy tions set forth ill the date of 'tach separamember has completed at of sa';isfaetory service pur'_oses under' 10 and would upon ap-. for as;ignment to or Is lqeserve, in which _, nnles_ converted to a:tl t_rms and condtLon 7V7(e) of this title, anco. l:!-owever, a ir _mber whose insurance could :,e continued in force under section 768(a) [4) (B) of thi_ title, but is not so continued, may, effect[v, the day after his insuranco olherwise woul, cease, convert such lnsuranc,_ to an indi, [dual policy under the terms and condition set forth in section 777 re) of :;bis title." (5) _;ection 768(c] is hereby repealed. ° (b) Dhe amendm ,nfs made by this Act shall not be constm ed to deprive any person di_:;charged or _leased from the un[/ormeli services of he United Stages prior to the date on whi h the Veterans' Group Life Insurance progi Lm (provided for under section 777 of title 8, United States Code) beeome._; effective o the right to convert Servicenen's Group Life Insurance to an individml policy n .der the provisions of law in _.'ffect prior t, such effective date. SEc. _;. Section 769 ff title 38, United States Code, i., amended as J )llows: (1) l_y deleting fl ,m paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection ( } "is insured under a policy :}f insurance )urchased by the Administr ttor, under s _tion 766 of this title" and Irmerting in li u thereof "is insured under :_lervicemen's ]roup Life Insurance". (2) ]3y redes[gnat ag paragraphs (2) and (3) of :_ubsection (a as paragraphs (3) and (4), re., pectively, ant by adding after paragraph 1) a new paragraph (2) as follows: "(2) During any rronth in which a momber is _msigned to t[le Ready Reserve of a un[fern:ed service u tder conditions which meet the qualificati ms of section 765(5) (B) of this title, or ts assigned to the Reserve (..,ther than th Retired Reserve) and meets tim qualificati¢ _s of section 765(5) (C) of this title, and is nsured under a policy off°rs assignmentuniformedderShall'termsUp°n timely qualifications C) of this title; (t) quall(B) of t SEc_ 5. (a) Se tion 768 (f tit:is 38, United States Code is l_nended as follows: (1) Subsectio:_ (a) is anended by insert.:. lng "or while th!_ member mee_:s the qualA., ficatiorks set fort in secti)n 765(5) (B) o]' {C) of this title immedlttely before "and. such insurance cease", (2) Clauses and (3) of subsection (a) are each amends by delet.ng "ninety days" wherever it appe; thereir, and inserting :b:_ lieu thereof ired twenty days", (3) (a) is further amended by adding at the md thereof the following: "(4) with _ct to a member of the Ready Reserve a uniformed service wh,_-;. meets the .'et forth in sec.. tion 765(5) (B) ff this title, ()ne hundre:J_ and twenty days separation or release :from such ass[ meat-"(A) unless on date ( f such separaticm ¢,r release the is tel ally disabled, un-. der criteria establ by the Administrator, in which event ik insurance shall cease one after the of sepaiation or release. such ass[ or on the date the ill-. ceases to . totally dlsa'bled, whichis the earlier late, but in no event prier expiration one hundred and _wenty _ from such as-. April 8, 19 74 Lenttaeof premiumSAdministrat_}rUnof insu canoe purcha,' _d by the Administrator, under section q ;6 of this title, there mtive office estabshall bc contributed 'rom the appropriation of this title, made for active dut_ l_ay of the uniformed continue In force of the first service concerned a amount determined increment of bg the mereby the Administrate (which shall be the her or the occur3 meat ret birthday, same for all such me lbers) as the share of whichever the cos: attributable ;o insuring such mere"(5) with res] to a mbel_of the Reber un,ier this policl , less any costs tracetired l_serve who qualt]_ations of able to the extra h_ _'ards of such duty lu section 765(5) (C) f this t tle, and_ho was the uti[formed serv '_es. Any amounts so assigned to tho Re:;erve prlo_to the conbrlbtted on beh .If of any individual date insurance thi_ arnendm_nt is shall be collected 1 F the Secretary conplaced in effect members of the R_ired corned :from such in Lividual (by deduction ]$;eserve, at sucl_ as the member_efrom pay or otherwis, ) and shall be credited ce[yes the first cf retirement p_, to the _ppropriatlon from which such conor the :member's sl_ :y-first birthday, whicl_ tributii,n was made." ever occurs earlier, .. _bJect _o the timely pay.-_ ment of the initial and subsequent premD _ (3) t;y deleting fr( m the second sentence _ms, under terms _ 'escribed by the Admin_f paragraph (4) of s_bsectlon (a) "subsectl/)n (1 hereof, or its _al year amount under istrator, directly to _he administrative office s_]¥ect;on (2) hereof' and inserting in lieu established under _ection 766(b) of this thel_of "paragraph 1) or (2) hereof, or title." fiscal\Fear amount under paragraph (3) (4) Subsection (t is an.ended to read as hereo_ and by deleing in such paragraph follows: (4) "tl_!_// subchapter' each time it appears "(b) Each policy _ :rchas_d under this suband "tru_ance unde_ this subchapter" and chapter' shall contain a pruvlslon, In termi_ lP_serti_,g _n lieu hereof "Servicemen's approved by the Ad: ministr_tor, that, excep: Group ]_ife_s_trance' as hereinafter provl_ ed, Se:'vlcemen's Group (4) ']'he fi1_t sente lee of subsection (b) Life Insurance whi¢ _ is continued In forc_ is ame:_ded 1_ dele1 ng "such insurance" after expiration of the p_riod of duty or and im,_rting i_ lieu thereof "Servicemen's travel under section _67(b) or 768(a) of this Group Life Insuff_nce ; and the second sentitle, effective the ( _y after the date such te:ace o such sub/_ct vn is amended by dei:asuran, ce would cea.' _, shall be a'atomaticallv., leting this subch/_ er" and inserting in converted to Veterax _' Grono Life llnsuranc,, lieu t::tereof "Serv_ omen's Group Life subject to (1) the tl_ lely pavment of the in[.. Insurar ce". rial premium under _erms prescribed by tho _um Administrator, and ) the terms and condI.(5) _!ubsection (c) .__...ended by delettions set forth :in _tlon 777 of this title, lng "any such insure xce_kand inserting in Such automatic con_ ;rs[on shah be effective lieu thereof "Servicerr m's _roup Life Insuronly in the case o: an ¢them_lse eligible ance". member or form._r nq _mber who is separate0 (6) q[he last sentem _ of su_tectiou rd) (1) or released from a _ _rlod ,)f active duty oc Is amended to read as _ollows: _11 premium active duty for tra xing ,)r inactive duty pa,-meats and extra h zard cosign Service-' training on or after _he d_,te ora which th_ men's £_roup Life Ins_ raaco and _e admlnVeterans' Group 12 e Imuranco program lstratlw:_ cost to the 7eterans' Ad_inistra(provided for under _ _ctlon 777of this title) tion of insurance issued under tI_ subbecomes effective. _% rvicemen's Group Life chapter shall be pate from the re_plving Insurance continued n folce under section fund.". 'g68(a) (4) (B) or (5) of t_ is tti;le shall not (_) By adding at th_ end of such sectl_n a bo converted to Vetel m's Group Life Insur,new subsection as foe >ws: directly lished to the under \ k April 8, 1 O74 sored life ment provision In view of Services amendments CONGRESSIONAL. or to use this allotaction of the Armed in view of the byand them, the Veteris prepared at S. 383 as reported as the Veterans' Insur- ans' Affairs this time to an amendment ance Act of 1974 The OFFICER. The question is on amendment of the Senator from The was agreed to. Mr. President, I ask unanimous that the Committee on Veterans' be discharged from further of H.R. 6574, that H.R. 6574 _de the pending business, and text of S. 1835, as amended, be for the text of 1-1.1%. 6574. The O_'_'iCER. Is there objection? objection, it is so ordered, H.R. 6574 will stated by title, The assistant ;gislative clerk read as follows: A bill (H.R. 6574 to amend title 38, United State Code, to persons to Join and remain in the and National Guard by providing coverage under Servicemen's Group Life ch members and certain Of the Retired Reserve, and for other mrposes, The OFFICER. Is there objection to the consideration of the House bill? There being no iection, the Senate proceeded [er the bill. Mr. _.Mr. President, I ask that all after the enacting clause in 6574 be stricken, and that the text S. 1835, as amended, be substituted thereof, The OFFICER. Without objection, it is so The question is on the engrossment of the amendment, The amendment ordered to be ehgrossed, and the to be read a third _time. The bill was the third time. Mr. Mr. President, I ask unanimous that S. 1835 and S. 383 be indefinitely r The OFFICER. Without objection, it is so Mr. MANSFELD. President, a parllamentary inquiry, The PRESIDING _ The Senator will state it. Mr. Mr. President, H.R. 6574, as amended, now the pending business and we hE proceeded to the point where we had third reading, Is that correct? The PRESIDING The Senator is correct. Mr. ,aLT,F.N. Mr. a parliamentary inquiry, The PRESIDING The Senator will state it. Mr. ,aLLEN. Mr. the provisions of S. 383 added to S. 1835, and then the House was brought up. Mr. MANSFI_r,r). That is correct. Mr. ALLEN. I do the provisions of S. 1835 as amended, added as a substitute for 6574. RECORD -- SENATE The PRESIDiN(_ OFFICER. It was a part of the unanimous consent request, Mr. ALLEN. Vely ' well, I thank the Chair. _ FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN AMENDMENTS OF 1974 S 5433 signs, it will give them a much clearer idea about the iqow of their taxes and the uses to which they are put. I would hope Senate adopt thisSoamendment andtheurge my wlll colleagues ACT to do so. The American people should see where their taxes go, and Federal proj.ects--whether dams or bridges or foreign The Senate continued with the conaid or political campaigns--shouid be sideration of the bill iS. 3044) to amend identified. the Federal Election Campaign Act of Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, will the 1971 to provide for public financing of Senator yield for a question for the primary and general election campaigns purpose of legislative history? for Federal elective office, and to amend Mr. ]DOLE. I yield. certain other provisions of law relating Mr. GRIFFIN. Of course, I wish there to the financing and conduct of such would be some indication that this rrotice campaigns. · had to be in large readable print, and mENT1FICATXOI_ OF TAX-SUI_PORTED pOLITICAL I think: the intention would be it could ADVERTmE_-NTS not be in small print. Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, if campaigns Mr. DOLE. No_ it could not be larger for Federal office are to become federally than your name, of ('ourse, but the pubfinanced projects like housing developlic shouid be able to read it. ments, highways, and flood control levees Mr. GRIFFIN. Would it be acceptable then they deserve to be accorded the to have a rubber stamp, so they couh! same treatment. Therefore, I am introstamp across the literature, "Paid for ducing an amendment to the so-called with Governments funds." public financing bill that will require Mr. DOLE. That would be appropriate. tax-supported political materials to be Mr. ,DRIFFIN. I thank the Senator. clearly identified and called to the attenThat clarifies the question. tion of the American people. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yieh! My amendment requires that any conmyself 1 minute simply to point out that didate for Congress, the Senate, Presithe statement itself calls for a false dent or Vice President who accepts Fedstatement. A person elected under title I eral tax funds for his campaign shall in the primary campaign would be enprint on all of his campaign literature, titled only to 50-percent matching funds. advertisements, bumper stickers, billTherefore, the statement on the billboard boards, or matchbooks a clear notice that or in television advertising or in newsthey are paid for with tax money, paper advertising or in the brochures he The Federal Government has develputs out that it is paid for by public oped a very useful policy of identifying financing only would be in error. It tax-supported projects, usually by mearts would be paid for only in part by public of a billboard or sign erected on the projfunds if he elected to take advantage of ect site. Frequently, these notices give the title I. total cost of the project, the Federal I think what we are seeing here is a share, the local or State share, and a filibuster by amendment, and this is just brief description of the project. Perhaps another one. such great detail would not be practical I reserve the remainder of my time. in the case of tax-supported political Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I am not campaigns, but the principle is valid. So part of a filibuster. I voted for cloture, as if the Congress is going to turn itself and the Senator knows. I had in my original the entire electoral system into a massive amendment "paid for in whole or in part Federal grant-in-aid program, it is enby Federal tax funds." I think that is the tirely fitting and proper that the Ameriintent. If only 50 percent was paid for in can people be shown how their tax dollars tax funds, the statement would contaia are being spent. "only 50 percent," but I did not know how If candidate X is going to be given so to draft that or how much each of us many hundreds of thousands of dollars would take. At least, for legislative hisfrom the U.S. Treasury, then I believe tory, that would be the intent and tho the American people are entitled to See hope. the fruits of their tax dollars clearly I could perhaps modify my amendment identified. It would be no great incon- to show the percentage of the tax funds. venience to tax-supported candidates to I ask consent to have the modificainclude such a notice on their bumper tion made to the effect that, ff it is not stickers, their buttons, their newspaper paid for wholly by tax funds, the part ads, and so forth. And I believe the pubthat is be shown. lic has a right to be advised of such The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there expenditures, objection? Without objection, it is so My amendment requiring this identifi- ordered. cation is simple and straightforward and Who yields time? it would certainly provide more lmmeMr. CANNON. Mr. President, I am prediate and valuable information on campared to yield back the remainder of my palgn expenditures to the average taxtime. payer than some obscure bookkeeping The PRESIDING OFFICER. Will the entry in one of the many reports required Senator from Kansas have his amendof political candidates, ment sent to the desk? When Mr. and Mrs. Taxpayer see their Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I would tax dollars being spent on candidate X's also point out that the percentage could billboards, candidate Y's newspaper adbe different in every instance, because vertisements and candidate Z's yard one person may take advantage of it to 425 S 5434 CONGRESSIONAL April 8, 19 74 RECORD --- SENATE the extent of 50 percent, and another person may take advantage of it to the extent of 20 percent. It relates to the amount of funds he is able to. raise for the purpose of matching, so it could be different in every instance. It is a very bad amenchnent, Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, the Senator from Nevada is entitled to his opinion, but I believe my amendment is entirely appropriate. I might say, as a matter of clarification, to avoid that possibility, I have gone back to the original language of the amendment, which I think would clarify it. Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, may I ask Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the Senator from Utah (Mr. B_.m_*r_')_ the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. FONG), the Senator from Florida (Mr. GreeNlY), the Senator from New York (iMr. JAVXTS), the Senator from Idaho (Mr. McCLURE), the Senator from TennesSee (Mr. BsocK), and the Senator frora New York (Mr. BUCKLEY) are nece_;sarily absent, I also announce that the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. BELLMO,_), the Senatc,r Irom Virginia (Mr. WrLr,XA,_ L. SCOT_), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. TAFT) are absent on ¢,fliciai bus ness. The result was announced--yeas 30. nays 48, as follows: duce t_e overall amount that can be expended very greatly. The printed amendment; by that humber has certain figures in it; I ask unani-' moths :mnsent that I may modify those figure_; slightly, even though the time limitar, ion has been agreed to. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without object:ion, it is so ordered. The amendment, as modified, is as follow:;: On p_ge 13, line 23, strike out "10 cents" and in:_ert in lieu thereof "8 cents". on page 15, line 9, strike out "15 cents" and insert in lieu thereof '_12 cents". i_[r. :,PIANsFIELD. Does the Senator re- that the clerk read the modified amendment? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will read the amendment as modified. The second assistant legislative clerk proceeded to read the amendment, as modified. Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous ,consent that the remainder of the reading of the amendment be dis_ pensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICEi_. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment, as modified, is as follows: [No. 123 Le_'.l YEAS--30 Allen Ervin Packwood Baker Fannin Percy Bartlett _oldwater R_ndolph Biden Griffin Ribicoff _[_yrd, Talmadge Harry, F., Jr. Hansen Helms Thurmond _Byrd, Robert C. Hruska Tc,wer Cotton I_fansfield Weicker Curtis l_._cClellan T¢,ung Dole _TcIntyre Dominick Nunn :_A¥S--4S Abourezk Haskell Nelson Alken Hatfield Pastore Beall Hathaway Pearson ]_;ible Huddleston Pell Brooke Humphrey Pr.oxmire _:urdick Inouye Re,th Cannon Jackson Schweiker Case Johnston Scott, Hugh Chiles I_iagnuson Sparkman Clark Miathtas Stafford Cook McGovern St,_nnis quest the yeas and nays? Mr. ALLEN.Yes. Mr. i_IANSFIELD. Mr. President, traanimous consent that it be in this ti:cae to order the yeas and the Allen amendment which called up. The PRESIDING OFFICER. object,;on, it is so ordered. Domenicl Cranston _:agleton l_Cart ]Eiartke V_ETE]!_ANS On page 3-q, between lines 20 and 21' insert the following new subsection: "{c) Any published political advertisement of a candidate electing to receive payments under Title I of this Act shall contain on the face or front page thereof the following notice: "'Paid for in whole or in part by Federal tax funds.'" On page 39, line 21 strike out "(c)" and insert in lieu thereof "(d)". On page 40, line 3, strike out "(d)" and insert in lieu thereof "(e) ." On in pagelieu 40,thereof line 3,"(e) strike out "(d)" and insert ." On page 40, line ll, strike out "(e)" and insert in lieu thereof "(f)." Mr. DOLF.. Mr. President, the remainder of my time. I yield back Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, before I yield back the remainder of mytime, let me say that, as the Senator pointed out correctly, he voted for cloture the other day. I hope he does so tomorrow. I yield back the remainder of my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time having been yielded back, the question is on agreeing to the amendment 6f the Senator from Kansas (Mr. DOL_), as modified. The yeas and nays have been ordered, and the clerk will call the roll. The second assistant legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that the Senator from Indiana (Mr. BAYH), the Senator from Texas (Mr. BENTSEN), the Senator from Idaho (Mr. CHm_C_), the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. EASTLAND), the senato r from Arkansas (Mr. FULBRIGHT), the Senator from Alaska (Mr.. GRAVEL), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. HOLLINGS), the Senator from Iowa (Mr. HU_HES), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. KENNEDY), the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. LONU), the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. McGr_.), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. METZZNrAUM) are necessarily absent, 426 _;ayh ]_;ellmon _;ennett _entsen ]_rock ]_;uckley Church Eastland Mondale Iqletcalf IMontoya iq:ess Muskle NOT VOTING--22 F,_ng F_llbright Gravel Gurney Holllngs Hughes Javits Kennedy Stevenson St_vens Symington T_mney Wl:lliams Long McClure McGee Metzenbaum Scott, _rilliamL_ Taft So 1V_r.DOLE'_ amendment, as modified, was rejected, The PRESIDING OFFZCER. The Sen_ _te will be in order, Mr. MANSF]_FM.,D. Mr. President, if i may have the attention of the Senate, I ask unanimous consent tlmt on the vote which will follow inunediately, there be a time limitation of 15 minutes, The PRESIDING O_-_IC_.[_. Is there objection? Without -objcctio_a, it is _:) ordered. Mr. MANSFIELD. Tha; will be the last vote tonight. I understated that the dist_inguished Senator from Alabama will call up an amendment which will be the pending b_ziness toraorrow. At this time, I ask unm_imous consent that there be a tlLme limitation of 1 hour on the Allen amendment to be called up, the time to be equally dividend between and controlled by the sponsol of the amend.merit, the distinguished Senator from Alabama (Mr. ALLEN), m_d the manager of the bill, the distingaishod Senator from Nevada (]Yir. CaN_¢,N). The PRESIDING OI_ICE]._. Withou_ objection, it is so ordered, Mr. ALLE_. Mr. :?resident, the amendment is No. 1141, _,nd it would re., I ask order at nays on will be Without 1Vlr. MANSFIELD. I ask for the yeas and n_tys. The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. HARTKE. Mr. President, a parliamentary inquiry. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will state it. Mr..HARTKE. Will there be a rollcall vote now on the insurance bill? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct. IN _ _ ANCE ACT OF 1974 The ;Senate resl mod the consideration of the bill H.R. t i74 to amend title 38, United States COd ,, to increase the maximum amount oJ Servicemen's Group IMfe Insurance to 20,000, to provide fulltime coverage tl ereunder for certain members of the _eserves and National Guard to autho_ [ze the conversion of such iu_urance to Veterans' Group Life lx_surance, and fm other purposes. Mr. _ARRY F. BYRD, JR. Mr. Pi-esident, a parliamm tary inquiry. The PRESIDIN_ OFFICER. The Senator will state it. Mx. _!LARRY F. I k_RD, JR. Is H.R. 6574 the pending busln, ss? The PRESIDE _G O]_'ICER. The l_;nding business cow is H.R. 6574 as amended. Mr. _IARRY F. YRD, Jl._. As amended by whl_t? The PRESID qG OiFFICER. As amended by the s_ bstantive language of S. 383 and S. 1835. Mr. [_kRRY F. BYRD, JR. A further parliamentary inql try. The PRESIDIN( OFFICER. The Senator wfil state it. Mr. t{ARRY F. ;YRD, JR. Am I correct in my unders _nding, then, that S. 1835 a:_'_d S. 383 hs _e been added to the House bill, or do ley take the place of the House bill? 'The PRESIDIN( OFFICER. They have replac_d the langu _ge in the House bill. Mr. iILARRY F. I ;YRD, JR. Insofar as the substance of _ 383 is concerned, it has no_ changed a _d there is no cost to the Government in _lved in that amendment? April '.8, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL it was never there," he said. "When Jack Kennedy looked forward to running agaln_; Jack. And we used to talk about it. We had hell of a good idea that I think would politics, We wouldn't live together but we would travel as much as possible and appear on express our views." After ,'s assassination, he said, he decided not to Then it appearedthat the Rockefeller and the Easterners would take over ,arty so he got back in the race. ,'But it was life or death for me." He says the running for President again is raised by young people, He spends as time as any conservative spokesman on the _ollege lecture circuit. Of 10 speaking he had In Novemher, seven were on He is no longer invited by conservative campus groups. Many is appearances now are open to all studeI and his staff says he draws large of all political persuasigns. He gets invitations to speak at commencements e_ year. The Senator reports increasing with his views among students, "I have a group two every week in this office," he said. answer their questiGriS and I won't answered but three or four and one m will say, 'Now, wait a minute. You're a ¢ and I-don't classify myself but _'m agreeing with you." The young like his criticisms of big government, "This, I think, is the central the young people." He has also founc a revival of courtesy on campuses. Our interview took place a few days before he to speak at Western Kentucky "I remember the last time I was there a little rough," he sa Unlvarstty of Kentucky. This has all L I never get any bad treatment any . Man, I used to have kids get up and shou 'Bull!' and walk up and down with dirty But the campus has changed completely. These kids, they know what they're there now." Nonetheless for Ooldwater among the young still a little puzzling, I suspect that the xplanatlof_ for it goes beyond of courtesy on campus or deep beliefs in ited government. There have been numerou indications that students are no longer interested in government of any limited or otherwise, Back in 1964, Reston may have revealed the secret of appe.al, not only to the young also to many others afflicted with and hope, but like some other good and analysis of that year, it got lost the national panic as people ran over to get out of the way of the menace: "Mr. Goldwater may all the ultras, and the antis--the are anti-Negro, antilabor, _r, anti-lntellectual_ but he also attracts else that is precisely the of these vicious and negative forces. Mr. t touches the deep feeling of regret American life: regret over the loss of ions faith; regret over the loss of and fidelity; regret over the loss of the spirit of pugnacious in short, over the loss of America's and idealistic youth." We now seem to . in another of our periodic spasms of t over lost innocence, And who in our and depleted cadre of political to symbolize that loss and than squareshouldered, all-Americ Barry Goldwater? The man is easy to Remember how he behaved after he lost 1964 election--43 million votes to 27 .ion. Unlike l_ichard Nlxon, the grudge and wound licker who found defeat intolerable, Barry Goldwater simply said hell with it, If t_ne RECOR D -- SENATE country did not hlm, he would go back to hls ham radio his flying. He would rather occupy his with inventing an electronic than with scratching his In Washlngton. And how change! If he was the Bela Lugosi of Amerl politics in 1964, he has now become Henry Higglns. Since he has begun to politically again, he is almost cranky _t lt. He showed me a huge stack of fan [ and said it had come from every state tn he union. "My biggest trouble is keeping with the damned stuff," he said. His had the same goodnatured but tone when he talked of having to run all _ the country maklng speeches, troublefor the party, educating the straightening out the President. He was to tell me that he was an ordinary desires nothing more tlta_ _ust the chance to live exactZy as he l_kes do precisely what he wants.* -What, after all, is lis politics? It never has been one of of .getting this country moving It is a polities of indignation. He looks from his work table where he ts mindln own business and here comes the iamned Government, meddling with him. is politics of delense, of outraged of the violated citizen who Just to live exactly as he likes, But wasn't he a to the country in 19647 That San convention hall full of yahoos, haters nuts was no joke. And he was there them, taking their cheers and by )resence and station egging them on. By there was a smell of fascism in the It was _o less real that it came from the and not from the chief, and the stood by and did nothing to stop it. And yet, there is Lll unfairness in the judgment if it stops Because as scary as that conventlon it not scary in the same way a George rally is when the fevers are high in Btrmingh_n or Meridian or Flint. difference is Jn tile build of the men at top. Wallace .'s a born and bred ne. When he finds passion in a crowd makes blood contact with it, riding it, fling it, lashing it to his own and thus girl both passions for a moment more than any two passigns singly and could ever achieve. George is a creature of political lust, and ff it 1; hard to distinguish hls politics from his exuality, that is no accident. He is in the _at tradition of hungry men who make distinctions among their appetities. Goldwater is Words like lust and passion do not fit him. like him but they do not yearn ) go to bed with hbn or he with them. Wallace is a dema~ gogue, Goldwater is merely a crowd pleaser. There is no doubt Barry Goldwater wanted to be Presiden_ but I think he is truthful when he says never lusted for it. Perhaps the And perhaps that is why they him so decisively, as some women a man wherl they sense that he is ,nded in his determination, The instinct is sound. It eltrainates the frivolous, bc in love and politics. Nevertheless, I am fretful over the way we treated Barry , that year. It troubles me that we stood by and let a man who was por$rayed to the world monstrous. When I went to mark my in 1964, I was not asked to vote rationally I was asked to be- S 5439 lieve only that_Barry gerous man. I l_ught self be cheate_[j FEDEtL_L ELECTION cAMPAIGN AMENDMENTS ACT OF 1974 The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill (S. 3044) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public f[nanciilg of primary and general election CaI:Ipaigllq for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating t_) the financing and conduct of such cam.paigns. AMENDMENT NO. 1141 Mr. ALLE1V. Mr. President, 'my amendment No. 1141 and I call ask it up be stated. The amendment PRESIDING will b_ OFFICER. The stated. The s_sistant legislative clerk read as follows: On pa4_e 13, line 23, strike out "10 cents" and insert in lieu thereof "5 cents". On page 15, line 9, strike out "15 cents" and insert in lieu thereof "10 cents". Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Pcesident, according to the unanimous consent agreement heretofore made, I offer a modification to the amendment, 4md ask that it be stated. The PRESIDING modification OFFICER. The will be stated. The assistant legislative followS'. On page 13, line 23. strike and insert In lleu thereof "8 On psge 15, line 9, strike and insert in lieu thereof "12 clerk read ss out "10 cent/' cents". out "15 cents" cents". Mr. ]%OBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, does the distinguished Senator from Alabama wish to speak on his amendmerit ti_is evening? Mr.._iLLEN. No. I understand that the time limitation will be stated on it: tomorrow. Mr. thank ]._OBERT C. BYRD. Very well. I the Senator. __,_,______ ORDER FOR RECOGNITION OF SE1N'ATOR AIKEN TOMORROW Mr. ROBI%*I:_T C. BYRD. Mr. Presidcllt. I ask unanimous consent that after the distinguished Senator from Wisconsin (MI'. PROXMIRE) has been recognized under the order previously entered on tomorrGw, the distinguished Senator from Vermont (Mr. nized for not to excetd The PRESIDING objection, Mr. AIKEN) be recog.- 15 minutes. OFFICER. Withffut it is so ordered. ROBERT C, BYRD. Mr. President, it is my understanding that there is time limitation on the Allen amendment as modified of 1 hour? The ator Mr. PRESIDING OFFICER. The a Sen.- is correct. ROBERT C. BYRD. It is my un.- derstanding also that the order for the resumption of the consideration of the unfinished business at the conclusion of routine morning business tomorrow has already been entered? The * From "I'm an Man," in "My Pair Lady." Copyright 1956 by Frederick Loewe and Alan Jay Used by permission of Chappell & C Inc. Goldwater was a danit and thereby let my- PRESIDING correct. Mr. ROBERT C. understanding that OFFICER. BYRD. the That is It is also my pending ques- 427 S 5440 CONGRESSIONAL tion at that time will be on adoption o_ the amendment of the Senator from Alabama (Mr. ALLEN)a_qmodified....... The PRESIDING OFFICEIL That is correct, Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, will the Senator from West Virginia yield? Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I yield. Mr. AIAbEN. May I state in brief just what the amendment and the modification wfil do. The amendment would have ·changed the permissible amount of money to be spent in a primary from 10 cents per'person of voting age to 5 cents, and to change the amount that could be spent in a general election fro m 15 cents down to 10 cents, The distinguished Senator from Nevada (Mr. CAt'NON) stated in colloquy on the'floor that he felt these reductions were too 'large, but ff the amendment was submitted at 8 cents per person of voting age in the primary and 12 cents per person of voting age in the general election, he personally--but not speaking for the committee---would support such an amendment. The overall amount that can be spent would contxol the amount of the Federal subsidy in the primary because the Federal Treasury potentially would be called upon to pay half that amount and it would of course reduce the amount that the Public Treasury would pay for the general election. Overall, it would accomplish about a 20 percent reduction in overall expenditures. It would be a possible saving of as much as $100 million every 4 years. So the modification has been made. It would accomplish a 20 percent reduction in the permissible amount of overall expenditures. I hope that on 428 tomorrow the amendment. RE CORD-Senate will accept SE NATE the PROGRAM Mr. ROBEP'r C. BYRD. l_[r. President the program :_or tomorrow is as follows: The Senate will convene at 12 noon. After the 2 leaders or their designees have been recognized under the standing order, Mr. PF_OXMXR_. will be recognized for not to exceed 15 mi:rotes. Mr. ALm._:N will t:hen be r,_ognized for not to exceed 15 rrd.nutes, after whiclt there will be a period for the transa_._tion of routine morning business, of rot to exceed !5 minutes, with statements therein limited to 5 minutes each. At the conclusion of tAe transaction of routine mornhag business, the Senate wfil resume consideration o_ the unfinished business, S. 3044, the public campaign financing bfil. The pending question at that time will be on the adoption of the amendment, as :modified, by iM[r. ALLEN. There will be a yea and nay vote on that amendment. The vote will occur at ap:}roxj_nately 1:4_5 p.m. Other votes on amen iments may o(> cur subsequent to the vote on that amendment arid prior to 3 p.m. At 3 pma., the debate on the motion to :invoke cloture will begirt, and there will be 1 hour under the rule. The hour will expire at 4 p.m. At that tLme, the manda... 'tory quorum call will be issued; and upon _e establishment of a q_orum, the vote, which will be a rollcall vote, will ocem' at approkimat_;ly 4:15 p.m. Subsequent to the vote on clloture, votes on amendrnent;s to the bill will be in or.. der, _md yea-and-nay _otes will occur. April ADJO1 Mr. ROBERT C. if there be no fur before the Senate, with t;he previous stand in adjourn_ noon temorrow. 8, 19 74 RNMF,NT BYRD. Mr. President, her business to come [ move, in accordsmce ,rder, that the Senate lent until 12 o'clock The motion was _greed to; and at 5:12 p.m. the Senate a ijourned until tomorrow, Tuesday, Apri 9, 1974, at 12 noon. NOMI IATIO:NS Executive nomir _tions received by the Senate April 8, 19' _: DEPARTM2 NT or STATE Joh_ P. Constand , of the District of Col'ambl:_, to be Deput_ Inspector General, Foreign AssistanCe, vic Anthony Faunce, resigned ixv THE h mxNr CoaPs The following-nan eclofficers of the Marine Corps for temporal ? appointment to the grade of brigadier ge teral: John P_.Debarr John ]?I.Miller Herbert J. Blaha Harold A. Hatch Philip D. Shutler Edward J. Bronars RicharcI E. Carey Warren R. Johnson GeorgeW. Smith Paul X. Kelley CONFIB FIATIONS Executive nom_ atton confirmed by the Senate April 8, i974: DEPARTMENT)F AORICULTURE Richard L. Feltne, of Illinois, to be an A.,3sistant Secretary o Agrlcu/ture. (The above nomin_ tion wag approved subJect to the nomine's commitment to respond to requests tc appear and testify before any duty constt 2ted committee of the Senate.) . SENATE FLOOR DEBATES ON 5.3044 APRIL 9, 1974 April 9, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL Xt represents a, position that is supported not only by the League of Cities and the Conference of ME 7ors but by the Governors Conference, as wi 1 as the Ar-CIO. Before conelud ag, I would llk_ to add a brief commentar on the measure we are propos_g in th4 context of the Supplemental Bill and tl e AdminiStration requests. As much as in _ ny overall budgetary eval~ nation, the Sul plemental Appropriations Bill represents a d _cislon on priorities. It involves a determlr atton based on the cornpeting demands f r federal dollars. In that determ] ration, I believe that our request can be f_ aded without in any way breaking the budl _t. Let me note th t the Administration has put forward a : §.2 billion supplemental budget request f¢ _ the Department of Delense alone. Theh request includes perinission to spend $474, million more in military aid for South Vietr tm. When I look at tl e lines stretching through the employment o_ ces throughout my states, where 220,000 pers, ns are unemployed where the unemployment rate is now at 7.7 percent, even under the ne_ Labor Department rules, then ! think our equest is even conservatlve. We are reques: mgonly$350miIlion. The Administration is requesting $474 million for guns for Salgon_ ! cannot help bul believe that the national interest would be ,etter served if the $350 million we request d were subtracted from the $474 million in the military aid request for South Vietnam. £ might add that I doubt the necessity or c _sirability of approving even the remainde_ We believe the _ddltlonal funds which would be added u_ ler our proposal for this fiscal year can be fi lurid within the existing budgetary spendingllevels. Expenditures for public service eml_oyment will result in savings in welfare l_yments and unemployment insurance and[increase tax revenues of 40 cents for every c_llar spent. In addition, based upon Bureau _)f Labor Statistics data, it has been estlmate_ that for every 10 public service Jobs Creeled, four private sector Jobs will be ereate_ linmediately and that eventually, six will over beth e nerated next 18 from to 24the months, another Gross National Product _crease resulting from those 14 Jobs. In t_ _s of Job creation and economic stimulus, t is a bigger bang for the buck than virtua ly any other program, The second conelu ling point I would urge on my colleagues r_ presents my own view of the direction this nation must move if it is to fulfill a wid_ range of aspirations awakened in part by ] ur own rhetoric and by the rhetoric of those who have gone before us. In America today, _he 4.7 million unemployed and the mo_ than _5 million poor are being denied tle promise of Justice. When FDR called for_ x a vision of this country in which there _ 'ould be full freedom, his vision included fi _edom from the chains of economic despoils: ). He looked out upon a nation in which a t i_ird of the people were ill-housed, Ill-fed ant ill-cared for. And he laid out the ehallen to end those conditions, The goals he Set :h still appear in the distance, t_ reala major for millions Americans. still Thereall taus; be expansion of in public services, m expansion in which the federal governme _t plays a continuing role, if we are to achl ye those goals. Enlarging the pub]: services made available to the citizens of this country--in combating a host of public ills, from inexiequate housing to irmxiequate medical care---represents the d rection we should be marking out for the: _ture. That direction can be tied through t _bllc service employmerit to helping set course toward full employment, where havt_ sedecent, able towell-paying work and wanting to work and important job to them. The measure we I not miraculously c: to achieving the lit velt desired; but it those objectives. I hope that the C, suggested amendme: RECORD -- SENATE opportunities available ce suggesting today will cry us to that goal, or _ration Franklin Roostwill be a step closer to minlttee will accept our t. _ WAS_rXNGTOr, D.C., March 26, 1974. Hon. EDWARn M. Km _rDY, U_g. Senate, Washington, D.C.: The AFL-CIO str¢ _gly supports the emergency public service _mployment amendment sponsored by a bi-pc 'tisan group of Senators. The $350 million pro lded by this amendment is vitally necessary uring the current fiscal year. The growth[ unemployment crisis makes adoption of his amendment a neeessity. ._g_ J. BIE1VIILLER, D_rector, Depa tment o/ Legislation, AFL-CIO. _ _ATIONAL LEA UE OF CITIES, U.S. CONF_ _ENCEOF M_YORS, March ZS, 1974. Hon. EDWARD M. El NlqEDY, u.s. Senate, Waskington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR EEl lq_DY: We strongly support your efforts, and those of your colleagues, to increase the supt [emental appropriations for public service jc _s. As Mayor Uhhnan of Seattle, Washington: said in testimony before the Senate Approprl _tlons Subcommittee on Labor and Health, _ducation and Welfare, "There is little qu _stion that the energy crisis is . . . resultlr; in massive unemployment throughout th country." As the Mayor S 5531 CONCLUSI(IN OF --IISI_SS The PRES _IUDDLESTON). closed, M_rrfing \V FEDEttAL ELECTION A1VIE_)IViENTS MORNING OFFICER business (]_r. is now CAMPAIGN OF 1974 ACT The PRESIDING OFFICER.' Under the previous order, the Senate will resume considex_tion of the unfinished business, S. 3044, which the clerk will state. The assistant leg_dative clerk read as follows: A bil]i (S. 3044) to amend the Federal Eh_tion Campaign A(_ oI 1971 to provide for public financing of primary and general election campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating to the financing and conduct of such c_a_npalgns. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The pending question is on agreeing to the amendment (No. 1141, as modified) of the Senator from Alabama (Mr. ALLEN), on which there will be 1 hour of debate. Mr. _LT,EN. Mr. President _, I ask unanimous consent to yield 10 minutes to the distinguished senior Senator from Delaware (Mr. I;_OTH) with the time to be charged equally between the two sides. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. ROTH. Mr. l%esident, ! thank the indicated in that re: Amony, in Seattle alone some 50,000 persons, re unemployed, and this does not even take ato account the impact of the energy crisis St. Louis has reported energy-related unem _loyinent of alinost. 7,000 persons in the last i _w months. Flint, Michigan, reports a 14 pen _ent uneinployment rate Angeles projectsor so er _rgy-related unemploy-Los in February, ae 22,000 persons. merit will reach 25,( )0 by this summer, The Administratic _'s supplemental appropriation request for public service employmerit is an inadequ_ te response to such increases in uneinploy xent. The Jobs, approximutely 35,000, creat d wil not even replace the employment o!c )ortunities being abollshed under the phs e out of the Publlc Employinent Program _ _EP). Local and state g verninent demonstrate, in the conduct of _ _P, the ability to place over 150.000 unempl_ 7ed in productive public service Jobs---Jobs _ nlch not only provided needed unemployme ,t but also met critical public service need of our communities, Every evaluation anc study of PEP has documerited the const_ _ctlve result_ of the program. Senat_)r from Alabama for his courtesy. Mr. President, I had intended to call Up an amendment, but have determined not to do so. However, ! do wish to dis- In our support of however, urge you _ an increase in FY 1[ priation in the man possible in FY 1975. ployinent will, ho' quently, we believe be given, on aandprio_ for FY 1975 t] your efforts, we would, consider the fact that r4 supplemental approer proposed will not be The problein of nnein'ever, reinaln. Conse;he cofisideration must basis, which to legislation eity future would Of my amendment u ue camps is cr6cial gn reform tolegislation, the passage ef '--' i I will refrain from calling it up and askirlg for a vote because, apparently, the Senate will not have the opportunity to seriously consider any campaign reform proposals which are alternatives to "pub]ic financing." authorize funds to c: Such legislation sh( Title II of CETA si were not designed problems such as thc crisis, Sincerely, ALLEN ] Ezee_t_ Nsf JOHN J cate public service Jobs. _ld be independent of me that Act and Title _ Ineet nnemployinent ;e created by the energy This fact is evident because of the reSUIts Of two _enate votes conducted last week on amendments to the Federal Election Campaign Act. On one vote, my amendment to allow all congressional candidates to send--without p0stag_-tWO mass mailings to each of their constituents was tabled without a vote be- . PRITCrIARD, JR., 'e Vice Prescde_', onaZ Leag'ue o/Cities, OvN_ur_, U'.S_ cecu_ve _on/erenceD_rector, o! Mayors. CUSS tine reasons why I do not intend to call up further amendments from my Mr. President, the amendment ! had camp_igI1 reform package. intencled to call up is an important element of my package of campaign reform proposals. The amendment would require the Federal Comznunications Comrrdssion to develop regulations requiring each television station to make available, without charge, a limited amom_t of television time to candidates for Fe_leral office. My amendment would permit each candidate to gain exposure through the television medium and it will prohibit most candidates from purchasing any other television time in addition to that provided by the stations without charge. Although I believe that the adoption lng taken VOte, the on its Senate amend, merit---No, were :made that, merits. On defeated asl134--after a tax-related the the second Baker objections amend- 431 S 5532 CONGRESSIONAL merit, it should not be considered by the Senate, for it would be subject to a point of order in the House of Representtires, This latter vote--in which the Senate defeated Senator BAKER'Samendment to substitute the public financing provisions of the pending bill with a plan to finance future campaigns with a 100percent tax credit for a contribution up to $50 on a single, or $100 on a joint return_lms indicated that supporters of campaign reform who favor the tax credit approach to campaign financing are placed on the horns of a dilemma. Since many constitutional authorities are convinced that any tax-related moasure must originate in the House, those of ns who support the tax credit approach are barred :from presenting the Senate with a viable alternative' to public financing until the House has considered this proposal or it can be attached by the Committee on Finance to an approprlate revenue bill from the House. RECORD -- SENATE this time because I am convinced that it, tends to emphasize, rather than de-. emphasize, the use of money in politi-. cal campaigns. In addition, public fi-. nancing may separate the candidate from his constituency. For, once a candi-, date learns that he can tap the Federal[ q['reasury for his campidgn funds, he may be encouraged to i.llow camlyaigr_ consultants to manage his campaign through use of the lates! Madison Ave-. nue techniques, instead _f carrying hi,,; campaign to the people directly ttn.ough personal contact with prospective voters., As an alternative to "public financing" I have sponsored legislatk,n to allow each taxpayer to take a 50 percent tax credit for a political contributit,n of $150 by a single taxpayer or $300 or. a joint return, I am convinced that the "tax credit" app:coach to campaign financing reform is a better alternative to "pl_blie financing'" because it encourages every taxpayer to, voluntarily contribute to the candidate of his or her choice. An egpanded use of the present tax credit fo:' political conFor this reason, I would prefer that a tributions should broaden the base of final vote on the pending bill be deferred campaign contr:ibutors an.t rel!ieve candi.until the parliamentaxy situation is such dates for Federal office from the necessity that the alternative approach can be oil soliciting large donations from a few considered, unless the tax credit apwealthy individuals or organi:zations, preach can receive a serious debate, it Mr. President. my proposal tS. 3131) to will be evident that the Senate is faced finance political campaigns through an with but one alternative. The public fi- increase in the maximum tax credit alnancing concept Will have been steamlowed for political contnbuti,_ns is the rolled through the Senate. key element in my "package" of cam-. It seems to me, Mr. President, that paign relearn proposals. ,qlnce this prosuch a delay would allow the Senate to posal cannot be adequately considered consider the pros and cons of both until it has been attached to a Houseapproaches to reform in campaign fipassed bill, it is obvious t;mt the Senate nancing. Since the radical changes ehcannot engage in a seriots debate of its visior_ed by the sulyporters of public provisions at this time. Moreover, the finanbing bill will not take effect until Senate has alrcady tabled the second ciethe 1976 general election, I see no reason ment of' my campaign reform "package" why a vote must be taken on this bill which would have reduced campaign before alternative avenues of approach costs by permitting congressio_aal eandlto campaign reform have been fully exdates to make two mass m_illngs at Gevplored. The Senate has already passed ernment expense.. several bills to reduce the influence of Mr. President, I am cor_mitted to the big money iii political campaigns, passage of meaningful campaign reform One bill would shorten the campaign legislation. I am also unwi!ling to further period to approximately 8 weeks, thus delay the work of the Sgnate. For, in reducing ca_npaign costs. Another proaddition to campaign refo_Ta many ether posal, S. 372, pisces limits on campaign important issues are demanding our. atcontributions and expendtture_, estab~ tention. I intend, therefore, to vote in lishes a Federal Eleotion Commission, favor of closing the debate on S. 3044 in and strengthens the disclosure requirethe hope that the Senate can move to a ments for all candidates and their camvote on the "public financ:ng" bill. paign committees. I remain convinced, however, that my I have supported eac_ of the_';e messproposal[s--taken as a who[e---would regures and I have urged the Senate to ulate the conduct of future campaigns strengthen their provisions by adopting without injecting an unwarranted infumy "package" of reform proposals, sion of Federal funds inta the-political Rather than go from (me extreme---in campaign proce_'_. Until "public financwhich campaigns are financed by unrelng" becomes the "law of the la:ad," I wfil stricted private contributions--to ancontinue to fight for enactment of my other extreme--in which the Federal alternative proposals, Government becomes directly involved [UIr. President, I yield back the rein campaign finaneing--I would favor mainder of my time. the implementation and enforcement of laws designed to shorten campaigns, re'rhe PRESIDING OF_IC_,'R. Who strict contributions and expenditures, yields time? and force ail candidates to disclose the ;.vir. CLARK. Mir. President, I suggest source of their campaign funds. F.nforcethe absence of a quorum and ask unaniment of these measu_together with mous consent that the time not be the enactment of my paokage of recharged to either side. form proposals--should end many of the The PItESID,ING OlvFICER (Mr. abuses of our political can_aign procH_w_Y). Without objection, it is so ess without creating amy additional ordered, and the clerk wil! call[ the roil. problems, l_r. (F_)LDWATER.Mr President, I As I have stated on pre_do_ oceaslons, ask unardmons consent tha_ the order, for I am opposed to public financing at the quo_mcall_rescinded, 432 April 9, 1973 The PRESID]_IG OFFICER. objection, it ls soordered. ,,, _ Without CELEBRATIOI_ )_ 100TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE BIRTH OF HERBERT HOOVER _r, (_OLDWA: ER. Mr. President, on April 1, I submit ed a concurrent _resolution ,calling for the celebration of the 100th anniversar3 of the birth of Herbert Hoover on Al gust 10 of this year in the town of West Branch, Iowa. I know that m:_ny Membe's of this body, regardless of party afffiil _ion, hold the memory of this great man n high regard; and in testimony of this act, I am delighted to announce that 25 Senators already have contacted me wis ting to t_sponsor the resolution. I wfil sk that a list of these .sponsor_,; appear the end of my re:marks. ]YIr. President Herbert Hoover is known for his m ly careers, as mining engineer, huma fitarian, President, statesman, and au' her. In his lifetime, he :Sas done some ver ' important things for isis core,try and t1 _ world. His relief activities are unpars leled. His humanitar: m career began in i1900 when he the food relief for victims of the Rebellion; then _Ln1914 he the American Relief Committee, as chairman, expedited the 12_,000 U.S. citizens who were in Europe at the outbreak of War I. Later th_,_t year, with and northern i_r'mee the Germans, he dfrooted the relief 10 million persons in the area who faced starvation. lin 4 years of got a billion dol]ars worth of food _eople. Once we entered the Hoover was ap:pointed U.S. foe by President Wilson pioneered methods of mobfiizing food in wartime. After t_!_e he was appointed Director C,eneral Relief and Reconstrq_ctio:a of and supervised the distribution of $3.3 billion of food and clothing to of cold and hungry persons in 30 In 19,21, Hoover obtain relief to the starving in Russia; and in :1927, wl.qen the Valley had :its worsi; flood in memory of man, Hoover undertook the job cf moving a and a half Americans to safety. His humane continued in i[946 when he was pointed coordinator of Food Supply Famine by ]?resident Truman. In that capacity, ]!foover traveled 35,( )0 miles to 22 eount:cles threatened famine and as a result of his , the _inited States shi more than 6 million tor_ of bread _ to the people of the h_Jngry natic His Government after 7 years of servicf; as ' of Commerce and 4 years m_President, the United States, was capped by service, while in , as head of the two :E[oover for organizing the executiw_ branch government. The two "Hoover Plans" objective and nonpartisan more than haft of which were adopted, for economy and of Government operations. April 9, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--SENATE Mr. President, [ Lis brief r_sum_ of Presidential races, a $1,000 contribution events tn the life of fferbert Hoover conin the House and the Senate. That veys some of the r _sons why I feel so amendment was voted down by the deeply that we shmf 1 honor his memory Senate. by providing for apl roprlate ceremonies That leads the Senator from Alabama commemorating th_ 100th anniversary to the inescapable conclusion that the of his birth, proponents of this bill, this public fiMr. President, I :sk unanimous connancing measure, are not interested in sent that a list of ill sponsors of Senate campaign reform. What they are interConcurrent Resoluti ,n 79 be printed in ested in, particularly in the lc,rimarles, the R_,coR_: is providing campaign expenses for There being no o ,jection, the list of themselves. They want the be_t of two sponsors was ordere/ to be printed in the worlds. They want contributions perRECORD, as follows: mitred up to $3,000 per person, $6,000 SPo_cso_s oF s co_¢. zzzs. 79 per couple. They want those contribuMr. Goldwater. Mr. ] ennett, Mr. Buckloy, tions, and then they want a matching Mr. Dole, Mr. Domenlc Mr. Domtnlck, Mr. system, too. So they do not want reIgastland, Mx. Fanz/ln, 1_ Griffin, Mr. Ourney, forIn. They want public subsidy added Mr. Hanson, Mr. Hattie'. and Mr. Hughes. - to the amount garnered from the priMr. Case,Mr. Clark, ! :r. Cotton, Mr. Javits, vale sector, Mr. McClellan, Mr. Rag [olph, Mr. Scott, Mr. The Senator from Alabama has tried Stafford, Mr. Stevenson, Mr. Taft, Mr. Tower, Mr. Tunney, and Mr. _ _er. to vision, knock butout a themajority campaignin subsidy th(' Senate, propossibly even a two-thirds majority, PEDE1ZAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT wants to see their primary campaigns AMENDMENTS OF 1974 financed up to one-half, wan_s to see their general election campaigns flThe Senate continued with the consideration of the bill (S. 3044) to amend nanced 100 percent, the Federal Election Campaign Act of This little amendment is ju,,;t a drop 1971 to provide for public financing of in the bucket. It would save approxiprimary and general election campaigns mately $50 million or $60 mllllion every for Federal elective office, and to amend 4 years. But It would be a step in the certain other provisions of law relating right direction. It would cut doxm on the to the financing and conduct of such amount of Federal subsidy to the cancampaigns, didates for Federal offices. In the comMr. _T J,_N. ! yield myself 6 minutes, paigns for the Presidential nomination, Mr. President, this amendment is in it would accomplish a com_lderable truth a campaign reform amendment,-reduct/on, certainly, insofar as the pending measure Whereas now, Mr. President, the bill is concerned_because it would accompwould permit subsidies of up to $7.5 mnlish a 20-percent overall cut in the per.lion to the various candidate:_ for the missible amounts that could be spent Presidential nomination of the two by a candidate for the House or the parties, this amendment would cut those Senate or the presidential nomination subsidies to approximately $5.7 million, or the general election---an overall cut of That is a pretty good little :subsidy_ 20 percent in the permissible amounts $5.7 million to subsidize 15 or 20 candithat could be expended, dates for the Presidential non_Lnation. Z The one exception is where a minimum believe they could sk/mp along on that. is provided for a small State. There I believe that the Senators and l;he Memwould be nO change in that. bors of the House who are going to run This would be accomplished by changfor the Presidential nomination could lng two figures in the bill, one being a get by on a subsidy of $5.7 million, provision-that in general elections, there I see the distinguished Senator from may be spent 15 cents per person of California (Mr. CRANSTON)entering the voting age in the political subdivision Chamber. This would not cut the subfrom which the candidate ls running, and sidy of the Senator from California, be10 cents in primary elections, cause it does not apply to the upcoming This little amendment would save the election, but it would cut do_r_ on the Federal Treasury, Save the taxpayers of subsidy allowed a candidate of a major the country, upwards of $60 million every party for the Senate in Califo_mia from 4 years. We talk about campaign reform, $2,121,000 to a mere $1,697,00C_. As soon cntting down on the amount of expendlas he got nominated by one of the two tures. Public financing does not accompmajor parties, he would go to l;he Treaslish that. This amendment is an effort nry and pick up a check for $1,697,000 to reduce the overall cost of elections, to run his senatorial race. The Senator from Alabama has alMr. President, it seems to the Senator ready tried to add amendments cutting from Alabama that this is not l_Jtting the the amount of individual contributions, politicians of the country too heavily, to The first amendment was to cut the cut down on the overall expenditures on amount that could be contributed in a which the subsidy is based--to cut down Presidential election to $250, and in on overall expenditures. House and Senate races to $100, the theI am hopeful that the Senate will agree ory meing that that is all the Treasury to this amendment. I might say that the would match and that, therefore, there amendment was originally reduced to should not be any contribution over that. cut the 15 cents per person of voting age What amendment was turned down. to 10 cents, which would have been a Then the Senator from Alabama ofone-third reduction from what is profered' another amendment which would vided in the bill; and in the l_rimaries, raise those figures a great deal, to profrom 10 cents per person of voting age vide a $2,000 contribution permitted in to 5 cents, S 5533 When the Senator from Alabama explained his amendment on the floor, the distingtfished manager Of the bill stated that if the change wE_smade to 12 cents per person of voting age in general eleclions and to 8 cents per person of voting age in primaries, he would support the amend_aent. So Z am hopeful that the, Senate will follow the lead of the di,,;tinguished manager of the bill and accopt the amendment. I reserve the remainder of my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields t!ime? Mr. CANNON. :[yield 3 minutes to the Senator from Iowa. Mr. CLARK. 1Vfr. President, the amendment offered by the distinguished Senator from Alabama (Mr. ALLEN) cer-. tainly ]aas the appearance of being an easy answer to the campaign funding judgment,of the abuses it ispastan 2answer years; inbut appescr-. in my anco only, not in substance. We all agree on the need to eliminate the influence of "big money" in the po.. litical l_rocess. 8o, th(; argument goes, we simply should drastically curtail cam-. paign expenditures, or at least curtail them beyond the present bill. It is a rem-. edy that everybody can understand, and I think it has great appeal: Just cut the amount, a candidate can spend, and everything will be ail right. But while this amendment may be an easy answer to one problem, it only opens up another series of problems. By reduc.. lng the spending limits, this amendment would (;rode what little competition st/Il exists :LTlthe political process. As _ have seen, incumbent Congressmen and Senators are reeleeted--95 percent of the time in the past few years--largely be.. cause the.v have been able to outspend their challengers on the average of 2 te 1. S. 3044 with its public financing provisions, win diminish the fund-raising advantage incumbents now enjoy. But 'the amendment now before the Senate would make it even more difficult to beat incumbent olBce holders, despite public financing. With all the advan.tages inherent in incumbency--the frank, :media access, for example---chal.lengers must be able to spend enough money to become known. Senator AT.T.m¢','_proposal---8 cents a voter in the primary and 12 cents in the general elec.tion--would be totally insufficient. I think the Committee on Rules and Administration gave careful considera.tion to this matter dnd arrived .at a_s equitable a figure as could be found. Mr. ]?resident, I spent $251,000 in my genera![ election campaign against an incumbent Senator. Only two other challengers, my good friend from Colorado (Mr. HttSKELL), and the Presiding Officer (Mr. HATHAWAY) spent less money in a successful race against an incumbent. But my opponent in 1978 would be able to spe_Ld even less than that should this amendment be accepted. With only 12 cents a voter, it would be nearly impossible for any challenger to present his case to the people. The American political system desper.ately needs more competition for public office, _aot less. I urge my colleaguss to join me in defeating this amendment. 433 S 5534 CONGRESSIONAL Mr. President, I yield back the remainder of my time. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I have mixed emotions abo_t the amendment, As the Senator from Alabama pointed out earlier; I did say ff he changed his figures from 10 cents in the general election to 12 cents and from 5 cents in the primary to 8 cents, I would vote for that and I intend to vote for it. I am not sure where the correct balance is as to the formula. I do know that in some of the larger Stat_ under the formula we.used it mounts up to a lot of money. For example, in California, under the 15-cent provision in the general election, $2;!22,154 could be spent. In the primary election in California the figure could be $1,414,300 under the bm as we reported lt. Under the Senator's amendment those fi§re'es would become $1,697,160 in the gekaeral election and $1,131,440 in the ptimary. That still is a substantial amount of money and I am not l_epared to say what is needed in the larger States. I know in some elections, as pointed out on the floor the other day, in the ten largest spending States in the last; election, all would be reduced somewhat by the limits we h_ui in the bill. We have in the bill two provisions that would not be affected by the amendment, One of those provisions is that in the primary election a person could use his folxnula times the voting age population or the sum of $125,000, whichever was greater; and in the general election, the formula times the voting age population or the sum of $175,000, whichever was greater. So he arbitrarily arrives at a figure that the smaller States, that are small population, them small in in area, such asbutmymany State,of would be able to spend in both elections a sum of $300,000. this formula that is were preposed by the If Senator from Alabama adopted there would be more States that could be affected by that base level. In other words, most of the States would be cut below that base level and more than would qualify under that base level formule than now qualify under the present formula that the Committee on Rules and Administration wrote into the bill. As I say, I have sort of mixed emotions because I am not technically able to speak on this subject for those people who represent the larger States, States which require a lot more money from the standpoint of campaign financing. My distinguished colleague on the committee, the Senator from Kentucky'(Mr. Coo_) would be able to speak for his State. The figure for Kentucky under the formula we had in the Senate bill would be $335,250 :in the general election and $223,500 in the primary election. Those figures would be changed under the formula of the distinguished Senator from Alabama to $266,200 in the general elcolion and $178,800 in the primary election, So I would have to look to my distillguished colleague from Kentucky on what should be done in his State. As far as _[ am concerned the floor we have put in for the small States is ample. I believe it perhaps could be cut somewhat. That has peen suggested by a number of Senators; that we should go below that 434 RECORD-- SENATE -%momat. I am willing b) ab:Me by theft _md I would support thc fic_)r, So while I intend t_ vote for the mnendment of the Senator from Ala_ bama, I look to,my colle_'.gue_; who woul,_ he directly affected on this on what could t_ done in their particular 8tales. Mr, COOK. Mr. President, may I sa)y to the Senator from Ne, ada that this is s, situation that really :_pplies itself _> the large StatE_ in the Union and I am sorry Senators from those States are not here to speak t_) it. I cansay with all honesty to the Sen,ator from Alabama that in my primar.¢ I did not spend $223,500 and did not spend $335,250 In my general election. I know that we probably spent more thm'_ $268,200, which is the 12-cent figure, and that was 5_ years ago. I am not rea]:[y sure until we get into a campaign whether we are going to gei_ caught in inflation like everyone else. I know I can speak wibhout any hesi.., i_tion at all that I was _,mazed to learn that when the :next elect:on came in my State, the cost for each candidate almosq_ doubled the amount I ha_ spent. I think what does botlaer me is this:: Let us take the 8 cents :n the primaryo Even if a candidate gets the bulk rate, 1[ a m not; sure he could make mailings to all of his consl;ltuents u oder an 8-cent._ figure. We know that i_,; now costs 1(_ cents for stamps. If one got the bulk rate, could he get er.tvelopes, s _am[_s, and en._ closures and make up tLe difference irt the apparent bulk rate ol 7 or 7 _/_cents, _ith all printing costs _r Ii,formation costs, and make one maiLng to constitu-. ents? The answer is that it '_rob_bly wouldl be next to impc,ssible to co. I think we aJso have to be fair and. honest and say it is probably impa_ible that we could make a mailing to all o_ our eligible voters as it is. I only hope that, if we are not successful with cioture this afterrt(_n, wha'; we are really not seeing is that the Senator from Alabama has decided to change the 15 and 10 to 8 and 12, if cloture is not available, we are got:ag to have a whole series of amendments so that, h_stead of 8 and I'L it will be 7 and 11, and then 6 and 10, and then 5 and 9, and so on and so forth, in an effort, somehow or other, to keep the debate on ';his bill going longer and longer and longer, because I think that is really what we are discuss-, lng here. We went ow_r these :_gures in the Committee on Rules and Administration. W'e went over tiaem quite extensively. If one believes this is the course to take and believes that we should take a try on this kind of financing, wi[a which I have ali kinds of problems in my own mind, I must say to my colleagues that, if in fact we are going to do :it, and If it is successful, then I do not think its very import should _testroy tr.e system, because the funds expected and the figure allocated to the individual voter will resuit in an effective campai_al not even beir_; able to be waged, and we would find, as a result of our attempts to keep cutting the figures down a:_d down and down, that we would have to repeal a law because, even though it was a good April 9, 19 74 law, ill could not accomplish the purpose of it. Every Senator has to vote based on the population of his State :and based on whether he can or cannot agree with respect to the figures as between 10 and 15 and 8 and 12 cents. I mtght say for the Senator's benefit that I have just found out, and ! think i_ fail:ness I should only say, that the bulk rate could be accomplished at 6.1 cents. For those who believe that between 6.1- and the 8-cent rate their ehtire campaign expenditures can be made in one mailing to all their constituents and nothing more--no radio, no television, no other campaign of any kind that costs funds--that his entire expenditure, aH gasoline, all travel, and everything else, cae be represented in the difference between 6.1 and 8 cents, if they want to make a mailing to all the constituents that are available in their States, then that is the decision each individual has to make. I do not think, within the framework of the bill, it is possible. What we are, in effect, saying, is that "We are going to save you money," but in the effort to save them money, we are going 1;o make it impossible to have a campaign which can be financed. In effect, we are going to give the people a campaigm financing bill under which the candidates are going to cheat right from the beginning. I think the American pcopie have sounded loud and clear that ghat is the very thing they want to get rid[ of. It would be the Senator from Ken_ucky's hope that he could conduct a campaign with $335,000, but I think It is going to be very difficult, and one of the reasons it is going to be very difficult is the present status we have in the eyes of the American People. But I do not think we ought to do it in the course of saying, "Here, we are going to save you $60 million in 4 years," because we might :find a pet project in Alabama in the form ,)f public works which might be worth ow_r $60 million, and nobody in the United States would know about it except thc' people of Alabama. Somehow or other, we have a habit of spending all _;he mm_ey the American people con_;riDute in taxes. Unfortunately, we spend more. The Senator from Kentucky is opposed Iz) deficit spending, and has always voted against deficit spending. But ff we put it in the 8 and 12 as opposed to 10 and 15 cents, in the light of the 8.-cent cost, if this program is adopted could a candidate make even one general mailing to all of the eligible voters in his State? ! think the answer would have to be "No." I do not think he could run a campaign. So th:ts Senator will vote against the _:_nendment of the Senator from Alabama only with the understanding that it does not change the money on this list for the Commonwealth of Kentucky, and probably it would be difficult for the Benator :from Kentucky to raise amounts c,f this kind, because I think it is going to be very difficult to raise campaign :funds. Mr. ALLEN. l_fr. President, how much i;ime remains to the Senator from Alat,_anm? April 9, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama has 16 minutes remaining. Mr. ,_T,T,_._. I yield myself 6 minutes, The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The Senator is recognized for 6 minutes, Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I have been somewhat mystified by the thrust of the argument of SenatOrs supporting public financing. It does not seem to be part of their theory of what reform is to reduce the Overall cost of campaigning. The Word "restraint" on the part of candldates does not seem to be part of their vOCabulary, Mr. COOK, Mr. President, will the Senator yield for _one slight suggestion? Mr. ALLEN. I yield, Mr. COOK. If the Senator takes campaign expenditures for the two Senators running for the last campaign in my State and the maximum on the list, it is about half or a little more than half that each candidate spent in that election, Mr. _T,LEN. I thank the Senator for his interruption and his comment. Mr. COoK..I apologize, Mr. _T.T._. I hope that the next time he will use his own time for making a comment, The idea of restraint on the part of candidates has not seemed to enter into the thinking of those who are supposed to be for campaign reform. ! submit that paying bills for campaigns out of the Public Treasury is not the Senator from Alabama's idea of campaign reform. Reducing the overall cost of elections, reducing the amount of individual contributions, and keeping them in the private sector is the idea of the Senator from Alabama as to what campaign reform is. X want to commend the distinguished Senator from Maryland (Mr. MaTmAS), who is not here at this time. He has liratted his contributions to $100. The Representative from Ohio, Mr. VANm, states that he is not accepting contributions or making any expenditures. So one ingredient that has not been mixed into this so-called campaign re- RECORD -- SENATE form bill is the idea of restraint on the part of candidates, Mr. President, the amendment offered by the Senator from Alabama would mix a little restraint--restraint in spending taxpayers' money--into the idea of campaign reform. But every time the Senator from Alabama tries to cut down on campaign expenditures, tries to cut down on the amount of individual contributions, he does not get any support from those who cry out for the need of campaign reform. They are opyosed to it. They want what they can get out of the prirate sector in the primaries plus what they can get out of the Government. That is not campaign reform--that is just escalating the cast of campaigns, Mr. President, the Senator from Kentucky is worried about inflationary costs of campaigns. Well, the drafters of this bill thought of that, too, and they wrote a little provision in here on page 17 of the bill that provides an escalator in the bill. It is reform. It is campaign reform, They wrote a little escalator clause that says that while the cost of campaigning goes up, in effect, the cost of the Government subsidy, the amount of the Government subsidy goes up. There it is in black and white. So the Senator from Kentucky need not worry about that. Mr. President, apparently the so-called reformers--that is, the spenders of the funds from the Federal Treasury---are not willing to cut down on the amount of the Government contributions. The amount of the campaign contributions, We passed a bill in July limiting the contributions to $3,000. That is too high. That is a big contribution, in the view of the Senator from Alabama. It permits two contributions, one by the man and one by the wife. That would be $6,000. That is a pretty big contribution. That is all this bill would do. We have already passed a bill such as that. But it is not campaign reform to say that the American taxpayer has to pay the cost of the general election campaign S 5535 of every Senator and every Member of the House of Representatives. Nor is it reform to provide that the American taxpayer has got to pay up to $7.5 million--and this is something that the American public does not realize-for each candidate for the Presidential nomination of the two major parties. Fifteen or 20 or 25 people are going to be running for the Presidential nomination. This wi]l match the contributions of the various candidates provided that they first get a campaign fund of $250,000 in small contributions. That would then match the contributions of all of them, including the $25ff,000, up to the point where t_e Government had paid the $7.5 million _o each of the various candidates. Mr. President, there are some 10 or 15 Senators Who would not turn down a draft for the presidential nomination; and there are some Senators who would wage an active campaign.· The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator from Alabama has expired. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I yield myself 2 additional minutes. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama is recognized for an additional 2 minutes. Mr. _.J-_LEN. Mr. President, this subsidy program, this welfare program for the benefit of politicians, is not campaign reform. The Senator from Alabama .'is taking a bad bill and is trying to make the bill 20 percent less bad by reducing the overall campaign expenditures permitted _mder the law. That is what the amendment does. So we are going to see whether the reformers want reform or whether they want a Federal Subsidy. It is as simple as that. Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time. However, before doing so, I ask unanimous consent that showing the amounts to athetabulation various States under the various formulae be printed in the Rzcor_. There being no objection, the tabulation was ordered to be printed in the I_ECORmas follows: PROPOSEDCANDIDATE EXPENDITURELIMITATIONS, U.S. POPULATION FIGURESAS OF JULY 1, 1973 Geographicalareas Voting age popu- $. 3044---10_per S. 8044---15_per lation--VAP (18 VAP in primary VAP i_ general years and over) elections t elections United States--PrimarlP......................................... United States--General*......................................... Alabama ....................................................... Alaska ......................................................... Arizona ........................................................ Arkansas ....................................................... California....................................................... Colorado....................................................... Connecticut..................................................... Delaware....................................................... District of Columbia............................................. Florida........................................................ Georgia ......................................... - ............. Hawaii......................................................... Idaho .......................................................... Illinois ......................................................... Indiana ........................................................ Iowa........................................................... Kansas ......................................................... Kentucky ....................................................... Louisiana ...................................................... Maine......................................................... Maryland....................................................... Massach users ............................... : .................. Michigan ....................................................... Minnesota ...................................................... Mississippi ..................................................... Missouri ........................................................ 143,403,00O 141,656,000 -; = -; 2, 338, 000 200, 000 1, 345, 000 1,374, 000 14, 143, 000 1,631,000 2, 101,000 382,00O 529,000 5, 427,0O0 3,140,000 549, 000 501,000 7 568, §00 31530, 000 1,957,000 1,570, 000 2,235, 000 2, 399, 000 689, 00O 2, 720,000 4, 006,000 5 922,000 2' 575,600 11453,060 3,251,000 $14,340,300 HA 233, 800 20, 000 134,500 137,400 1,414, 300 163,100 210, 100 38, 200 52, 900 542, 700 314, O00 54,900 50,100 756, 800 353,300 195,700 157,050 223,500 239 980 681900 272,000 400,600 592,260 257 500 145131}0 325, 1_ IqA $21,248,400 350, 700 30,000 201,750 206, 10O 2,121,450 244,650 815, 150 57, 300 79,350 814, 050 471,000 82, 350 75,150 1,135,200 529, 560 293, 550 235,500 335,250 359, 850 103, 35(1 408, 000 F_0, 900 888 300 386_ 250 217 950 4871650 5!_per VAP in primary election _ 10lCper VAP in general election f_ per VAP in primary election z 121_per VAP in general election $7,170,150 HA HA $14,165,600 $11,472,240 HA HA $16,998,7;!0 116, 900 10, 000 67, 250 68, 700 707, 150 81, 550 105, 050 19, 100 26,450 271, 350 157,000 27, 450 25, 050 378, 400 176, 500 97,850 78,500 111,750 119,950 34, 450 136 000 2001300 296, 100 128, 750 72,650 162,550 233, 800 20, 000 134, 500 137, 400 1, 414, 300 163, 100 210, 100 38, 200 52,900 542, 700 314, 000 54,900 50, 100 756, 800 353,000 195, 700 157,00O 223, 500 239, 900 68, 900 272, 000 400, 600 592, 200 257,500 145, 306 325, 100 187,040 16,000 107,600 109, 920 1, 131, 440 130, 480 168, 080 30, 560 42,320 434,160 251,200 43,920 40, 080 605, 440 282, 400 156, 560 125, 600 178,800 191,920 55;120 217,600 320, 480 473, 760 206, 000 116,240 260' 080 280, 560 24, 050 161,400 164,880 l, 697, 160 195,720 252, 120 45, 840 63, 480 651,240 376, 8130 65, 880 60, 120 908, 150 423,600 234, 840 188,400 268, 200 287,880 82, 680 326, 490 480, 720 710, 640 309, 000 174, 360 390, 120 Footnotes at end of table. 4215 S 5536 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--.SENATE April 9, 1974 PROPOSEDCANDIDATE E;"Pi-NDITURELIMITATIONS, U.S. POPIILATION FIGURESAS OF JULY 1, 1973---Continued Voting age popu- S, 3044--10¢ per S. 3044--15¢ per laHon--VAP (18 VAP in primar, VAP in general yearsand over) elections . electiona Geographioalareas Montana......................................................... $474,000 Nebraska ....................................................... 1,042,000 New Hampshire................................................ 531,000 Nevada .......................................................... 365,O0O New Jersey ...................................................... 5,030,000 New Mexico..................................................... 691,000 Hew York ...................................................... 12,665,000 North Carolina ................................................... 3,541,000 North Dakota ................................................... 421,000 Ohio.......................................................... 7, 175, g00 Oklahoma ....................................................... 1,832,000 Oregon ......................................................... 1,532, O00 Pennsylvania .................................................. 8.240,000 Rhode Island .................................................... 677,0O0 SouthCarolina ...................................................... 1,775, OOO SOuthDakota ....................................................... 454,000 Tennessee .......................................................... 2, 799,000 Texas .......... ' .................................................... 7, 785,00O Utah ............................................................. 715,000 Vermont ............................................................ 309,0aG Virginia ............................................................. 3,243,000 Washi ngton............................................................. 2, 329, 000 West Virginia........................................................ 1,228, 00() Wisconsin .......................................................... 3, 033, 0aG Wyoming ........................................................ 234, 000 Outlying areas: Puerta Rico..................................................... 1,651,000 Guam......................................................... 52, O00 Virginia Islands ................................................. 44, 000 '.;! per VAP i_ primary election1 52, 100 $23,700 18, 250 26,550 251,500 34, 550 63.3,250 172,550 21. 050 3E8, 750 91,600 76,600 412, OOO 33, 850 88,750 22,700 139,950 369, 250 35, 750 15, 450 162, 150 116, 450 61,400 151,650 11,700 $47,400 104,200 36, 53, 500 log 503,000 69, 100 1,266,500 345, log 42, 100 717.6OG 183,200 153,200 B24,000 67,700 177.500 45,400 279,900 778, 500 71,500 30,900 324, 300 232, 900 122,800 303, 3OG 23,400 $37,920 83,360 29, 42, 200 480 402, 400 55, 280 1,013,200 276,090 33,680 574, 0aG 146,560 122,560 659,200 54, 160 142,O00 36,320 223, 920 622, 800 57, 200 24, 720 259, 440 186, 320 98, 240 242, I_tO 18, 720 $56,880 125,040 43, 63, 600 720 603,600 82, 920 1,519,860 414, 120 50, 520 861, OOG 219, 840 183, 840 998,800 81,240 2'13, 000 54.480 33-, 880 934, 200 85, 800 37,080 389, 160 279, 480 147, 360 363, 960 28, 080 165, I0{B 5, 20t_ 4, 40( 247,650 7, 800 6, (_0 82, 550 2,600 2_,200 165, 10G 5, 200 4, 400 132,080 4, 160 3, .'i20 198,120 6,240 5, 280 s VAP for the general e/c_:tionincludes all geographicalarea populat OhSexcept Puerto mca Guam,and the Virgin Istanda he(ause their _asidentsare not permitted to vote n the presidestial gene al election. The legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. ROBERT C. BYt_D. :[ announce that the senator from Texas (Mr. BENT-' _;EN), the Sem_.t_r from Delaware (Mr. ]_n)EN), the Senator from Idaho (MI:.. CHUaCH), the Senator from Arkansa_ (Mr. FULBRIGle/'._), the Senator from Iowa (Mr. HUGHES), the Senator from Mas.sachusetts (Mi'. KENNED't0, the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. lONG), and the Senator from Wyoming (M:c. MCGEE), are necessarily absent, Mr. GR1-F_N. I ann)unce that the Senator from Utah (Mr. BEI_rNETT},and the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. FONG), ar_ necessarily absent, ever, I would be wilUng to make it available to wish the Senator would to use it.from Alabama, ff he Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I would much thattime the because Senator Ifrom tucky prefer u_e ]_i_ feel Kenthat the argument he is making on behalf of not reducing this subsidy is certainly having an adverse effect on his position. Ih_hope that he will use the remainder of '] minutes. I also announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. WrLLIAM sent on official business. I,. Sctrrr), is ab.. The result was annolmced--yeas 46, nays 43, as follows: [No. 125 Leg.] '_AS---46 _dken Ervin Pe_rsoa _dlen l_nnin Pall Baker Griffin P_)xmtre _lartlett Hamsen Randolph time.- I reserve the remainder Mr. COOK. Mr. President, I think we have made our point. I yield back the remainder of our time. OFPICF. R. The PRESIDING yields time? Mr. have ALLEN. Mr. President, time I remaining? Who how much The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senater from Alabama has 8 minutes remaining. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Presid_at, I ;yield back the remainder of my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has been yielded back. The question is on agreeing to the amendments, en bloc, of the Senator from Alabama. On this question the yeas and nays have been ordered, and the clerk will call the roll. 436 _Bellmon Hartke _Ible _rock Helms Ho:Lllngs [/;urdiek Hruska Byrd, McClellan Harry l_,Jr, l_lcIntyre _,yrd. Robert C. Moss Ivietzenbaum cannon chnas Muskie cotton N_lson curtis Nunn F, agletoi_ Packwoo_ Aboure_ ]Sayh aean l_;rooke _uerae_ case Clark Cook cranstoa Dole Domenici Eomintck Ea_tland 126per VAP in general election $_1,10C, 15A._ _,_, :_.50 754,500 103,650 1, 899,750 53l, 150 63, 150 1,076, 250 274, 8t_ 229,800 1,236, OOO 101,559 266,250 68,100 419, 850 l, 167, 750 107, 250 46, 350 486, 450 349, 3.'._ 184,200 ,154,950 35, 100 Mr. COOK. Mr. President, may I say that I alx,logize to the Senator from Alabama £or taking any of his time. Mr. President, how much time have we remaining? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senafar _rom Kentucky has _ minutes remaining. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, I would be perfectly willing to yield the entire 7 minutes to the Senator from Alabama, if he wishes to use that time along with his time, so that he will not feel that he was interrupted. Other tl_an that, we wmfid be willing to yiel'd back the time on this side. How- Mr. President, 8_ per VAP in primary election _ $47,4{M 104, 20,l 53,50n 10) 36, 503,00) 69, 10 ) 1,266, 50) 345, l0 ) 42, 10 ) 717, 50 ) 183,20 ) 153, 20 ) 824,0_) 67, 70q 177,50_) 45,40( 279, 90]1 778, 50i) 71, 50 ) 30, .cOil 324, 30_1 232, 9011 122,80_, 303,300 23, 40h Presidential primary candidates may _nd in any State twice the amount a candidate for Senatenomination may spend, subject to a national limit of 10_time,';total VAP in connectionwith cavhpaignfor presidential nomieatian, VAP for the primary election includes all _eographicalarea populations becausethe outlying areascould participate in the presidential nominating processto the extent that they are pmmitted to send delegatesto +,henational nomi_atiegconventions. of my 10_ per VAP in general election NAYS----43 Goldwater G ravel Gurney Hart H;_skell H_tfield H:_thaway Huddleston Humphrey Inouye Js cl_son Javits Jchneton Rll_ioo_ P_Ch Sl_rkman Stratford. _tennis Stevenson Symington Taft Ts:Lmadge Thur_ond Wefc_ar Magn,_so_ Mansfield Mathias McClX_re McOovern Metcatf Mondale Montoya Pa_tore rercy Schwe/ker Scott, Hugh Stevens Tower Tunney Williams Young NOT VOTING--ii Fang Long Fulbrlght McGee Hughes Scott, Kennedy WllIiam L. Bennett Bentsen Btden Church So 1Mir.ALLEN'S amendment (No. 1141, a_;modified) was agreed to. Mr..ALL_.N. Mr. President, I movethat the vote by which the amendment was agreed to be reconsidered. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I move to lay l:_tLatmotion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was a_eed to. The PRESIDING OFFICER. (Mr. HELMS). Pursuant to the previous order, the Senator from Illinois (Mr. ST_.VE_so_) is now recognized t_ call up an araendment. Mr. ,'SPARKMAN. Mr. President, will the Senator from Illinois yield to me briefly'.' Mr. _TEVENSON. I am glad to yield to the ,_3enator from Alabama, reservin/r 1_ right to the floor. V'J:SIT I'O OF THE :_SIATE BY MEMBERS GE 'MAN BUNDESTAG TI_ Mr. _PARKi_ LN. Mr. :President, we are honored tod _y to' have visiting us eight members of _he German Bundestag, headed by the P esident o,f the German Btmdes_ag, Mrs. Manemarie Ranger. ' I understand _hat Mrm Annemarie Ranger is the o: _ly woman head of a parliament anyw _re in the world, so I SUppOse we can 1 agree that women's lib has come to 3rmany first of all. WUl our distin_ zished guests who are nOW seated in th_ rear of the Chamber Ptc_a.se rise when: call their frames. I_rs. Annemari_ Renger, President of the German Bun Lestag. Hans Katzer, Hermarm Hoechel , Dr. Herbert Ehrenberg, Uwe Ronn _urger, Hans-jurA en April 9, 19 Wischnewski, CONGRESSIONt Schmidt, Dr. May I also preBerndt yon Staden, from the Federal Re- sent His the public of (Applause, to the United States. rising), 2 _INUTES RECESS Mr. unanimous Mr. President, I ask that there be a 2- cons minute recess the purpose of greet- Lng our the (Mr. STEVENSON) floor. There being the Senate took whereupon called to order visitors, and that Senator from Illinois retain hls right to the ection, at 2:06 recess until 2:08 p.m., p.m., reassembled when the Presiding Officer (Mr. HELMS). Mr. unanimous the RECORD one of our There being raphies were Mr. President, I ask to have printed in of each ection, the be printed RECORD, aS RE_OER, President of the Sects , Born October 7, Widow. Employed in pnbl From 1945 to Kurt Schumacher. Member of Bunde From 1959 to 19( sory Assembly of the Assembly of Union. Until April 1973, Committee of thc and the Presidium. Since December German Bundestag Member of the the Vice President of oil of Social clalls% International. biogin the _: (SPD) Bundestag. Party. L9. business. private secretary of Dr. since 1953. I, member of the Advl; European Council and Western European the Executive Democratic Party 1972, President of the Committee of the Bundestag. CourtWomen in the So- I_ATZER,] (CDU) Member of the Bundestag. Christian Democra Party. Bern January 31_11 19. Married. -School (' Technical 1950, Secretary since 1963 Chairma_ of the Social of the Christian Democratic of Germany. Deputy Chairman the Christian Democratic Board member AG. Since 1957, member German Bundes_ag. ,, From 1965 to Federal Minister of Labour Deputy Chairman the Christian Democratlc group in the Bundestag. Regular member of for the Preservation of the of the Parllato Article 45 GO (, of the Joint Cornmlttee according to 53A GG. HO_-CRE_L, Member Christian of cial Union. Born March Married. Lawyer. S_udled law Munich. Member of Committee. the (CDU/CSU) Party/Christian So- S1, 1912 in Alx-en-Provence the Bavarian and Executive L RECORD S, 5537 -- SENATE Member of th ' Advis(_,_y Council of the Bayerlsche Verel: shank and of the Dlrectorate of the Ba erlsche Treuhand AG. Member of th4 German Bundestag since 1953. 1957-1961 Chal: nan of the CSU group In the Bavarian Sta · Parliament and Deputy Chairman of the ( DU/CSU Bundestag group. From 1966 to 1_8, Federal Minister for Economic Cooperatii n. Memb,_r of the Ex, _utive Committee of the Party groupmember In the oJI undestag. Regular thl; Foreign Policy Cornmittee. Regular member the' 1st Investigation Commit_ee. 1961 to 1965, 1_ _deral Minister of the Interlor, l965 to 1969, 'ederal Minister of Food, Agriculture and _ )restry. 1969 to 1972, Jeputy Chairman of the csu group In the 3avarlan State Parliament and Chairman of ;he Mediation Committee. Since 1970, Ch Lrman ef the Committee Budget, Taxes, IMmey, and Credit of the CDU/CSU group. Regular membl of the Finance Cornmittce, Deputy Chairman Committee I for Foreign and Security Inter-German tions, Europe and Pi rl [icy, ,velopment Policy. feta--SCHMrDT (WuRoEN 9RF), HERMANN (SPD) Memb,_r of the Ger nan Bundestag. Social Democratic 'arty. Born February 6, 17. Married. Manager. Colonel 'es.). From [946, busine., _manager of the "Westf211sche Rundschan' in Slegen. From 1948. tempo: arily municipal, magistrate, and district r presentatlve. Since 1962, dlstric' president and In this capacity Chairman o: the Board of Directors of the Transport S( _lety South Westfalta. 1950-1961, membe] of the Parliament of Nordhein-Westfale_). Since 1961, member 0! the Germa_ Bundes~ tag Memb,_r of the Er 'o_ean Council, of the Western European TJ lion and of the North Atlantic Assembly. From 1969-1972. D_ suty Chairman of the Defense Committee. Since February 1, 973, Chairman of the Defense Committee. _DR. 'YONWEIZS_CI_ _'R,RICHARD (CDU) Member of the Gerr an Bundestag.' Christian Democrat _ Party. Born April 15, 1920. Married. Lawyer. Studied law in ::ford, Grenoble, and G6ttingen. Dr. J_:_., board mere ,er of several corporatigriS. 1964-1970, Fresiden of the German Lutheran Convention. Member of the Syn ct and the Council of the Lutheran Church in Germany. Membl_r of the Exe¢ ltlve Committee and Chairman of the Comn lssion on Rules of the Christian Democratic _ Lrty. Memb_-_r of the Get aan Bundestag since 1969. Deputy Chairman oi the Christian Democratlc Party/christian Social Union group DR. EHRENt gC_I_[_BERT (SPD) Member of the _erman Bundestag. Social Democrat Party. Born December 1926. Married. Political Econo] 1st, studied Sociology in Wllhelmshaven an G0ttlngen, Dr. rer. pol. From 1964 to 19_ , political-economic divlsion at the Generi Board of the Industrial Trade Union (Corn, ruction Workers' Union). Member of the ommittee for Political Science wlth the J PD Executive Committee and member of tb expanded Committee of the Society for SecJ I Progress. From May, 1968 o October 1969, Director of the sub-divisio2 Structural Policy In the Federal Ministry o: Economies. October 1969 to pill 1971, Director of the Division Economi, Financial, and Social Policy In the Feder_ Chancellory. * May 1971, to D_ _mber 1972, State Secretary at the Federa: Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs. Since December 972, member of the German Bundestag. Deputy Leader o: the Bundestag group of the Party. Deputy Chairma_ of the lEconomlcs Cornmittee. RONN_m Member of the Ge Free Democratic t Born November 2_ Married. Farmer. Since 1970, Cha_ Sehleswlg-Hoisteln: utlve Committee of 1966 to 1972, mere of the united Prote: of Germany, since of the Lutheran Ch Member of the December 1972. Deputy Chairmm Bundestag. Regular member Committee. Regular member o Agriculture and For_ ,_, UWE (FDP) man Bundestag. _rty. 1920. man of the FDP Party nd FDP. member of the Exeche )er of the Ge_eral Synod taut-Lutheran Churches r2, member of tile Synod _rch of Germany. _rman Bundestag since >f the FDP group of the of Affairs the Foreign the Committee of Food, _try. _ WISCHENEWSKI _lVS-J_ROEN (SPD) Member of the Ge_ nan Bundestag. Social Democratic _arty. Born July24, 1922 Married. 1953 to 1959, secret 1959 to 1961, Fei Young Socialists. 1968-1972, membe] mittee of the Party. Member of the Ge_ Policy. Sinc_ 1957, memb, destag, From 1961 to 1985 Parliament. .ry at IG Met_all. eral Chairman of of the Executive the Com- nan Society for Foreign of the German Bun- ember of the European in the Bundestag. _ FEDERAL ELECTION AMENDMEN_ The J_enate 0AMPAIGN OF 1974 ACT with con- continued the siderati,_u of the bill (S. 3044) to amend the Feqeral Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financLng of primary' and general election campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating to the financing and Conduct of such caInpai_, ms. Mr. HART. Mr. President, mOllS consent that during sideration of the pending I ask unanifurther conbill, Burton Wides of my office,be permitted the prlvilege of the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objectien, it is so ordered. Mr. STEVENSON. Mr. President, I send ail unprinted amendment to the desk and ask that it be stated. The PRESIDING OFFICER. amendment willbestated. The assistant legislative clerk ceeded to read the arhendment. The pro- 437 S 5538 CONGRESSIONAL Mr. STF, VENSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further RECORD -- SENATE ' (A) in the c_e of a canc.tdate for electlol:_ to the office of President, no contribution from any person shall be taken :mto account reading of the amendment be dispensed to the extent ttlat it exceeds $250 when with. added to the amount of alt other contribu_ The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without lions made by that person t_ or for the, boneobjection-, it is so ordered, and the fLt of that candidate for hi.' general election amendment will be printed in the Rfccampaign; and ORD. "(B) in the caso of any olher c.andldate loc The text of the amendment is as for election to Federal office, no contrfbu_ion from any person shall bE taken into ae_ lows: count to the extent that it exceeds $100 On page 10, beginning wlth line 17, strike when added to the amount of a:[1 other con_. out through line 6 on page 11, and insert trlbutlons made by that person to or for th,_ in lieu thereof the following: benefit of that candidate for his genere,1 "(b) (1) Every eligible candidate who is election campal_:n. nominated by a major party is en_ltled to "(6) No candidate rday receive payments payments for use In his general election 'under paragraph (2) (B), 3 lB) (ii), or (4) (B_ campaign In. an amount equal to the sum tn an amount bears the same of-Iatloexcess b_ of one-half of thewhi-h difference between "(A) (1) in the case of a candidate for the amount to which the candidate is on-. election to the office o/ President, 40 per'titled under paragraph (2) 4A), 113)(B) (i), or cent of the jmaount of expenditures the can(4) (A) (whichever is applicable) and the didate may m_ke in connectto,_ with that amoun_ of expenditures tLe candidate may campaign under sectlo,_ 54)4, and make in connection with h:s general election "(H) in the case of a candidai_ for elsecampaign under section 5(4 as the amount lion to the office of Senator ca- Representsto which he l_ entitled under paragraph tile, 25 percent of the amount of expefidit2) (A), (3) (B) Ii), or (4) (A) (whichever is tures the candidate may make lin connec.applicable) bears to the ar_onnt to which a lion with th.at campaign und_ section 504, candidate for election to _;he same office is and entitled under p_ragraph (l) (A). "(B) the lgnonnt of contributions he and On page 12, l:xte 24, stri:e out "(5)' arL_ his authoriz,ed committees receiw.,d for that insert in lieu thereof "(7)". campaign. On page 78, after the ma':for below line 2i!_, "(2) Every eligible candidate wlho is norainsert the followhxg: lnated minor partygeneral is entitled payr_xP_qz_rruaE LIMIrATIOr_S ments by for ause in his electionto campaign in an amount equal to the sum _f-SEC. 305. Effective on t:xe day after th_ "(A) an amount which bears the same date of enactme:at of this act, section 61§(a} ratio to the amount to which a major party of title. 18, United States _3ode, is amended candidate for election to the .,_ame office to readasfollow_: is entitled under paragraph (1)(A) as the "(a) (1) No htdivldual may make a cc_n., total number of popular votes received by the trlbution to or for the bone fit oil a eandidat_ candidate of' that minor party for that offor use in his plimary elee';ion campaign, or rice in the preceding general election bears to for use in his general e:ectlon campaign the average number of popular votes received which, when added to the sum of all othec by the candidates of major parties for that contributions trade by th _t individual for office in the preceding election, and 'use in that primary or gen_ ral election canx., "(B) the amount of contributions he and palgn, exceeds $2_,000. his authorized committees recelwxl for that "(2) Notwltrmtanding the provisions c.f campaign, subsection (c) (3}, no pers)n (not an lndl-, On page 11, beginning with line 19, strike vldual) may make a contribution to or four out through line 23 on page 12 and insert 'the benefit of t_ candldat. _ for use in hi.$ in lieu thereof the following: to the sum of-campaigns for nomination and for electioll_ "(l) an a_nount which bears the same 'to Federal office which, when added to the_ ratio to the amount to which a major party sum of all other contrlbnti)ns made by that candidate for election to the same office is person for use l:a either .)r both of thos,> entitled und_ paragraph (1) (A) aa the nuncampaigns, exceeds $6,000.". her of popular votes received by that candidateor minor (other party) than asinthe a maJot the candidate preceding ofgeneral election for that office bears to the average number of votes cast in the preceding gertoral election for all major party candidates for that office, and "iii) the amount of conla'ibutions he and hfs authorized committee received for that campaign. "(4) An eligible candidate who is the nominee of 2, minor party or whose eligibility is determined under eec_lon §02(d)(2) and who receives 5 percent or more of the total number of votes cast in an election, is ontitled to receive payments under section 506 after the election for expenditures made or incurred in connection with his equal generalto oleotion campaign in an amount the sum of-"(A) an amount which bears the same ratio to the amount to which a major party candidate for election to the same office ia entitled under parargaph (1)(A) as the nunber of in popular votes received can_ didate the election bears to bythethataverage number of votes east for ali major party candidates for that offioe tn that _lection, and "(B) the amount of contributions he and his authorized committees received for tl_at campaign, "(5) For p%ucposes of this subsection--- 438 April 9, 19 74 reported by the Rules Committee. Instead of 100 percent public financing, congressional candidates would receive a front-end subsidy 25 percent of the expenditure limit applicable to congressional campaigns. In addition, private contributions of $100 or less would be matched with public funds on a dollarfor-dollar basis. Presidential candidates would receive a 40-percent entitlement and matching funds for private contributions of $250 0I' less:_ again on a dollar-for-dollar basis. T:hat :means that congressional candidates could receive up to 62.5 percent and prt-sidential candidates up to 75 percent o.f the respective expenditure limits from public sources, instead of 100 percent. This amendment strikes a fair balance b_ween those who want 100 percent and those who want nothing. It decreases the COSt to the Treasury of the financing of camp-signs for Federal office. If this amendment prevails, the amounts from t_Le checkoff would be more likely to cover the total cost of public financing. It does not in any way affect the cornmitres bill's treatment financing of primary election campaigns. It preserves the healthy and innocent participation Of small contributors. It eliminates the dangerous participation that comes as a result of large contributions to campaigns for Federal office. It would more clearly be constitutional than any measuce which effectively prohibited aH public funds, no matter how small. The prospect of waiting for the Treasury to send $950,000 to a candidate for the U.S. Senate in Illinois is offensive. It is offensive to me. It would be offensive, I dari_say, to many members of the public, and it is dangerous. A candidate could then l_terally buy a campaign. C:_ndiilates ought to be under some cornplilSiOI_ to seek small contributions from the people, and the people ought to be pormitted that form of political participa_ion. Mr..President, I ask unanimous eonMr. STEVE_N'SON. Mr. PTesident, i: sent that William Staszak of' my staff offer this amendment on behalf of mybe permitted the privilege of the floor _elf and Senators TAFT, ]DOMENIcr, MONduring the consideration of this amendDALE, CRANSTON, HUMPHR_ ¥, slid BEALL. ment. The purpose of public finsaxcing is t,0, . The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without elimblate the large and potentially cor.objection, it is so ordered. rupting contributions of big raoney from Mr. STEVENSON. Mr. :President, the Our politics. This amendment would ac.. distinguished Senator from Ohio (Mr. compllsh that purpose but it would not TAFT) and the distinguished Senator _llmJi13,te the :_mocent, small eontribufrom New Mexico (Mr. DOMENICI) have ti0ns which are a healtLy form of par.worked long and hard on this proposal. tieipation in our political sy.';tem. It is a compromise. It is intended not This amendment would limit the corn.only tc eliminate the corrupt influence of paign contributions of individuals 9,,), large inoney in our politics but also is Federal campa:_ms to $3,)00 in primarie:; intended to end the debate which has _rld $3,000 ir_ general election camswirled around this bill. It will not make paigns. In thai; respect, Jt do,as not alter everybody satisfied, but it does give us the prox_sions of the bill reported by the an oppoltunity to get an important job Rules Committee. done m:_d to get on with the rest of our It would also limit t l:e contribution:; busine:_;s in the Senate. Senator of committees to $6,000, which could b,_ DO-_XE_ZCr and Senator TAFT have been adlocated between a general election lily partners in this endeavor. They have ¢amp_lign and a primary election cam_ worke5 at great length on it, and have paign as the committee s_ es fit_ done s:} very resourcefully. This amendment the:_ est'_b[:_he_ a Mr. TAFT. Mr. President, will the Sensystera of partial public financing s_; gtor yield? opposed to the 100 pe_cent public fi.Mr. ,STEVENSON. I yield to the Sennancing v:hich Is establi;hed _n the btl/[ tttor from Ohio (Mr. T_F*._. April 9, 197/, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD---SENATE Mr. TAFT. Mr. President, I commend the Senator from Illinois for his tnitiatire in this matter as well as the Senatot from New Mexico (Mr. DOMENICI) and others who have agreed to cosponsor this amendment to the pending campaign reform bill. We hope it will serve as a basis for compromise on public financing and thus move the debate forward considerably, The pending bill, without our proposed ,_mendment, provides Federal matching payments for all contributions of $100 or less for primary election congressional candidates---S250 or less in the case of Presidential candidates---who collect certain minimum amounts of private funding on their own, and 100 percent public financing for the general election campaigns of major party candidates, up to overall spending limits. Limitations on private contributions would be $3,000 for individuals and $6,000 for any organlzation such as COPE or BIPAC. By contrast, our amendment would restructure public financing for general ,elections, so that major party congressional candidates could receive 25 percent of the campaign spending limit in Federal funds upon their nomination with no matching required, and $1 of additional funding for each dollar collected in private contributions of $100 or less for congressional races. A similar arrangement, with a 40 percent downpayment and matching contributions up to $250, would be applied to Presidential general elections. As under the present bill, minor party candidates would operate under the same system but be ellgible for proportionately less Federal funding in general elections, based upon their performance. Limitations on contributions for organizations would be lowered from $6.000 in primary and gerteral elections separately to $6.000 total, I believe that basic reforms in campalgns financing Bre essential so that our citizens will be certain that their Government is not being operated to satisfy the interests of the few large contributors, rather than the Nation as a whole, The most important step we can take in this dlrectionistoplace strict limitations on the amounts which any single lndividual or organization can contribute to a candidate. The bill before the Senate attempts to do this, but has been loopholed with an amendment allowing contributions of up to $6,000 form organizations. The bill before us also provides public financing, in recognition that these limits in themselves will exacerbate the task of raising enough campaign funds for both incumbent and challenger to make their views known to the public. However, I am concerned that the bill will allbw private contributions too high to eliminate the abuses it seeks to correct; allow more public financing than necessary f6r general elections; foster a mushrooming of wasteful campaign expenditures at taxpayers' expense and the proliferation of campaign expert firms which have grown Up already to an alarming extent; and unnecessarily eliminate a meaningful role for small private contributions, The system we are proposing would clamp down on the size of private con- tributions; provide full public financing for the crucial initial portion of campaign expenses but force heavy reliance upon small private contributions for remaining expenses; continue and increase the importance of the role of grass roots activities, and the small contributors involved, in campaign finance; and reduce Federal costs over the present bill by thousands of dollars for each campaign-in fact, so far as the Presidential and possibly even senatorial races are concerned, by millions of dollars, I am hopeful that the merits of this particular public financing approach will appeal to both supporters and opponents of full public financing. Mr. DOMENICL Mr. President, will the Senator yield? ' Mr. STEVENSON. Mr. President, I yield to the Senator from New Mexico. Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I do wish to commend the Senator from Illinois and the Senator from Ohio for the work they have done on this amendment, I have just a few thoughts to add to theirs, First of all, I have supported the idea of public financing of Federal elections from the very beginning. But I have looked very carefully at what we were trying to do when we moved in the direction of public financing and found at first we were trying to get of the very large contributions that really or to the American people were having an inordihate effect on the political system. ! think public financing would do that, and our amendment would do that, but no one who was a proponent of public financing, to my knowledge, has said there was anything wrong with a candidate for public office taking contrbintions from small contributors, indeed, in large number. In fact, many of those who have been proponents of public financing have been equally strong proponents for the involvement of the average citizen, What concerns me about the bill without the amendment of the Senator from Illinois, the Senator from Ohio, me, and others, is that basically it is saying, "We do not want participation by the average citizen: $100, $200, $300, $500." It has been said here with regard to other bills before us that we frequently throw the baby out with the bathwater. In this instance, unless we not only permit small contributions but also encourage and entice them, we will, indeed, be doing that. In campaigns across the country the average citizen has said, "I like that candidate. I want to give him a small contribution." Instead of that kind of contribution, which is basically at the heart of participation, and putting small money where the mouth is, and letting a citizen's personal endeavors in behalf of the candidate follow, we would eliminate that in the bill before the Senate, where candidates could, if they choose, get prtrate contributions. But as a matter of fact there is no incentive or encouragement because ff the candidate does not he will get a check from the Federal Government for 100 percent, I believe there is nothing wrong with the $100 matching all the way up, with encouragement to get a $1,000 contrtbution, or up to $3,000. This would narrow S 5539 and cut back on the effect that Federal tax dollars would have on the total amount to be used. The same reasoning can be used with respect to Presidential c_;mpaigns. There is nothing miraculous about 25 and 40. To encourage the $100 and the $250 fox' President,iai races, minimiT, tng the $6,000 contributions groups can give, leaving it at $6,00CJ, but not permitting it in primary and general elections, and upping the individual to $3,000 is a significant stroke in the direction of individual citizen part:[cipation. But it eliminates the thing we started out to eliminate. With reference to my campaign for the, Senate, indeed, I had large contributors, but I believe my campaign stands in the State of New Mexico as a record for the, number of small contributors that con-. tributed to my campaign. For a small State lik,e mine, it would approach 5,000 tndividtutl donors. We went out and asked them, and they, in turn, asked others, and from them came the nucleus of those who had a genuine interest, with s_all amounts of $100 to $150. I truly do not want to be a part; of eliminating that kind of participation. which I 1;hink is salutory and has a good effect. I hope those who are genuinely interested in public financing will understand th:Is is a genuine effort to start in. a new direction where we have not had one, and start in a reasonable way for a reasonable amount of public money, and leave the ingredient of participation that comes from the contribution of many small A_nericans who still take politics and candidates seriously, and who would prefer to give their money, $100 or what-. ever, to their candidate and still make them fe_l it is important, and not say, "You do not have to contribute ff you dc, not want; to; we will get it all from the Treasury." That is the answer we will get from other than those, who do not want any public fir,_nclng. That is what we win be saying to the smaller contributor. We will be saying, "You are not important be-. cause if you do not give, we will get it from the Treasury." Those who favor this approach will understand it is possible to move from. zero to 100 percent. The amendment of the Sen_tor from Illinois, the Senator from Ohio, and the Senator from New' Mexico would be a good and salutary. start toward preservation of that which is good in the present system. Mr. S'FEVENSON'. Mr. President, I wish to commend the Senator from New Mexico for recognizing that It is possible to eliminate the large contributors from politics ;_ithout eliminating small contributior_3. Far from being a source of corruption, the small contribution is a source of involvement by people in their pofltics. The p_wpose of the amendment is to drive the big money, but not the people, out of om' politics. I wish to ask the Senator from New Mexico ff he does not agree that to eHmlhate the $I or $2 or $3 contributions from campaigns might very well be unconstitut_lonal. It is not only that, but it seems to me there is a constit_lot_al right of people to contribute in small 439 8 5540 CONGRESSIONAL amounts to the candidates of their choiee_ Without some basis for saying, "No, it is wrong, it is unreasonable to make small contrlbutions."---and--X see no basis for such an assertion--it is possible it could be held to be unconstitutlon to take that approach, Mr. DOMENICI. My answer is in the affarmative. I think there are serious constitutiona][ objections to a provision which would prohibit it. I think from a legal and practical point of view, ff a citizen cannot contribute, regardless of whether he wants to contribute, small or large, it is both practical and unconstitutional, . There t.,; evidence which would justify drawing the line somewhere, I think $3,000 anti $6,000. Those are a matter of proper legislative judgment on the facts that have been developed in the history of this Nation, but to say, "One cannot give; we will take it aH from the tax coffers" would place this matter in seriouq jeopardy, Mr. STEVENSON. I thank the Senator. Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. STI,_-qfENSON. I yield to the distinguished senior Senator from Minnesota. Mr. HUMPHREY. Junior now. 'Mr. STt,_-%'ENSON. Junior. Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I have over the past few days been visiting from time to time with the distinguished Senator from Illinois (Mr. STEVENSON)' about this amendment. Earlier today I talked with the Senator from New Mexico aix)ut it. I have been a strong proponent of what we call public fi_anclng of el_mtion campaigns, but I have been in this Body long enough to know when we are really trying to get results or whether we are just going to have an issue. I think the question before the Senate is, Do you want an issue or do you want an accomplishment? Do you want to make some progress or do you want to spin your wheels? I would prefer to have 100-percent financing of Presidential elections partlcularly. While some say large contributions are a source of corruption, the fact is they are always a source of suspicion, and in the times in which we live, that sense of suspicion has been intensified, Therefore, it is necessary for the Congress of the United States to reform the campaign election laws, to limit the size of contributions, to establish machinery that will supervise our elections fearlessly and honestly, and a't the same time try to make use of our checkoff system, which we have already legislated, a checkoff fund or trust fund to which hundreds of thousands of taxpayers have already made payments; and to use that checkoff fund sensibly and honestly in the election campaign or in the ' campaign process, So, Mr. President, I came to the conclusion that ff you just want to talk campaign financing, then go the whole way and make Ivory soap seem to be conlaminated and float right out of the stream of public life and private sensibfilty; but ffyouwant to get some reform that will do the Job that we need to do, namely, k_ limlt the size of contributions, to have an accounting of every dollar 440 RECORD --- SENATE April 9, 19 74 that comes in a.s well as every dollar that comps'cruise. That is the 'way we got our is expended, :lo set lim:ts on how much Constitution, and I am not going to be we caw spend on a cantpaia_ per votEkr, drivel:._ to the wall by somebody who says and at the sa_.ae time a._;ure :some private that if one compromises or if he trims interest on the part of indigiduals in the down a little bit, somehow or other he campaign and election process, then we has sold out. We are not selling out, but have to make some cranges along the we are not going to permit people to buy line of the amendment proposed by the in, either. Senator from Illinois and other Senators. What we are doing is trying to do a X am very proud to be a cosponsor of the job that needs to be done. We have been amendment, up this hill and down this hill a half a I have talked with _the Senator, as I dozen thnes, and we have as yet very said, a number of time s, and last week little _ show for it. The chance is now indicated my desire l_) be associated before us to have something to deliver with that amendment. I want to say great to the American people. pressure has been brou_:ht on some of us I would have hoped, as I said to the not to be associated with it. Some peoSenator from Illinois and to the Senapie that are associated with what we ca]il tor from New Mexico, that we might good government or cleLn government do have had in the Presidential fund 50 not want me to go along with this propercent public financing. I do not think posal, but as I had to _en ()ne of them, there is anything particularly magical "I have to do the voting in the Chamber, about 40 or 50 percent, but I would have and you axe the very :_eople who have thought it might have been a better figtold me we should not be influenced on nre. 13e that as it may, the issue before the outside." So I am not going to be the EI.S. Senate is simply, Do you want influenced. The only inftuence is going to to ha.ye a continuing issue on which come from the inside--what I know to be there are no results, or do you want to right. What Il know to be right is what have results and be able to build on that we are attempting to do here. We have from :practice and experieence? .I think to close this debate m_d get to voting we have the chance now to get results some respons!ible, sensible campaign reand to cleanse the stables of American forms that the American people want of politics and to get away from the deus. We have the duty to accomplish meaning and disgusting business of goit in this sessiion of Congress. lng out and raising mUllons of dollars of Everyone kaows the other body is not campaign funds from huge contribugoing to go along with some of the things tions and then having somebody point we have voted for here, but I have said the finger at you and saying, "You are privately to some colleagues in this body a crook or can't be trusted." that what we have been doing will not I think the Senate of the United sell. It will not wash. It makes good headStates ought to face up to the fact that, lines. It pleases people who say, "You whether big money is the source of cotare doing 100 percent. Perfect. You are ruption, it is the source of growing susgood and pure." But it will not pass. pieion, and a big country like ours canDo we want to get rest[ ts that will ramnot live on suspicion and distrust. We edy the infection in our booty politic, or have to implant into the system trust do we just want to talk, talk, and talk, amd confidence, and remove distrust and and have an issue to t:_y to go out and cynicism. prove that we were purer than the other Thc amendment l{roposed by the Senfellow? ator from IUinois--and I compliment I think the proposal _efore us does the him for his practicality--will remove job that needs to be done. It will give us doubt and suspicion and cynicism and some results. Z[twill permit both the senit will put us on the high road to a sible use of public fina:lcing on the one (;leaner system of politics that will inhand and include priw_te small contxivolve both private and public financing buttons on the other. £f the American and public participation. political process is goin,_ to be corrupted Mr. CRANSTON. Mr. President, will by $100 contributions, then we have all- the Senator yield ready gone do'am the drs.in. It is not goinl_ Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. to corrupt the American political proce.,_s. Further, I think we _hould know that Mr. CRANSTON. i want to say that public financing in other countries has the Senator from Minnesota has stated not been on an individu_,l basis. We ouglht very, very eloquently the reasons for my to make the :record quite clear on thai;, supporting this bill and why it should be Public financi(ng of carlpai_,ms in coma- enacted. tries like Great Britain, the Federal ReIn l_elation to the pending amendment, public of Germany, an, i others, goes to I would like to compliment the Senator political parties that are highly orga- from Illinois, the Senator from New nized, disciplined party units under the Mexico, and the Senator from Ohio for parliamentary system. There are not coming up with a formula that I think many Senators who waat public financ- deals with two, very important aspects Lug just corr_mg to the po]iUcal party, of the measure now before us in ways Many of us hope to run independently which I think had not been handled in and hope that people f.*om both parties the most appropriate way in the measure will join in putting us in ofiice. £u its present form. So what we have betore us, I think, Fir_,_t,I am very concerned about the is a reasonable adjustment and cora- first amendment's right to express onepromise. In this day and age anybo4_ self not only by what one says, but by who says "compromise" may be con- what one does. I fear 100 percent mandemned, but the whole sy_,;tem of _mis datory public financing would deny that Government is based on intellig_at right to individuals who wish to speak out April 9, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --- SENATE S 5541 by making contributions--hopefully small contributions--which we will be moving to under this measure, Second, I think it is very important to reduce the overall cost of public financing so that the measure cannot be subject to attacks that it is costing too much or that it is a raid on the Treasury. I do not believe that it is either of those two things, but I do believe that this amendment, by reducing the total cost of public financing, serves a valuable purpose In that respect, as well as contributlng in other respects. For these reasons I am glad to join the Senator from Illinois (Mr. S_gVrNSON). Mr. ABOUREZK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. HUMPHREY. ! yield, Mr. ABOUREZK. By way of information, does the existing legislation require mandatory public financing? Is there not provision that allows for small contributions to be raised? Mr. HUMPHREY. Yes; in the congresslonal, Mr. ABOUREZK. How about the Presidential? Mr. HUMPHREY. One hundred percent. Mr. ABOUREZK. It Is optional, as I understand it. Mr. HUMPHREY. Yes, optional. But this is mandatory. The subject matter of the Stevenson amendment is a mandatory provision. That is the difference, Mr. ABOUREZK. But existing legislation does not prevent small contributions from being made? Mr. HUMPHREY. The formula for the primaries remains the same as it is in the bill. Mr. ABOUREZK. But it would be very tough for a challenger to raise the money under this provision. Mr. HUMPHREY. I do not think it would be any tougher than it is now. Mr. ABOUREZK. It would be a great deal easier if he had a mailing list, because the limit placed on contributions is much stricter than it is now. Mr. HUMPHREY. I appreciate that the limit is $3,000 for an individual and $6,000 for a group contribution, whether one is an incumbent or a nonincumbent. Matching funds are exactly the same. If one is a challenger in a Senate race, it is $100 matching funds to $100--up to $100--but he gets 25 percent right off the top of the table, so to speak, Mr. ABOUREZK. But an individual could count on only $200 in a congressional race. Mr. HUMPHREY. The Senator is correct; whether he is an incumbent or a challenger, Mr. ABOUREZK. If he is a challenger, he would not have access to those sources of money I have referred to. He would be out of luck, so to speak. If I might just say if I might offer an observation, that this is not an incumbent's amendment, But a challenger would have a difficult time raising money to challenge an incumbent. Mr. HUMPHREY. Not one bit more. An incumbent has some advantages, but somenaydisadvantages, There hearealso the has yea and rotes. There lizing sorae of these issues. We are giving the taxpayer something else. We axe giving him good, clean politics. We are removing the element of doubt and suspicion. Mr. ALLEN. Does the Senator feel that candidate,s would be subject to improper influences during their campaigns? Mr. HUMPHREY. 1: have never believed; but I will tell the Senator that a great many folks I know do believe that. I do not happen to believe it, but I believe the Senator from Alabama makes a valid point. But I wish I could convince everybody who writes to me. Mr. AI,r.EN. The Senator said that in being for this amendment he had to resist certain entreaties and demands certain pr_sure groups that were demanding all or nothing, I believe the Senator said. I want to commend the distinguished Senator for not being completely in the lX,ckets of those pressure groups. Mr. HUMPHREY. I thank the Senator. Mr. ATJ._.N. Some Senators are not quite as brave as the distinguished Senator from Minnesota. Mr. HUMPHREY. Sometimes bravery is only rewarding this body by blows, injuries, and defeats. I have suffered a littlc of that in my life. One more will not hurt, so long as it is not final. Mr. ABOUREZK. Mr. President, I think I have the floor. Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, ! have the floor, but I shall yield the floor so that the Senator from South Dakota may with hi_ argument in support continue of the amendment. Mr. HUMPHREY. The Senator is right In this instance. But in congressional elections, it is optional, Mr. ABOUREZK. I wonder what all the fuss is about concerning small contributions being made under existing legislation. It seems to me that this amendment is being sold on the basis that people cannot contribute small amounts, and thereby take part in the public process. If what I read is correct-I wish the Senator from Illinois were in the Chamber--25 percent for congressional elections will be publicly financed and raised, and also be raised with small contributions. Mr. HUMPHREY. For matching, 25 percent is, the immediate amount one is entitled to, and the rest is under a matching formula, Mx. ABOUREZK. What is it in the Presidential race ? Mx. HUMPHREY. The same thing. are no "maybe" votes. If he is out in the countryside, he can say, "Yes, that is a reasonable position. I am sympathetic to that position." "But I do feel you have merit in your position." But if one is an incumbent, they say "Thank you very much but you voted 'nay' or you voted 'yea'." There is not a great deal of advantage when in riding off on a white horse with a great big spear. When one is a challenger, he can always say "maybe." Gee, I have always wished that we had a vote, not "yea," or not "nay," but "maybe." Would I not be the happiest Senator? Mr. _r,r,_.N. Mr. President, I should like to ask the distinguished Senator from Minnesota a question. It looks as though, with the 25-percent financing, even in congressional races, and the matching thereafter to be a maximum Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, will the Senator :_ield for an inquiry? Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, a parliamentary inquiry. Has any time been set to vote on this amendment? Mr. MANSFIELD. There is no time limitation on this anmndment. I assume there will be plenty of time. Mr. IX)LE, Before the vote on cloture? Mr. MANSFr_.D. Before and after the vote on cloture. Mr. ABOUREZK. Mr. President, I yield to the dJistingulshed Senator from New Mexico. Mr. r_)MENICL Mr. President, I should like to take a few moments to explore and to inquire about what the aspects are and whether the Senator from Alabama's 62.5 percent is indeed what would re_qly happen.' First c_f all, there is an incentive to ¢here be a funding, matching of 62.5 percent inwould Federal Mr. HUMPHREY. That would be the maximum only. Mr. ALLEN. Actually, that would be the maximum only, so what the minimum would be would be a sort of bargain basement 37.5 percent discount amendment to the American taxpayer. Is that about the size of the amendment? Mr. HUMPHREY. That Is good. I might say that in this time of inflation, that is a welcome discount, MX. ALLEN. The Senator is giving the American taxpayer a 30-percent discount in the bill. Mr. HUMPHREY. He gets something else. The Senator has a way of capsu- give some small contributions in the congressional races--S100 for small contributions. However, in congressional races one is entitled to receive contributions up to $3.000. However, of this amount, only $10_ is matched, unless someone were to receive his entire campaign contributions in amounts of $100 or less. Then he would have less than 62.5 percent Federal involved. one went out and tax got dollars $10, $15, or $20 Ifthousand raised in small contributions of $100, only $100 of each would be credited to matching; $900 each would go in the campaign fund would be part of the total in arriving at that which he could spend. But to the extent it was in excess of $100, it would not be matching. So the idea is that 62.5 percent is the absolute Forty financing percent under istheimmediately formula in public the bill, and the balance, as I think the Senator from Ohio would tell the Senator; up to $250,000 is matching. In other words, if one gets $250,000 in contributions, he gets $250.000 in matching, Mr. ABOUREZK. If one is a challenger in a race against an incumbent, he does not have access to the sources of eontributions that many incumbents have, such as the various committees around the country--the labor committees, and so on. He has to have a very large maillng list in order to keep up with wha_ the incumbent has already raised. Is that a correct statement? 441 S 5542 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- S}i.,[ArE_ ¥ maximum. So there will be contributions 1V_'. CLARK. Mr. P::esident, will the in addition to the 62.5 percent. Senator yleRt? The same reasoning applies to the Mr. ABOIZ.FCEZK. I 3ield to the Serm_... P_sidential campaign, $250 is matched, tor from Iowa. You can receive $3,000 contributions, but 1_'. CLAP_g:. Mr. l_esidcnt, ! rise t7o to the extent that you are successful in oppose this amendment becanse I thi:nk garnering contributions over $250 from it could mean the total destruction of private sources, all of that extra money is what we have accomplished in public charged to your total allowable, but is financing here in the h_st 19 days. not matched with Federal dollars. An amendment such as this ought noi; I would also say to the Senator, who is be taken lightly. It ougat to be discusse ltcatlon, distributlon of printed leaflets, pamphlets, or other docu_aents, or display '_hrough the us,; of any outdoor advertising :_acility, and such other use of printed media _ the Commission shall prescrl;,be. ''. w_mg oF IngPORTING :IE_lYIRE_.-ENTf_ eectio_,i 507(b) (i) of this Act), and any other amounts contributed to an individual for the purpose of supporting his activities as a holder of Pederal o4_ce, may be used hy that candidate or individual, as the case may be, to defray any ordinary and necesa_ry expense_ incurred by him in eonnection _,lth his duties as a holder of Federal office, or may he contributed by him to any organLzation described in section 170(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954. To the extent any such contribution, amount contribut_d, or expenditure 'thereof is not other_.ise required to be disclosed under tlle provisions of this title, such contribution. E_mount contributed, or expenditure stroll he fully disclosed in accordance with regulations promulgated by the Commission, The Commission is authorized to p]_omulgate such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this section. *_PF_4ALTY FOR VIOLATIONS S_C. 305. Section 306(¢) of the Feder_l Election campaign Act of 1971 (relating to l_orrnal requirements rcspe_ting reportS and ,tatements) is amended tc read as follows: "(c) The Commission Ir.ay, by puhlish_d regulation of general appllc_bll:_ty, relieve _ "(1) any category of candidat,_ of the ob. ligation to comply personally with the requirements of subsections (a) through (e) o_ sectimi 304. if it determines that such actio_x will not have any adverse effect on the pur.. poses of this title, and "(2) any category of political committee_; of the obligation to comply _Ith such sectior if such committ/,_s--_(A) primarily support persons seekin_i E,tate or local office, and "(B) do not operate in more than ont_ I_tate or do not operate on a sta_ewldi': k_.qis.", t_oN_m_S nv _H_ N_ _q_ O_r _i_crrrrs_ P_RSON S_c. 306. Secti.:m 310 of the Pederal Elec-, "SEc. 318. (a) Violation of any provision of this title Is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine ,of not more than $I0,000, imprisonment for not more than one year, or both.. "(b) Violation of any provision of this title with knowledge or reason to know that the action committed or omitted is a violation of this title is punishable by a fine of not more than $10,000, imprisonment for not more than five years, or both.". APPLICABLE STATE LAWS SEC. 308. Section 403 Of the Federal Election Campaign ACt of 1971 is amended to read as follows: "_'F_r ON sra_ LaW "SEC, 403. The provisions of this Act, and ef regu_a%ions promulgated under th_ Act. preen_pt any provision of State law with respect tc_ campalgr,_ for nomination for election, m' lor electi,_n, to Federal offic& (as such term is defined in section 301 (c)) .". T}t.TLEIV--F]gD!_.ALEI/ECTION COM]_I_ION _'REPORTS". CA_PA][GN ADVER_.SE_ _c. 304. fl_ction 805 of the Federal ElseSion Canipalgn Act of 1971 (relating to reports by others than political committees) _s amended to read as follows: "aEQ_YlR_I_S 12EI.ATING TO CAMPAIGN _wv_Rrm_a tion Oampaign Act of 19_1 (relating to pro-, hib/tion of con_xlbutions _ name of an-. other) /s redesignated as section 315 of such. Act and amend, d by lnse:-ting after "another person", the first tim; It appears, the, following: "or knowingly _ermit his name h) be n;_ed to effect such a contribution". ESTAeLI_ttM_I_r OF .FEDERAL ELECTIOIV COMi_ISS_ON; CENTRAl, CA]k_PA_GN COMMIqFKi_I_S; CA,PateN _m_osrroams Src. 4)1. (a) Title III of the Federal Election Campalgn Act of 1971 (relating to disclosure of Federal campaign funds) is _mendetl by redesignating section 308 as ;ection 312, and by inserting after section _07 the following new sections: aOL_ or VOLmC,U_ Pa]_SIDE_YT!AL _aTy FUNDS; _>a_xo_ USE _ OF ]_;XCESS SEC. 307. Title III of the Federal Election C;_mpaign Act of 1971 is amended by' _trlKinLg out sect/on 311 and by adding at ihs end of such title the following new sections: tlol_. "2JPPROV_L "(b) Any published political advertisemeat shall ovntain a statement:, in such form as the Commission may prescribe, of the identification of the person autkorizlng the publication of that advertisement, "(c) Any published who publishes any l_olltical _advertisement shall maintain, such reoords as the Commission may prescribe for a period of two years after the date of publication r_tting forth such advertMement and 'any material relating to identification pE_nrr_ms B'Z NATIONAL COMMi'].'t'r._ SEC. 316. (a) N'c, expenditure tn excess of $1,000 shall be made by or t.n behalf of any candidate who h_,,s received the ]mominatlon of his party for th'estdent o" Vice President 'tufiess such expenditure hl,s been specifically approved by the chairman c.r treasurer of that polttlcal party's national committee or the designated representative of that netinnal committee in the S_ate where the f.unds are to be expended, furnished to him in connection therewith, and shall permit the public to inspect and copy those recede at reasonable hour;, "(d) To the extent that any persc_ sells eq_ce in any newspaper or magazine to a candYtate,or 'his agent for Federal office, or nomlnattan t, hereto, in connection with such candidate's campaign for nomination for, or election to, such office, the charges made for the use of such space in connection wlth his campaign shall not exceed the charges made _or comparable use of sucll space for other purposes. "(e) Any political committee shall include on _ face or front page of all literature and advertisements soliciting contributions _following_aotice: '"(b) Each national comncittee approving e_penditures l_n¢[er subsec';ion (a) shall rel,-_ter under seetlon B03 as _ political co;mmittee and report each expenditure it approves _ ff it had made tLat expenditure, together with the identification of the perso_l seeking approval ani, making the exj_endit-are. 460 CaMP_.XON CAT_PA_GNS; '*S_c. 305, (a) No person shall cause any political advertisement to be published un!ess he furnishes to the publisher ,of the advertisement his identification in _,rltlng, _cether with the identification of any person authorizing him to cause such publics- el p PENALTZES PRE$IDEIUTIAL "(c) No politic than one national "_;_ o_ co_-_s_rr_ CA_PA_GN EX,- _t party shall pave more comrnitte_ _o_rs ro_ C_a_XN _,_arOSF. S *'SEC. 317. Amo_mts receiw_d by a candidal_ as _gmtrlbnttons that are in excess of an,._ amount necessary to d_.,fray hta campat.gh expenses (after the application of "F_Zg_L ELECTION COMMISSION "S_c. 308. (a)(1) There is established, as ;:m independent establishment of the execu_iw; hrar_ch of the Government of the United :Btates, a commission to be ]mown as the ]_,_ederal Election Commission. "(2) 9?he C_lssion shall be composed of _;he Comptrollcr General, who shall serve without the right to vote, and seven members 'who sh_31 be appointed by the President by ftlldl with the advice a_ad consent of the Seni_te. Of tliesevenmembers_ "(A) two shall be chosen from among in¢[ividuals recommended by the Presidcnt pro tempers _f the Senate, upon the recommen4ations ef the majority leader of the Senate arid the minority leader of the Senate; and "lB) t_o shall be chosen from among tndlviduals recommended by the Speaker of ti:le House of Representatives; upon the rec().mmendations of the majority leader of the Blouse an4 the minority leader of the House. _.!'lie 'two members appointed under, aubp:_ragraph (A) shall not be affiliated with the same political party; nor shall the two n:_embers appointed under _ubparagraph (B). Of the members not appointed under simh subparagraphs, not more than two shall b_ affiliated witl_ t_s same political party. "(3) Members of the Commission, othez than. the ,Comptroller General, shall serve for terms of seven years, except that, of the members first appointed_ April 9, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL "(A) one of the members not appointed _nder subparagraph CA) or (B) of paragraph (2) shall be appointed for a term ending on the April thirtieth first occurring more than six months after the date on which he is appointed; "CB) one of the members appointed under paragraph (2)(A) shall be appointed for a term ending one year after the April thirtieth on which the term of the member referred to in subparagraph CA) of this paragraph ends; "(C) one of the members appointed under paragraph (2) (B) shall be appointed for. a term ending two years thereafter; "(D) one of the members not appointed under subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (2) shall be appointed for a term endln4_ six years thereafter. "(E) one of the members appointed under paragraph (2) (A) shall be appointed for a term ending four years thereafter; "(F) one of the members appointed under paragraph (2) (B) shall be appointed for a term ending five years thereafter; and "(G) one of the members not appointed under subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (2) shall be appointed for a term ending six years thereafter, "(4) Members shall be chosen on the basis of their maturity, experience, integrity, linpartiality, and good judgment. A member may be reappointed to the Commission only once. "(5) An individual appointed to fill a va. saucy occurring other than by the expiration of a term of office shall be appointed only for the unexpired term of the member he succeeds. Any vacancy ocourring in the office or member of the Commission shall be filled in the manner in which that office was originally filled, "(6) The Commtsson shall elect a Chairman and a Vice Chairman from among its members for a term of t_o years. The Chairman and the Vice Chairman shall not be affilleted with the same political party. The Vice. Chairman shall act as Chairman in the absence or disability of the Chairman, or in the event of a vacancy in that office. "(b) A vacancy in the Commission shall not impair the right of the remaining momhers to exercise all the powers of the Cornmission. Four members of the Commission shall constitute a quorum, "(c) The Commtssiom shall have an omcial seal which shall be Judicially noticed. "(d) The Commlss_om shall at the close of each fiscal year report to the Congress and to the President concerning the action it has taken; the names, salaries, and ddtles of all individuals in its employ and the money it has disbursed; _nd shall make such further reports on the matters within its Jurisdiction and such recommendations for further legislatlon as may appear desirable, "(e) The principal office of the Commisslon shall be in or near tt_e District of Columhie, but it may meet or exercise any or all its powers In any State. "(f) The Commission shall appoint a Gertoral Counsel and an Ex_0utlve Director to serve at the pleasure of the Commission. The General Counsel shall be the chief legal ofiicer of the Commission. The Executive Directot shall be responsible for the adminlstrafive operations of the Commission and shall perform such other duties as may be delegated or assigned to him from time to time by regulations or orders of the Commission. However, the Commisstoa shall not delegabe the making of regulations regarding elections to the Executive Director. "(g) The Chairman of the Commission shall appoint and fix the compensation of such personnel as are necessary to fulfill the duties of the Commis_o_ in accordance with the provisions of title 6. United States Code. "(h) The Commles4on may obtain the _rvlces of experts and consultants in accordanco with sectloa 8109 _ title 5, United 8tate_ Code. RECORD -- SENATE '(t) In carrying out its responsibilities under this title, the Commission shall, to the fullest extent practicable, avail itself of the assistance, including personnel and facilities, of the General Accounting Office and the Department of Justice. The Comptroller Gertoral and the Attorney General may make available to the Commission such personnel, facilities, and other assistance, with or without relmbursement, as the Commission may request, "(J) The provisions of section 7324 of title 5, United States Code, shall apply to members of the Commission notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (d) (3) of such section. "(k) (1) Whenever the Commission sub-mits any budget estimate or request to the President or the Office of Management and Budget, it shall concurrently transmit a copy of that estimate or request to the Congress. "(2) Whenever the Commission submits any legislative recommendations, or testimony, or comments on legislation requested by the Congress or by any Member of Congress to the President or the Office of Management and Budget, it shall concurrently transmit a copy thereof to the Congress or to the Member requesting the same. No officer or agency of the United States shall have any authority to require the Commission to submit its legislative recommendations, or testtmony, or comments on legislation, to any office or agency of the United States for approval, comments, or review, prior to the submission of such recommendations, testimony, or comments to the Congress. "PO%VERSOF COMMISSIOI¢ "SEc. 309. (a) The Commission has the power-. "(1) to require, by special or general 0rtiers, any person to submit in writing such reports and answers to questions as the Cornmission may prescribe; and such submission shall be made within such reasonable period and under oath or otherwise as the Cornmission may determine; "(2) to administer oaths; "(3) to require by subpena, signed by the Chairman or the Vice Chairman, the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the produetion of all documentary evidence veldtlng to the execution of its duties; "(4) in any proceeding or investigation to order testimony to be taken by deposition before any person who is designated by the Commission and has the power to admintster oaths and, in such instances, to compel testimony and the production of evidence in the same manner as authorized under paragraph (3) of this subsection; "(5) to pay witnesses the same fees and mileage as are paid lp like circumstences in the courts o_ the United States;, "(6) to initiate (through civil proceedtugs for injunctive relief and through prescriterions to Federal grand Juries), prosecute, defend, or appeal any civil or criminal action in the name of ti_e Commission for the purpose of enforcing the proviisons of this Act and of sections 602, 608, 610, 611, 612, 613, 614, 615, 616, and 617 of title 18, United States Code, through its General Counsel; "(7) to delegate any of its functions or powers, other than the power to issue subpenas under paragraph (3), to any omcer or employee of the Commission; and "(8) to make, amend, and repeal such rules, pursuant to .the provisions of chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code, as are necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act. "(b) Any United States district court within the Jurisdiction of which any inquiry is carried on, may, upon petition by the Commission, in case of refusal to obey a subperm or order of the Commission issued under subsection (a) of this section, issue am order requiring compliance therewith. Any failure to obey the order of the court may be punished by the court as a contempt thereof, "(c) No person shall be subject to civil liability to any person (other than the Co,n- S 5561 mission or the United States) for disclosing information at the request of the Commiesion. "(d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Commission shall be the primary civil and criminal enforcement agency for violations of the provisions of this Act, and of sections 602, 608, 610, 611, 612, 613, 614, 615, 616, and 617 of title 18, United States Code. Any violation of any such provision. shall be prosecuted by the Attorney Gert-. eral or Department of Justice personnel only after consultation with, and with the con-. sent of, the Commission. "(e) (1) Any person wlho violates any pro-. vision of this Act or of t_ction 602, 608, 610, 611, 612, 613, 614, 615, 616, or 617 of title 16, United States Code, may be assessed a clvli penalty by the Connnlssion under paragraph (2) of this subsection of not more than $10,000 for each such violation. Each occurrence of a violation of this Act and each day of noncompliance with a disclosure requirement of this title or an order of the Cornmission issued under this section shall constitute a separate offense. In determining the amount of the penalty the Commission shall consider the person's history of previous riolations, the appropriateness of such penalty to ,the financial resources of the persoJs charged, the gravity of the violation, and the demonstrated good faith of the perso_ charged in attempting to achieve rapid cornpliance after notification of a violation. "(2) A civil penalty shall be assessed by the Commission by order only after the person charged with a violation has been given an opportunity for a hearing and the Commission has determined, by decision incorporatlng its findings of fact therein, that a violation did occur, and the amount of the penf_lfy. Any hearing under this section shall be of rqcord and shall be held in accordance with chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code. "(3) If the person against whom a civil penalty is assessed falls to pay the penalty, the Commission shall file a petition for onforcement of its order assessing the penalty in any appropriate district court of the United States. The petition shall designate the person against whom the order is sought to be enforced as the respondent. A copy o_ the petition shall forthwith be sent by registered or certified mall to the respondent and his attorney of record, and thereupon tile Commission shall certify and file in such court the record upon which such order sought to be enforced was issue d. The court shall have Jurisdiction to enter a Judgment enforcing, modifying, and enforcing as so modified, or setting aside in whole or fn part the order and decision of the Commission or tC may remand the proceedings to the Corn,. mission for such further action as it may direct. The court may determine de nov(_ all issues of law but the Commission's find.. ings of fact, if supported by substantial evi.deuce, shall be conclusive. "(f) Upon application made by any indi.. vldual holding Federal office, any candidate, or any political committee, the Commission, through its General CQunsel, shall provide within a reasonable period of time an advisory opinion, with respect to any specific transaction or activity inquired of, as to whether such transaction or activity would constitute a violation of any provision of this Act or of any provision of title 18, United States Code, over which the Commission has primary jurisdiction under subsection (d). "CENTRAL CAiMPAIGNCOMMITTEES "SEC. 310. (a) Each candidate shall des_gnato one political conLmlttes as his central campaign committee. A candidate for nomination for election, or for election, to the office of President, may also designate one political committee in each State in which he is a candidate as his State campaign committee for that State. The designation shall be made in writing, and a copy of the designslion, together with such Information as the Commission may require, _shall be furnished 461 S 5562 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SE..4A.UE April 9, 19 74 ·go the Coxmmisslon upon the designation of expenditures not in excess of $100 to any any such committee, person in connection with a single purchase "(b) No political committee may be destgor tr_msaction. A record of petty cash dm-. hated as the central campaign committee of hursements shall be kept tn accordance wil_ more than one candidate. The central camrequirements established by the Conm_lsstc:n, paig_ committee, and each State campaign and such stateraents and r-_ports thereof shill committee, designated by a candidate nomibe furnished to the Commission as It m%g hated by a political party for election to the require, office of President shall be the central cam"(c) A candidate for ncminatlon for elecpalgn committee and the State campaign tion, or for election, to the office of Preside_lt committee of the candidate nominated by may establish one such depository in ea(.Jl that party for election to the cfffioe of Vice such State, wh:ich shall b_ cor_;ldered by :his President. ' State campaign committee for that State a_al "(c)(1) ,Any political committee authorany other political committee authorized b7 ired by a candidate to accept contributions him to receive c0ntributlcns or to make e:xor make expendltur, es In connection with his pendil;ures on l_Js behalf lIL that State, undo:: campaign for nomination for election, or for regulations pre,,_crlbed by the Commission, as election, which is not a central campaign his single campaign dep_sltory. The cam:v, committee or a State campaign co]xtmittee, palgn depository of the candidate of a polit, f., shall furnisil each report required of it unc81 party for election to the office of Vi42t; der section 304 (other than reports required President shall be the campaif,n depository llnder section 311(b)) to that candidate's designated by the candidale of that party for central campaign committee at the time It election to the office of Pr,_sldent.". would, but for this subsection be .required (b) (1) Section 5314 cE title 5, Unite_ to furnish that report to the Commission. Slaloms Code, is amended by adding at the e_:d: Any report properly furnished to a central thereof the following new _ aragraph: campaign committee under this subsection "(60) Members (other than the Coat:shall be, for purposes of this title, held and troller General], Federal Election Con_mi:_. considered to have been furnished to the sion (7)." Commission. at the time at which it 'was fur(2) Section 5B15 of sncL title is amende_ nished to such central campaign coramittee, by adding at the end thereof the following "(2) The Commission may, by regulation, new paragraphs : require any political committee receiving "(98) General Counsel, Federal Electio:_ contributions or making expenditures in a Commission. State on behalf of a candidate who, under "(99) ]E_eetulve Director, Federal Elections subsection (a), has designated a State camCommission." palgn committee for that State to furnish (c) Until the appointment a_d qualifica,its reports to that State, campaign, committee lion of all the members of the ].*ederal Elecinstead of furnishing such reports to the _'l;lon Commission and its General Counsel central campaign committee of thai; candland until the tcansfer provided for in thi_ date. imbsection, the Comptroller General, the Sec"(3) The Commission may require any rotary of the Senate, and the Clerk of the political Committee to furnish m_y report House of Representatives ,';hall continue to directly to the Commission. carry out their responsibilities under title :£ "(d) Each political committee which is a s.nd title III of the Federal Election Cam.. tlon (8.) and ill paragraphs (12) and (14) {[as redesignated by section I,>04(d) (2) of this Act) ,[:,f subsec_on (b), and Inserting "Cornmlssica"; (6) striking out "supervisory officer" each place _t appears in section 306 (relating to fm_aa_t requirements respecting reports and stater_ents) and inserting "Commission"; (?) striking out "Comptroller General of t:he United States" and "he" in section 307 (relating to reports on convention financing) and inserting "Federal Election Commission" and "i_; '', respectively; (8) striking out "SUPERVISORY OFFICEa" in the caption of section 312 (as redesign,_ted by subsection (a) of this section) (relating to duties of the supervisory of. ricer) and inserting "COMMISSION"; (9) striking out "supervisory officer" in s_,_ctlor[ 312(a) (as redeslgnated by subseclion (l_) of this section) the first time it appears _md inserting "Commission"; (10) amending section 312(a) (as redesignated by subsection (a) of this section) by-(A) striking out "him" irt paragraph (1) a_d in:!_rting "it"; (B) striking out '"nlm" irt paragraph (4) a0_d in,,_rting "it"; and (C) striking out "he" each place it appears in paragraphs (V) and (9) and inserting "it"; (11) striking out "supervisory officer" in section 31Z(b) (as redeslgnated by subsectlon (si) of this subsection) and inserting "Commission"; (12) amending subsection (c) of section 312 (_:'. redeslgnated by subsection (a) of this section) by-(A) striking out "Comptroller General" each place it appears therein and inserting "Commission", and striking out "his" in the second sentence of such subsection and insertlng "its"; and (B) _:triking out the last sentence thereof; arid centrai campaign committee or a State campaign committee shall receive all reports filed with' or furnished to it by other political committees, and consolidate and furr_ish the reports to the Commission, together with its own reports and statements, in accordance palgn Act of 1971 as such titles existed o_ the day before tl_e date of enactment of this Act. Upon the appointmen_ of all member_ of the Commis_ion and its General Counsel, the Comptroller General, the ISecratary of 'the Senate, and the Clerk of the Ho'_se o:f (13) amending subsection (d) (1) of seclion 312 (as redesignated by subsection (a) of this section) by-(A) striking out "supervisory officer" 'each place it appears therein and inserting "CornmJasion"; with the provisions of this title and 12OHS prescribed by the Commission. "CA_APAIGN DErOSI'rORIES (B) s'[rlking out pears in the second and inserting "it"; "SEC. 311. (a) (1) Each candidate shall designate one or more National or State banks as his campaign depositories. _ae ceatral campalgm committee of that car_didate, Representatives :_hall meet with the Commis,sion and arrange for the transfer, within thirty clays after the date on which all such r_embers and the General Counsel are ap.. pointed, of all records, do:uments, memo.. randu_, and o':her paper_ asscmlated wit_ carrying out their responsibilities under title ][ and title III of the Feder_l Eh;etlon Cam-, and any other political committee aut[horlzed by btm to receive contributions nr to make expendlttlres on his behalf, shall maintain a checking account at a depository se, desig_ted by the candidate and shall deposit any patgn Act of 1971. (d) Title III o:_ the Feder_ Election Cam-, palgn Act o_ 19'/1 l_ amended by--(1) amending section 30: (g) (relating to definitions) to re:_d as follows: ,'5_c. _'_Y2. Section 312 (a) (6) (as redeslghated by tl_ha Act) of the Federal waectlon Campaign Act of 1971 (relatir_g to dutie_ of _ho sup_rvhsary officer) is amended to read as follows: contributions received by that cor_nlttee into that account. A candidate shall deposit any payment received by him under section 506 of this ,Act in the account maintained by his central campaign committee. No expendtture may be made by any such committee on behal:i of a candidate or to influence his election except by check drawn on that _ccount, other tban petty cash expendi_uree a._ provided in subsection (b). "(2) The treasurer of each committee pollticai cornmittee (other than a political au$Jaorlzed by a candidate to receive contrlbulions or to make expenditures on his bellaif) shall designate one or more National or State banks as campaign depositories of that cornmlttse, and shall maintain a checking account for that committee at each such depository. All contributions received by that committee shall be deposited in such an account. No expenditure may be made by that committee e_:cept by check drawn on that account, other than petty cash expenditures as provided In subsection (b). g(b) A poll[t"ical comm145tee may maintain petty oash'_und out of which it may make "(g) 'Commission' meaas the Federal Election Commission;"; (2) striking out "supervisor' officer" in section S02(d) s_d lnsertin; "Commission"; (3) striking oat section 302(1:) (relating' to organization of political committees); (4) axasnding section 303 /relating to registratlon of political committ_s; statements) by-(A) striking out "superv/_ory officer" each time it appears therein and h_serting "Cornmission"; and (B) striking out "he" in the second sen.. fence of subsection (b) of ;ach section (as radesignated by section 203 ia) of this Act) and inserting"it"; (5) amending ,'_ction 304 (relating to re.. port_ by political committees and candidates) by-(A) striking out "appropriate supervisory officer" and "him" in the first sentence tberecf and inserting "Commission" and. '_'i_;", respectively; and (B) s_riking out "supervisory officer" where it appears in the th[rd sentence of subsoc- *'(6) 1ix>compile and maintain a eumulagive index listing all statements and reports filed wi'th the Commission during each cai,endar year by political committees and ,_andidatee, which the Commission shall cause to be published In the l%deral Register :ac less frequently than monthly during _ven.-nu:mbered years and quarterly in odd:xmnbered years and which ehall be in such _'or.m and shall include such information as may be ]_>rescribed by the Commission to perm/t ea_:' ldentificattont of each statement, report, c:andldate, and committee listed, at :least as to their names, the dates of the ;_;tatements and reports, and the number of :pages in. each, and the Commission shall :make copies of statements and reports listed l_ the h_dex available for sale, direct or by _aatl, at a price determined by the Commie_ion to be reasonable to the purchaser;". JUmc_aL aEv-mw S_c. 403. Title ITI of the Federal Elec_ion I:_ampaig:_ Act of 1971 is an_mded by ln:serting _fter section 312 (as redestgnated by %his Act) the following new section: 462 regula- "he" the sentence and first place it apof such _ectlon (C) e;riklng out "the Attorney General on be:half of the United States" and inserting "the Commission". n_:gxn_o _ I_q_LI_ATIO_I OF REI_ORTS April 9, 19 75 CONGRESSIONAL "J_VXCIALREV_W "SEC. S1S. (a) Any agency action by the Co_mtssion made under the provisions of this Act shall be subject to review by the United States Court of Appeals for the Distrier of Columbia Circuit upon petition filed In such court by any interested person. Any petition filed pursuant to this section shall be filed within thirty days after the agency action by the Commission for Which review is sought, "(h) The Commisison, th_ national cornmittee of any political party, and individuals eligible to vote in an election for Federal office, are authorized to institute such actions, including actions for declaratory Judg_ent or Injunctive relief, as may be appropriate to implement any provisions of this Ac_. "(c) The provisions of chapter 7 of title 5, United States Code, apply to Judicial review of any agency action, as defined in section 551 of title 5, United States Code, by the Commission. ]_i_ANC_AL ASSISTANCE TO STATES TO PROI_OTE COI_PLIAlgCE S_c. 404. Section 309 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (relating to statements filed with State officers) is redesighated as section 314 of such Act and amended by_ (1) striking out'a supervisory officer" in subsactlon (a) and inserting in lieu thereof "the Co,_mtsslon"; (2) striking out "in which an expenditure is made by him or on his behalf" in subsection (a) (1) and inserting in lieu thereof the following: "in which he is a candidate or In which substantial expenditures are made by him or on his behalf"; and (3) adding the following new subsection: ."(c) There is authorized to be_ppropriated to the Commission in each fiscal year the sum of $500,000, to be made available in such amounts as the Commission deems approprlate to the States for the purpose of assisting them in complying with their duties as set forth in this section.". Aq[TrHORT_.A_Oi_' OF APPROPRIATXONS SEC. 405. Title III of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 is amended _by adding at the end of such title the following new section: '_AUT_OE_ZA_'mz_ _)F _PPaOPR_ATIO_rS "SEC. 319. There axe authorized to be appropriated to the Commisison, for the purpose of carrying out l_s functions under this title and under chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code, not to exceed $5,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,4974, and not to exceed $5,000,000 for each fiscal year thereafter, TITLE V--DISCLOSURE OF FINANCIAL INTERESTS BY CERTAIN FEDERAL OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES IPI/_)ERAL F-_IPLOYE_. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE REQ1U_KEMENTS SEC. 501. (a) Any candidate of a political party in a general election for the office of s Member of Congress who, at the time he becomes a candidate, does nc_ occupy any such ol]lce, shall file within one month after he becomes a candidate for such office, and eacll Member of Congress, each officer and employee of the United States (including any member of a uniformed service) who is cor_pensated at a rate in excess of $25,000 per annum, any individual occupying the la, rich of an officer or employee of the United States who performs duties of the type generally performed by an individual occupying grade GS-16 of the General Sehedule or any higher grade or position (as deretrained by the Federal Election OommlsSion regardless of the rate of compensation Of such individual), the President, and the Vice President shall file annually, with the Commission a report containing a full and complete statement of--- (1).the amount RECORD -- SENATE and source of each item if S 5563 he served in any s._eh position for more of income, each item of reimbursement for any expenditure, and each gift or aggregate of gifts from one source (other than gifts received from his spouse or any member of his immediate family) received by him or by him and his spouse jointly during the preceding calendar year which exceeds $100 in amount or value, Including any fee or other honorarium received by him for or in connectton with the preparation or delivery of any speech or address, attendance at any convention or other assembly of individuals, or the preparation of ax_y article or other composition for publication, and the mouetary value of subsistence, entertainment, travel, and othex facilities received by him in kind; (2) the identity of each asset held by him, or by him and his spouse Jointly which has a value in excess of $1,000, and the amount of each liability owed by him or by him and his spouse Jointly, which is in excess of $1,000 as of the close of the preeeding calendaryear; (S) any transactions in securities of any business entity by him or by him and his spouse Jointly, or by any person acting ou his behalf or pursuant to his direction durlng the preceding calendar year if the aggregate amount involved in transactions in the securities of such business entity exceeds $1,000 during such year: (4) all transactions in commodities by him, or by him and his spouse Jointly, or by any person acting on his behalf or pnrsuant to his direction during the preceding calendar year if the aggregate amoUnt involved in such transactions exceeds $1,000; and (5) any purchase or sale, other than the purchase or sale of his personal residence, of real property or any interest therein by him, or by him and his spouse Jointly, or by any person acting on his behalf or pursuant to his direction, during the preceding caiendar year if the value of property involved in such purchase or sale exceeds $1,000. (b) Reports required by this section (other than reports so required by candidates of political parties) shall be filed not later than May 15 of each year. In the ease 04 any person who ceases, prior to such date in any year, to occupy the office or position the occupancy of which Imposes upon him the reporting requirements contained in subsection (a) shall file such report on the last day he occupies such office or posit/on, or on such later date, not more than three months after such last day, as the Commission may prescribe. (c) Reports required by this section shall be in such form and detail as the CommAssion may prescribe. The Commission may provide for the grouping of item of income, sources of income, assets, liabilites, dealings in securities or c_mmodlties, and purchases and sales of real property, when separate itemization is not feasible or is not necessal_ for an ac.c.urate disclosure of the income, net worth, dealing in securities and cornmodities, or purchases and sales of real property of any individual, than six months during such calendar year. (g) As used in this section-(1) The term "income" means gross income as defined in section 61 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954. (2) The term "security" means security as defined in section 2 of the Seculqties Act of 1933, as amended (15 U.S.C. 77b). (3) The term "commodity" means cornmodity as defined in section 2 of the Corn-. modlty Exchange Act, as amended (7 U.S.C. 2). (4) The term "transactions in securities or commod_tles" means any acquisition, hold.. lng, withholding, _e, transfer, or other dis.posttio_x Involving any securlty or com.modity. (5) The term "Member of Congress" means a Senator, a Representative, a Resident Com-. missioner, or a Delegate. (6) The term "officer" has the same meanlng as in section 2104 of title 5, Un/ted States Code. (7) The term "employee' ha_ the same meaning as in section 2105 of such title. (8) The term "uniformed service" means any of the Armed Forces, the commissioned corps of the Public Health Service. or the commissioned corps o! the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (9) The term "immediate fa_nily" means the chlld, parent, grandparent, brother, or sister of an individual, and the spouses of such person. (h) Section 554 of title 5, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection: "(f) All written commUnications and memorandums stating the circumstances, source, and substance of all oral communications made to the a{,ency, or any officer or employee thereof, with respect to any el_e which is subject to the provisions of this section by any person who is not an officer or employee of the a4;ency shall be made a part of the public record of such case. This subsection shall not apply to communications to any officer, employee, or agent of the agency engaged lm the performance of investlgative or _uting functions for tl_e agency with _eslDeet t(_ such case." (t) The first repcr_ required under this section sharl be due on the fifteenth day of May occurrir_g at least thirty days after the date of enactment. TITLE VI--RELATED INTERNAL REVENUE CODE AMENDMENTS INCREASE IN pOLr_CAL CONTEmTJTIONS CREDIT A!q2DDEDUC_rION SEC. 601. (a) Section 4I(b)(1) ofthe Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (relating to maximum credit :_or contributions to candidates for pu.bltc office) is amended to read, as followsl "(I) _aXn_UM CREDIT.--The credit allowed by subsection (a) for a taxable year stroll not exceed $25 ($50 in the case of a Joint return under section 5013)." (b) Section 218(b)(1)'of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (relating to amount of deduction for contribul;lons to candidates for (d) Any person who willfully fails to file a report required by this section or who knowingly and willfully files a false report under this section, shall be fined $2,000, or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both. (e) Ail reports filed under this section shall be maintained by the Commission as public records, which, under such reasonable regulations as it shall prescribe, shall be available for inspection by members of the public, (f) For the purposes of any report requlred by this section, an individual shall be considered to have been President, Vice Presldent, a Member of CongresS, an officer or employee of the United States, or a member of a uniformed servlce, during any calendar year public office) is amended to read as follows: "(1) AMOUNU:.---The deduction under subsection (a) s_nall not exceed $100 ($200 in the case of a Joint return under section 6013)." (c) The amendments made by subsections (a) and (b) shall _pply with respect to any political contribution the payment of which is made after December 31, 1973. REPEAl, OF EX_STI_G I'ROVIS_ONS RELATING 're PmgSmENTIAL Ca_PA_C_ Fn_ANClNO SEC. 502. (a) Part VIII of subehapter A of chapter 61 of the Infernal Revenue Code of 1954 (relating to designation of income tax payments to the Presidential Election Campaign Fund) is repealed. Subtitle ri of such Code (relating to financing of Presidential election campaigns) is repealed. (b) The table of parts for subchapter A ,463 5564 CONGRESSIONAL of chapter 61 of such Code ts amended to strike out the last item (relating to part viii). (o) The amendments made by this section take effect on the dante of o_mctment of this Act. GIFT TAX TP_EATMEIqT OF pOLITICAL CONTRIBIJ- Tie, in SEC. 603. (a) Section 2503(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (relating to exclusions from gifts) is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new sentence: "Gifts made to different political committees which make expenditm'es (ineluding transfers of funds and contributions by a committee) for the purpose of htfiuenclng the nomination or election of any candidate for elective office slaall for purposes of this subsection be deemed to have been made to that candidate unless the donor establishes to the. satisfaction of the Secretary or his delegate that-(1) at the time he made t_he gift he could not have been reasonably expected to know which candidate would benefit from his gift, and (2) at no time did he direct, request, or snggest to tlhe committee, or to any person associated with that committee, that a particnlar candidate should receive any benefit from his gift. (b) The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply with respect to gifts made on or after the date of enactment, TITLE VII--MISCEI-J-_-NEOIJS PROVR[SIONS PRESIDEIqTIALpREFERENC4gpRI_IARY ELECTIONS sec. 701. (a) Each State which conducts a Presidential preference primary election shall conduct that election only on a date occurring after the first day in May during any year in which the' electors of the President President ofare (b) and For Vice the purposes this appoin'ted, section, the term--(1) "Presidential prefere_aoe primary election" means an electio_ oo_ducted by a State, in whole or in part, for the purpose of_ (A) permitting the voters of that State to express their pr_fer_acea for 'the nation of candidates by polYracal partiesnomifor election to th.e office of Pre.dent. or {B) choosing delegates to the national nominating conventions held by political parties for the purpose og nominating such candidates; and (2) "State" means each of the several States of the United States and tl_e District of Columbia. CO_aESSm_L ra_R_rS S_c. 702. (a) If, under the law of any State, the candidate of a political party for eleclion to 'the Senate or to the House of l_epresentatives is .determined by a primary election or by a convention conducted by that party, the p_qmary election or convention shall not he held before the first Tuesday in August. If a subsequent, additional prtmary election is necessary te determine the nominee of any political partF in a State, that additional election shall be held withia thirty days after the date of the :first such primary election. (h) For purposes of this soction_ (1) the term ."State" l_eans each of the several States of the United States, the Cornmonwealth of Puerto _tco, the territory of Guam, and the territory of the Virgin Islands; and (2) a candidate for election as Resident commlssinner to the United States, tn the case of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or as Delegate to the House of Representatives, in the _m_e of the territory of Guam or tho terrlt_>ry of the Virgin Islands, Is considered to be a candidate for election to the House of Representatives. (e} Section 10(a)(3) _ the District of Columbia El_.tion Act (D.C. Code, see. 1110 464 RI_CORD ---SENATE (a) (3)) is amended by t;trikt_g out "t_,s first Txtesday :in May" _md inserting i:.m ].leu thereof "t_e first Tm,sday in August"', srrsemqslo_ro_ mm_K rom MASS M&ILING_i Xl_MREDIA_ELY BEFOR_ FRLEC_rXONS Src. 703. Nofwithstandirg any other prevision of law, no Senator, Repre_entativl!,. lgesldent Comgdssioner, er Delegate slh_ll make any mass mailing o: a newsletter a,r mailing with a simplified form of addres_ under the frank under section 3210 of titl,_ 39, United Stal_es Code, lurlng the sixty clays immediately precediag the date on which any election is held tn,which l_e is a candtdate, PROtIIBITION OF FRANKED SOLICITATIOI_S Ap,-il 9, 19 74 1Vic.ALLEN. Mr. President, I ask unaniIE._OUSconsent that it may be in order to call for the yeas and nays on the substltute amendment of the Senator from Kansas (Mr. DOLE). The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objectJion, it is so ordered. Mr. ALLEN. IVIr. President, I ask for the Yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. [_iAlqSFIF. IJ_. Mr. I_resident. I ask unanimous consent that time begin running at the conclusion of morning bustness tomorrow. My understanding is that Wt_ have two special orders and th_ S_c. '704. No Senator, Representative, Resldent Commissic,ner, or De:egate shall mak._ 2,ny solleitat_>n of funds bi' a mailing unde:,_ the frank under section t210 of title 39, United _'tatea Code. there will be a period for not to exceed 15 lniEkutes for the conduct of mornins business. I make that request. The PRESIDING OFFICEI_. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. i_ANSF_LD. Mr President, m,./ Mr. I_ANS_I_.LD. Mr. President, I ask understanding is that ti:lis amendment unanimous consent that following the i_ in the nature of a substiimte to tla.t_ disposal of the amendment in the nature _ending bill; is that correct? of a substitute by the distinguished SenMr. DOLE. _..aat is eorr._ct_ Mr. MANSFIE%D. Mr. Pres'.kient, after discussing this:matter with the mana_r,_ 0f the bfil and the sponso: of the amend-, merit, I ask lmanimom_ consent thai: there be a 5-mfmute limitation, with time h) begin runnh_g tomorr)w at the hour of 11 a.m., the l;Ime to be equs[lly divided betwee:u the manager of ';he bill and the spousor of the amendment, Mr..AIJ,_N. Mr. PresiJent, reserving: the right to object, may" inquire ff this. i_', a complete Sllbstitute f_r the bill? Mr. DOLE. The Senatol fl'cia Alabama is correct. Mr. ALLEN. 5 minutes wou_[d be sufficient--_ Mr. IVlABISFI_ELD. Would the Senator make a suggesti_on? Mr. t_. 'We already lmve a limi.tation provi0,ed by rule ;_[XII. I should li)re to make inquiry, do, m the Senator leave out the public financing :in his substitute? Mr. DOLE. T_ere is no public financ-, lng. The limitation is $3,00O--,cash contributions above $50--no public finanelng. That is a departure Irom the pend-, lng legislation, l[ can discuss it tomorrow iii 10 minutes to a side. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. _Iesident, I will wi.thdraw my request. MI'. _. ]_ would not object to 10 minutes, ator from Kansas (Mr. DOLr), the distinguished Senator from Iowa (Mr. CLA_K) be recognized--because it had been his intention to call up one of his amendments tonight--so that it would be the :pending business on tomorrow. Mr. P. OBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, perhaps I should say that there was the understanding on the part of several af us that after morning business tomorrow, the disaster relief bill would be taken up, and that there would be a time limitation on it. ][ wonder whether the distinguished :majority leader would modify his request '_o provide that, following the disposition of the Dole amendment, the Senate proteed to the consideration of the disaster ::elief bill, and upon disposition of the bill, that the Senator from Iowa (Mr. _LARK) then be recognized. _/Ir. i_rANSFIELD. That would be perfectly acceptable. I should have remembored that because I was told about it; but, in any event, it will be the next amendn_ent after the Dole amendment in the nature of a substitute. Mr..ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, 'I ask tmanimous consent---and this request has been cleared with: the leader:ship on the Republican side, and with ;Senators BA_.u and DOMENICI, the two ranking members on the committee and Mr. MANSF_HRD. Fine. Mr. AIJ_-rlg. But we sh>uld discuss it for more than 5 :minutes. Mr. COTTON Mr. President, the Senator from New ttampshire has not taken i minute's time on this whole d_0ate yet. I wish that the time or the substitute _maendmtmt could be extended long l!he subcommittee respectively, and the distinguished chairman of the Public Works Committee, and the distinguished _;enator from North Dakota (Mr. BURr,mrx), who is the chairman of the subconunittee on the majority side--that there be a time limitation on the disaster :relief bill of not to exceed 2 hours, to be enough so that I could have 5 minutes, Mr. MANSI_kCLD. Well, Mr. President, ]2 .ask unanimous consent thai; there be a one-half hour time limitation on the substitute amendment el tlu; Senator from ]._ansas (Mir. DOLE), the l'_ne to be equally divided and controlleq between the manager anti the sponsor of the bill, with 5 minutes tx} be all0cw_dsl_eeifieally equally divided between and controlled by I_enators BURDICK and DOMENICI; and that time on any amendments thereto be limited to 30 minutes, tx) be equally divlded and controlled in the usual form; and that the agreement be in the usual _;_rm. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. to the Senator from New E[ampshire (l_[r. Costa>u). 'The PRE_IDI[_[G OY_E[_-'ER.. Wfiahout objection, it-is so ordered, lVlr. COTTON. I thanh the Senator from Montana very much. l_lr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I want to take one moment of my time this evenlng to commend our Senate leadership, the distinguished Senator from Ment_ma (l_[r. MANSFIELD) Itlnd the dtstingdished Senator from Pennsylvania April 9, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-- SENATE (Mr. HuG_ SCOTT), as well as the distinguished manager of the pending bill, Senator CASNOS, for their efforts over the period of the past few days in bringLng the importance of this proposal to the attention of the Senate. Their conversations and assistance developed the votes for cloture and demonstrated that orders for the rec, tomorrow, there transaction of ro_ of not to exceed merits therein limi The PRESIDIN_ objection, it is so paign reform oflegislation. two-thirds the Senate wants camMany thought the battle for cloture could not be won. We know how far we had to come since the vote last week. And Senators MANSFIELD and HUcH Scott deserve great credit for so effectively turning the tide. The issues had been debated and discussed extensively. The time had come for decisive action, thanks to the extraordinary efforts and of the leadership, decisive action was taken by the Senate this afternoon. All of ns interested in this issue should recognize the strong position our leaders took. Because of their efforts and initiatives, this legislation is now moving toward final passage, and all of ns are in their debt. It is a tribute to the Senate's bipartisan leadership that we are about to see final Senate action on a bill that may well become the high water mark in the legislative record of the 93d Congress, and a landmark reform that can bring honest elections to the people and integrity back to Government. OI_DER FOR RE( 0GNITION OF SENATOR ROTH ON THURSDAY Mr. ROBEI_T C. _YRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous c( _ent that on Thursday, after the rem_ rks of Mr. BmEN, the distinguished senic' Senator from Delaware (Mr. ROTH) _ recognized for not to exceed 15 minut ,s. The PRESIDIN( OFFICER. Without objection, it is so b _ered. _T TO ABOLISH THE H.R. 13542--A1_ POSITION O_ COMMISSIONER OF FISH AND 'WI _DLIFE Mr. ROBERT BYRD. Mr. President, I _tsk the Chair lay before the Senate a messagefrom t _'Houseof Representa- of not therein to exceedlimited 15 minutes, with statements to 5 minutes each. At the conclusion of the transaction of routine morning business, the Senate will resume consideration of the unfinished business, question atof that time will S.be 3044. on The the adoption the tires on H.R. 1354 ' The PRESIDN£ C)FFICER laid before the Senate H.R. ]3542, which was read twice by its title, a_ follows: H.R. 13542, an act_o abolish the position of Commlssloner of FiSh and Wildlife and for other pUrPoses. _ Mr. ROBERT C._BYRD. Mr. President, ! ask unanimous cdpsent for the immediate consideration of the bill. The OFFICER. Is there objection to the consideration of the bill? There being no the Senate proceeded to bill, which was ordered to a third was read the third time and CALL Mr. ROBERT C. Mr. Pl_sident, ! suggest the of a The PRESIDING clerk will call the roll. The second legislative clerk proceeded to call roll. Mr. ROBERT C. Mr. President, ! ask unanimous that the order for the quorum call _ _rescinded. The PRESIDING Without objection; it is so ORDER TINE MORROW Mr. ! ask u_a_t_ous O1_ ROUBUSINESS · TOthat after the nition of Senators on e a period for the ine morning business minutes, with stateed to 5 minutes each, _ OFr_ICEtt. Without wdered. , PR, _GRA1V[ Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, the Senate will convene at l0 a.m. tomorrow, After the two leaders or their designees have been recog_zized under the standlng m_der, the following Senators will be recognized, each for not to exceed 15 minutes, and in the order stated: Mr. METZENBALVIVI, MI'. ROBERT C. BYRD, Mr. B_DEN. At the conclusion of the orders aforementioned, there _qll be a period for the transaction of routine morning business amendment by Mr. DOLE, amendment No. 1127, on which there is a time limitation of 30 minutes, with the yeas and nays already having been ordered thereon, Therefore, there will be a yea-and-nay VOte on amendment No. 1127 at about 11:30 Upona.m.the disposition of the Dole amendment, the unfinished business will be laid aside temporarily, and the Senate will proceed to the consideration of the disaster relief bill, S. 3062, on which there is a time limitation of 2 hours, with a time limitation on any amendment thereto of 30 minutes, and with a time limitation on any debatable motion or appeal of 10 minutes, to be equally divided and controlled in accordance with the usual form. Yea-and-nay votes may occur on amendments to that bill, and undoubtedly there will be a yea-and-nay vote on the final passage thereof. Upon the disposition of the disaster relief bill, the Senate will resume consideratlon of the unfinished busing, S. 3044, and the pending question at that time will be on the adoption of the amendment by Mr. CLABE. Yea-and-nay votes' will occur on amendments to S. 3044, beginning with and subsequent to the disposition of the Clark amendment, and hopefully the Senate will complete action on that bill tomorrow. Mr. President, included in my statement of the program was the statement with regard to debatable motions and appeals, and I ask unanimous consent that the time related thereto as stated in the program be effectuated, S 5565 The PRESIDING OFi_ICER. objection, it is so ordered. Without TO 10 A.M. Mr. ROBERT* if there be no before with the stand In tomorrow. The motion 6:15 p.m., the tomorrow, 10 a.m. Executive Senate March The following the under the United S_ate6 Code tlon under the Title 10, United duty indicated and _'o be first Bobby M., The following She Regular Air c_ted, under the Title 10, United rank to be the Air Force: 2'0 BYRD. Mr. President, business to come move, in accordance that the Senate until 10 a.m. agreed to; and, at adjourned until April 10, 1974, at received by the rotc-. for appointment in , insection the grade 8284,indicated, Title 10, a vlew to deaigna.. of section 8067, fJode, to perfonm the. d_te o_ rank to be ' of the Air Force: (medical) Jones, for appointment in in the grades indlsection 8284, Code,of with ds_tes of by the Secretary of coZonel Bomar, W.F., 5 8--05-1947. Bossio, Jack Galileo Brand Fisher, Dorrald E. 1--22-0063. Frederick, Peter J., Hauer, Leslie Kahler, Harold,J.,508- 8-6441. Lamar,JamesL.,431 Madison, Thomas M 450-38-1953. NewBorn .225-2d-1053. Pitchford. 428-40-4878. s_ Swords, Trautman, Konrad _ _174-20-4904. Underwood, Paul G. Welch, Robert J. } . 455-03-7958. Wilburn, WoOdrow _o _e Abbot,t, Joseph C. Jr 142-28-9387. Alley, Gerald W., Atterberry, Edwin L., t51-46-0128 Barbay, 43 Berg, Klle Brunstrom, Atan L. Burer, Arthur W., Condon. James C., Daughtrey, Robert N. _6_ '._. 2666. Doughty, Daniel J, Downing, Donald W., Duart, David 066-24-4764. Elliot, Robert M. Gideon, Wlllard Greene, Charles E. Jr. Hatcher, David B. Hildebrand, Leland L. S91-36-0024. Jayroe, Junus s., Jensen, Jay Johnson, Richard E., _ _1-54-6696. Kerr, Everett Martin, John M., McKnight, Geoa'ge O., Means, WlUlam H. Jr. Morgan, Herschel S. Nagahiro, OdeU, Donald ]_. Pattlllo, Ralph Perkins, Olendon W. 4 Shattuck, _m_th, Rlcl_rd D stirm, Robert L., 465 S 5566 Vanburen, Waggoner, Wenaas CONGRESSIONAL O., 302-28-_4§8. 523-36-1180. 502-26-6882. Yulll, John H_ _ Wells, Ke n seth R. 535-41 _-9694. Wilson, Wi tiara W., 482_,6-80135. T( be secomi liez:tenamt MacDonal( , George D., 3_ 6-42--9491. II_T THE Brazelton Brenneman 304244"LL25' Brodak, John W, §A?S. Burns, Butler, William _ Cooper, Richard Davies, John O., i Flora, Fredrlc R., Ford, David E., Francis_ Richard i 448-40-976_, Gray, Hart, Thomas T., 266-§B*-2Q_. Hoffson, _rthur 462-62-_269. Hx_bbard 515-2S-80_9. Irwin, Robert H., ( Jeffrey, Robert D, Kramer. 442-42-1_1. Lane, Michael C., ', Lane, Mitchell S., Monlux, Harold D. Myers, Glenn L., It O'Donnell, Samuel Jr., 161-34-3'188, Peel, Robe_._ D., 412 Pollack Sigler, Gary R., Torkelson 502-4_34_. Venanzi. Gerald S., 85-67-_971. Wilson, Hal K. III, 12-30-4927_ '.Pobe _iez_ten_t Acosta, Hector M., 4 Anderson, John W, Baker, David E., Barrows, Henry C., Bales, Richard L. Bednarek 115-40--;992, Beens, Lynn R., Bennett. Jr,, 256-64-3857. Beutel Brunson Butcher, Jack M., 33 Callaghan, Peter A., Copack, Joseph ,320-42-7347. Craddcok, Randall, 441-445449. Cressey, Dennis C., Dart, Chart.es Dickens, _.qma Finn, William R., Fulton, Richard Galatt, 38-3597. Gatwood, Robin F, 240-62-4651. Geloneck, Terry Granger. Paul L., Halpin, Carter Richard C., Howell Hudson, Robert M., 51 Kennedy, Klomann, Thomas J., Keens, _109. Kroboth, Latelia, George F., Lewis, Martini, Mayall, William T., Miller, Morris, George W., Jr., i Ostermeyer, 263-q0--991_. Price, Larry D, Rusch, Seek, Brian J., Seuell, Johrt W., Sienlckl, Theodore Thomas Thomas, Robert Tucker, Timothy S., Vaughan, S_umuel R., Vavroch, D_ane Walker Wa_zel Charles Ward, Bria_ H., 466 The follow For tempera _lmander _;lon therefol Abeyta, All Acquilano, Adams, Da_ Adams, Sta Alberes, Pel All, Kennel Altsman, R/ Alvick, Roy Ammerman Anderson, Anderson, Anderson. Avlla, Phil Backer, Jot Banks, Otis NAif/_ edo Lionel k_:co Donald d Arthur _fcrd M. _ T., Jr. x O. aert James, J:_. _verett Hugh Turne_', Jr. ;ri William _arles Daniel )land B. F, M. _0rdon Bh'kner, Blwer, Robert Blatus Blume, Bobrlck, Boughton, Boyd, Grant Forrest Smeed James , Douglas A. Crow, CI D.. CostantJ l William Robert Michael, Jr. Daley, Cutliffe, Davies, Dar_ Bonnet Davis Davi_ Davis, Denny, Alvin yes K. James Derr Frederick Ronald D. Ill Dickens Devon Doak dph Joseph _ G. _rt O. nfier J. H. nk Edward Willard hard B_. 51tchell Jr. Donnell, Donnell Douglas, Downard :Drive,r, Drumm, _Duffield, Dutton, Dyer, Dyer, Ellswor_h Gnllforc[ Evere_t Francis, Ross FerrLg, Finley, Finney, Fischer, Flanagan, Flohr Florlo, ' Cabot W. Walter, III Gordon Burridge, Delmar Busch, Bush, Gregory _ Callan, James _ Carlisle t Keeler, Jr, Cart ;ith Castoz Cato_ Chop, Christopher_on, Churchill Churma Churchill Clancy, Robert ,Clark, George Clay, Henry Geo_ Jr. Clarke, Charles 1! Jr. Clements, Paul ]! ,Sqement, David Oolvin, John Bernhartli Combs Charles Colwell Oonklin, Dwight: Jr, F. Edwaxds, Eizen, Enderson, Ewin_, Rich Iqynn, Foley, Robert Forslund, Fox, Merle T. Frame, _'ankHn, Frederick, Bradshaw, :t P., Jr. Braun, John Jr. Braurdlch tam Everar_l Brenner, Marc Brooks Dewltt, Jr, A. R. Brownlee, s Law,on, Jr. Ek)ok, Cool: CUlt'S.e, _g..2mmed Na,,al l_._rve officers promotion to the grade et' the llne subject to quallfic_lprovided b _ law: Bell, Bell, Richard Ben/tam, Jar Bem_ett Berg, Peter Bergquist, Jo Bertinot Best, Walter Biggers, Biggs, Robert Billings, April 9, 1975 RECORD--SENATE Hans Elliott David Jr. Stuart a, Jr. E. Loeper Downing,. Brooks William Jr. William Alfred (_eor_ r Bruce I Edward Donald Sheldo_ j_. Gall TIT. Garrldo, C_arto:n (3ary, Gautsch Geriac;_ Gilbert, John Gilles G,lllis, Dana J. p. Jr. _ Joseph , Jr. 11 _lds_ein, Goodrich, Gore, Alfred M. German, Lanny ] Orapsy. Ronald t Gravel, Gray, Garold Gra Green, Robert Green, William Grettum, Griesscl O:rUllth Oroepler, (3'aderhm Donald . Jr. ! SENATE FLOOR DEBATES ON 33044 APRIL 10, 1974 April 10, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL MEET_IGS current interest scheduled North tn the Southern Region I,and 15th annual Central, Dallas. Institute for Landman, and elsewhere Permain Basin Petroleum Golden West, Odessa. meeting, Center, Ramada Inn ApriZ 1Z annual Wlchtta Annual meeting of Society entists, Hyatt Regency Hotel, Ap.rt_ 1-3 meeting, Convention AAPG-SEPM, del Rio Hotel, San S 5645 ApT_ in the region Marc_ 27-28 Gas i_ssoclation, annual Texas RECORD -- SENATE TTPCOMr_TG Hilton April of _endent meeting, Inn of She Professional Earth Scl-. ctos 6th annual Offshore Conference, AstrohaU, Houston.. WEEKLYOMPLETION SUMMARY Otherexploratory wells(including deeper*peel, shallower-pool, outpastor extensiol Newfieldwildcats Stateor district Northern Texas EasternTexas (59............... and6).. WestcoastTexas7B..... TexasPanhandle10..... Gas Dry Total Footage 0 0 I 0 5 0 26 9 I 4 2 6 2 il 1 10 2 26,859 10,941 41,(110 10,979 46,983 5,232 24 32 0 1 0 1 0 HewMexico Divisiontotal..... 2 Oil 004 All exploratory wells Year Footage to date Yearage Gas Dry 01 O 0 0 0 0 I O 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 I 6,(100 26,440 0 ............. 0 ............. 1 8,955 O.............. I 2 2 5 41,39g Anwellsdrilledfor oil or Stateor district Oil NorthernTexas9............... WestcoastTexas7B.......... TexasPanhandle10.......... WestTexas7C,8,SA.... EasternTexas NewMexiCo (southern (5 and6)......... toy ist_i'l)S-)Divisiontotal............ TRIBUTE TO B, )B ALLISON, 14 7 4 41 1 5 1 i_1 72 19 sPORTS V_RITEI_ Mr. FANNIN. .VIr. President, it was with great sorro_ that I learned of the death of one of Lmerica's finest, sports writers, Bob A1 ison of the Phoenix Gazette. He died last ]_ _day, April 5, after a year'long fight _ gainst leukemia. Bob Allison joil ed the Gazette in 1937, and he had beeI sports editor for the past quarter cent ary. Tens of thousands of Arizonans folk _ed his columns as our area was transfoi'med from a State in which high schoo football was the biggest sports event nto a'center of major sports activity nparable any place in this cci_ _tion. His skU1 was rE :ognized 1964 when he wa of the Year" by t I of Sportswriters Mr. President, had many fans America. I ask ur. articles from the zona Republic great newsman There being with almost natiofially in named "Sportswriter e National AssOCiation nd Sportcasters. know that Bob Allison nd admirers all over animous consent that ]azette and The Art- p ,ying tribute to the be ._rinted in the RECORD. no abjection, the articles were ordered to be )rinted in the RECORD, as follows: [From the Phoeni: Gazette, Apr. 6, 1974] BOB ALL][SON, GAIn_'-_i:_;SPORTS EDITOR, DInS Robert B. "Bob" _lllson, who Joined The Phoenix Gazette ir 1937 as a combination news and sports wr] er, and served the newspaper more than , years as sports editor, died yesterday at G _od Samaritan Hospital. _, _ \ Dry Total Footage Yearto date 10 15 _5 2 25 24 9 61 ? 7 71,106 71,551 61,231 345,105 32,6(17 24,7(16 159 218 96 593 115 74 42 133 606,306 Allison, a iV_s_ native, had been suffering from leukemia_ last spring. He was 57. He was perha] best known through his column, "Alon re _ the last edition of which tn Tuesday's Gazette. He was named E _ of The Gazette In _ ,utatlon for fairness and1947, clarityand "Along The Way" one of _ respected columns in the state. The direct eau was listed as a c_rebral Eugene C. .'r of The Gazette and The said of Aliison: "Bob was Art on Gna of the men in the Gazette al Republic "Almost any go be said about a man coul_ be s Allison. "He was a sweet always was enjoy, by his fellow He knew sports a_ few writers dld to write about thegn. And the readers Gazette loved and _ppreclated what he . "Bob Allison we_a man of great c¢ He battled his f_al illness wlth the great spirit he sho_ved as a combat sole World War II, a_d a strongly competitive sports editor. ! "It ts a heart b_eaklng experience to have to say good-bye t_ such a great friend and loyal associate." ! Allison was na_ed "Sportswriter of the Year" in 1964 by t_e National Association of Sportswriters and _portscasters. ' Hls Gazette assignments, wide-ranging and varied, included _ch major sports assignments as the Indt_napolis Championships, 500, the U.S. and U.S. Amateur]Gold World Series, heavyweight championship lng, and major bas_ball, backetball and ball events. ! Allison Was graduated from' Mesa School in 1933 anal attended Arizona Teachers College [now Arizona State Open the boXfootHigh State lint- 1,255 ago 39 42 88 17 84 3(1 33 19 I_ 14 I17 _1) 300 193 Stratand service--Yearto date 119 19 159 15 57 I 459 23 159................ 4 100 1,053 62 Allwelts-Yearto deta 178 233 97 616 119 74 1,317 verstty) he became editor of the college the predecessor of the State Press. In 1938, became editor of the Flagstaff Journal following year, he returned to the area, and joined The Gazette as a sportswriter _ rider .,;ports editor Larry Grill. World War interrupted his sports career. Allison U.S. Army in January 1944 and served combat wlth the 86th Infantry Dlvlslon Europe until the Germans surrendered, i unit wire then reassigned as occupational in theas Philippines. was honorably a staff sergeantHe in 1946. He Gazette and was named sports editor following year. He was a charter member and past president of Phoenix Press Box Assoctatton, a of the Journalism fraternity, Sigma Delta a charter member of the Phoenix Club, a director of Golf Writers of a member of the Football Writers and_a charter member Ot the Golf Hall of Fame. He resided his family at 2341 W. Keln include his wife, Mary; a Samueh,_; stepchildren, John Ann Emmons; a brother, grandchildren. ....... Phoenix Gazette] Joe Gtlmarttn) THOUGHT said Bob. Allison was such a nice _IIf I heard _ once, I heard it a thousand times. _k And every t]_, It seemed to irritate me a little bit n)or_ untU finally I almost wanted to scream. "He's not a n_ce m_n, dammitl He's a great 469' S 5646 CONGRESSIO1N!AL man. One ever met." of the reate_ newspapermen l: But I never did. Of course, I me_ to tell him, In fact, as he fought the uni ;htable fight the last few months, Z ,even _ eked out the exact day I was going to tel him what ][ thought. It was called tomorro_ z. Wn_RE _LSE? Friday ew;nlng w aen managing edt:tor Alan Meyer called to te . me tomorrow has been canceled, I cried. _ cried hard. I can't ever rer_ ;tuber a time when I've felt sorrier for mys_ f. Today, as I sit 1_ re in what has ti) be the emptiest rocm_full, f desks, _ypew.riters, telephones, file cabt_ _ts, waste baskets, and Junk that ever th re was, I'm st_ll feeling sorry for myself, Where el.._ am going to find _;omeone _lth his ability ti Judge news and people ·.. his knowledge ¢ _ writhing.., his patience with my p_:uliarlt _s . . . his willingness to do the office drud _ so that I and others would be free ) concen_ate on the When Allison like a club. Rathe_ head with needed it, he just ever you it. And he had the p got smart enough $_ We had perhaps agreements in 13 ye was right axil I wa_ In each case, he needed to find it o l_okmaaJ_r._osttwc For a piece about to have an awful lo hoping that in sba: than kept hit you over the it handy for when- ttenee to wait until you realize you did need dr. _our or five major disrs, and, in each case, he wrong. ;ave me all the time I ;t. (And in one ease, it years.) _Prr_vil Bob, this column seems about me, but I'm Just lng some of the things he meant to me, I c n make yeu understand that he was so muc more than Just a nice man. Bob left .';o muc] of himself with each member of the staff that the ca,real reader mayBut notwe realize he's one. will. If I could have back, It would be ti call canceled, If I could give one be: If you ha?e sore, been meanhxg to te don'twait, And if I were aske¢ Bob Allison, lit would He Gave At The Off And gave, and gay the Arizona Boa ALL_ It was no secret leagues, friends and munity that death _ _e day of my own life tomorrow tlhat of excellence sportswriters and skills of SPECIAL Mr. _epublic, Apr. 7, 1974] )i_'S LEGACY ) Bob Allison, his colal)st of the sports cornas near every precious ,and came Fridi fight If against Bob Allison ]eukemii c_ eulogy, he would ha_ bered for the personal he instilled In young their journalistic tra_ 4'70 ending a year-long fid have dictated a _ asked 9o be rememand professional pride _raftsmen who ]earned from hm_ to a genera%Ion of are in the mcmorle_ ts fo: yea:rs to come. COZ_FEi_ ENCE :EHE G'URNF_. April ON i INF_'_GY THE EV_'_ CRISIS i_ c. President, ! eli' would 1. Tourism (_an economy is as imp )rtm_t to the Amelq-, and th Art ericfm people as industry. Beck.use of this, as I at the ourism Subcommit;- any other ;Manounced tee hearings, this Tourism was called 3, 1974, in Orlando, ajor Conference o:n o take place on May' 'qa. Tourist-oriented. industries througho .t Florida and other intere,_ted States, as well as representa-, /;ives of the execu;ive and legislative branches of Goverz.ment, will partici-, pate ill the Conferelq :e. The purpose of veloped The which bility dations _tions which can bs _t at the national _ mitical effects of the tourism indus_asis given to States ]h :aave highly de_ will be charge of developing and suggest: and State implemental The urgent need be readily 'undel look at thc, tour with the respormi_ pe(:ific recommen,ns to _ delivered o?ficials for subion ] )r this conferenc,_ ;co:ed by tarAng a _m industry: In 1972 the tourist L ir:dustry contrib_:kted approximately _61 billion to thc U.S. economy and p 'o_qded direct enlployment to approxJ ha;ely 1.6 111illio]:1 Z_nericans. In Florida, tourism is one of the larg.,. est single indc_tries, accounting for 15 Percent of the State; t_)tal gross Stat,_ product--OSP--in ic73. The ener_._ crisis has hit this inc ustry harder that,, ally other. Thc tourism attributable to the e_ l;ercent for Florida d_ March alone, The lifting o:[ the Iv barge does not repre _ecline April directly _r_:y ring crisis was the month iddle ent a East oil ,solution em.. tc. 19 74 rlsis. We _hould indeed take advantage of the q _lified relief due to the li ftin_l of the ex barge to plan now for f utur,E_emergencl .'s. Anyone desiri_ g to participate in the SpeciEd Conferex _e on the Effects of the ]_,_rlergy Crisis on rourism should contact llly office, 5107 Dirksen Senate Office Eluilding, Washi]igton, D.C. 20510. Without objec ;ion, I ask that the program for the Ci reference be printed in t/he lq'_CORDfollo wing this statement. There being nc objection, the program was ordered to b printed in the RECORD, as follows: PaOORa_: SPECIAL CONFERENCE O1_ TIlE EFFEC_ OF TiIE Elq ERGY CRIS_S ON _'O_RI_S'S_ Cf:_iday, May ::. 1974---GoldKeyInn0 Orlando, Fla.) 9:30 a.m. Coffee, Foyer of Inn. 10:1i5 a.m. Welc ,me, U.S. Senator Ed'_trney, 1V_aln Confers _ee Room. 10:25 a.m. Welc _me. Federal Energy Office Deputy Admtnlst_ _tor John Sawhill. 10:80 a.m. Grot Discussions: Hotels and l_._otel; Restauran Chamh, ers of C( Carriers and Age: Sales. 12:oo noon. Lun 1:30, p.m. Dlscu: (]Finalization of R 3:00 p.m. Oral Chairmen to Sena_ minlstrator Sawhl 4:00 p.m. Rema trator John Sawhi 4:30 p.m. Rema Ed Gurney. 5:00 p.m. End of CONCLUS] Attractions; 'Camping; _merce. Transport_91on: ts; Retail and Wholesale heon Break. _lon Group Work i_ess/ma_ commendations). Presentations of Orol_ )r Gurney and Deputy Ad[. ks, PEG Deputy AdminisL. ks, United States Sen_,tor _onferenee. DN OF B ISINESS MORNING The PRESI[ lNG OFFICER ASOUI_EZ'K). The period for the action now of routh ; morning (i_r.. trans- business is concludeq_ _l _DE:_tAL ACT · ELECTION AMENDMENTS The :PRESIDING previous order, the sume consideration CAMPAIGN OF 1974 OFFICER. Under the Senate will now reof the unfinished business, S. 3044, which the clerk wll state. The legislative clerk read as follows: s. 30_4, to amend the Federal Election Campa gn Act of 1971 to provide for public financl_xg of primary and general election campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of la_ relating to the financing and conduct of such campaigns. The Senate resumed tion of the bill. The: PRESIDING pendir!g question anlendment of the sas ( }_r. DOLE) clerk _'illstate. the considera- OFFICER. The is on agreeing Senator NO. 1127 to the from which Kan- the The legislative clerk read as follows: Ame_dment No. 1127, proposed by the Senator from Kansas (Mr. DOLE), in the nature of a substitute. The 15 of 10, thmsc, confer- tourist indu_ _rie _. conference _ 11 be composed of tourist-relate i_dustry groups sequent can brief spec,iai 1 _is ence is to delineate i taken by Governmf level to diminish t_. the energy cri3is' on try, with special emp such as Florida, wh day. But to read his co' nnn, to see him at the Phoenix Gazette's s errs desk dashing off headlines and banter ag with his young staff, Bob Allison's terribl_ )ersonal-burden never showed, the friend, the craft_,i;._ ml:_ed. But the ma_k he ga will er Journali ...... to Federal for ears in Phoenix. _ders in Arizona wel_ [on (,f admirers. Sporl_J country voted hin:_ ,rear" in 1964. arou:xd Bob in a bus:_-. ling hy deadlines kne_' who pitched in 9o hax_., rudgt ry of a copy desk, .ts office away from the wher_ Bob Allison hun_: be,at a typewriter ne_?_' tx) report to ti e Ccngress concerE,J.ng final arrangemmts for the Specil_] Confe:cence on the _ffecbs of the Energy Crisis on Tourism which hits been al'ranged in conjunct on with the touris_.s hearings held by tl _ Sfnate Commerce Committee Sll]3eon mitlee on Foreig_ Commerce and To' risnl On March 2§ seven to write an eptt_ph )e: :e, and gave . . . --- Bcb to like 2Vioyer's )tece of advtoe, it would thing important you've somebody important, lght have given up, rength and courage favorite for over 25 Colleagues and r4 only part of a large h ,sditor.,_ around th, '_Spertswriter of the ThoE_ who worked :ness made more gru ]him as a gentle ]eade die his share of the , A spanking ne_ prlv ]hurried pace was not his hat. lite chose to ihis team. Bob Allison t_.e ma: man---will be gr_ev0u., _ECTS OF TOITI_ISM A )w _'u,_ Technically, Bok was the boss, but in truth, he wasn't t_ Tibly good at bossing. Yet, in a field _here unsetftshness and loyalty often are s _othered by inst:incts (3/ self preserw_tion, t.e built the m_t loyal and unselfis]h sport,, staff I've ew;r seen. In the 13 years I've been here, nobody ever went away ma, . All this he did not by being boss, but by being Bob. He didn't use his :nowledge and expertise Death nlen the be at llls typewritel ,rodu, finghLm _reezy, new_y sports columns whi, a made a readl_; "glamor".... Where else? [From other found RECOFD -- SENATE PRESIDING OFFICER. Time on this amendment is limited to 30 minutes, to be equally divided and controlled by the Se]:mtor from Kansas (Mr. DOLE) and the Senator from Nevada (Mr. CANNON), with the Senator from New Hampshire, April 10, 19 7_ CONGRESSIONAL (Mr. COTTON) being guaranteed 5 rainutes of that time. Who yields time? Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, ! yield such time as ! may require, As I indicated yesterday afternoon, we have gone full circle with public financlng. At the outset, the promotors and the sponsors of public financing were, in el' fect, suggesting that we had to go to public financing to purify the poltical process, that those of us in politics must accept public funds in order to purify the political process, that for some reason, private contributions---even though they would require disclosure, even thoughwe .might set a spending ceiling, even though we would have strict reporting requirements--would lead to the suspicion that those who accepted private contributions, from whatever sources, were suspect, perhaps cof-ruptible, or corrupt, However, in the course of debate, we have seen a transformation. We now axe asked to vote on the measure, unless there is significant change, to provide a mix-that is, some public financing and sonde private financing. As I stated yesterday, it does appear that the original intent of the sponsors has been forgotten. We now hear speeches and statements from the sponsors of pub1lc financing suggesting that perhaps partly private and partly public money is all right, for some reason, Mr. President, if, in fact, there is this great concern about the need for purifytng the political process for those of us in politics, those who contribute, those who work in campaigns, or those who make contributions in kind, then in my opinion it should be one way or the other. There should be either total public financing, or there should be total private financing with adequate safeguards to make certain--as certain as we can--that there will not be these abuses which have been referred to over and over and over again, based on Watergate and based on elections before 1972. My substitute campalgn.._[Qrm proposal woul d omit public fin_ing, but -'it does provide reform. It does'provide, in essence, what the Senate provided last year in passing S. 372 which is still awaiting action on the House side. In addition, it has new provisions. It has an annual limitation on contributions of $3,000 for individuals and organizations. It has a limit on cash contributions of $50. It addresses itself to the problem of so,called campaign "dirty tricks." There is a prohibition and penalty for violating the provisions of that section. It does, as the other bills do, provide for certain changes in the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 with reference to reporting, disclosure, and registration of candidates and committees. It establishes a nonpartisan Federal Election Commission and provides assistance to the States to promote compliance with the work of that commission, It deals with disclosure of financial fnterests--disclosure by Federal employees, and it covers the President, the Vice President, Members of Congress, candidates for Federal office, and any- RECORD -- SENATE one in OS-16 or above, or anyone paid over $25,000 a year. It provides additional incentives for small contributors by doubling the tax credit for contributions to $25 and the deduction to $100; and of course that would be doubled to $50 and $200 for a joint return. It deals with gift tax treatment of political contributions. It deals with the length of Presidential and congressional campaigns by requiring that Presidential primaries should not be held before May 1 and that congressional primaries not take place before the first Tuesday in August. In essence it provides the reform we have been discussing since last year. It seems to the Senator from Kansas that since we have created the Watergate Committee and the taxpayers have poured out millions and millions of dollars in expenditures for the Watergate Committee that we are acting prematurely in the case of the bill before us. The hearings started on May 12, 1972, as I recall; and we were _ohl at that time by the distinguished Senator from North Carolina (Mr. ERVXN) and the distingulshed Senator from Tennessee (Mr. BAKSR) that after the hearings were conducted, certain legislative recommendations would be made, if necessary to clean up the political process. That report is not due to be. filed until late May of this year. There have been no recommendations at all from the Watergate Committee. Now, there appears to be some rush toward a judgment in the Senate of the United States. We all voted to create this committee, to look into political excesses and abuses and to recommend what~we might do to correct those excesses and abuses. Now we find ourselves, perhaps based on the emotion of the moment, trying to pass legislation which permits the Mmebers of Congrss to dip into the Federal Treasm7 for the total cost or partial cost of their campaigns, It is my belief that the American people have yet to fully understand the iraplications of "public financing." I suggest that this is just a foot in the door. I suggest that the last minute efforts yesterday by sponsors of total public financing to water it down, to reduce the size of public financing, really demonstrated their lack of commitment to public financing---or perhaps their awareness that the American people are beginning to understand the impact of public financing because of publicity it may have received during the past 2 or 3 weeks. It occurs to the junior Senator from Kansas that the American people are concerned about a great many things and the financial concerns of poiiticians are not high on their list. We addressed ourselves for about 7 days this year to whether or not we should have a pay raise. Now we are in the third week of addressing ourselves---and taking almost every minute of every day--to whether or not the Senator from I{_ansas and others should have their campaigns paid for out of the public Treasury. ! do not believe this is of any great interest to the American people. They want to purify the political process; but in doing that, ! S 5647 do not believe they ever expected the Federal Government to give every candidate for public office, for the House of Representatives or for the Senate, a blank check on the Federal Treasury. Mr. President, an historian of America's legislative process might have foreseen a fairly sizable reaction to the spectacular political revelations of the past year or so. After all, the Sherman Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the Social Security Act, and a number of other important l_ws were sparked by major events or trends in our Nation's 200 years of development. But ! question whether anyone could have predicted the direction that has been taken by many in Congress and numerous other observers in reaction to the bizarre and disturbing scandals which have recently swept Washington. WATraaATE COMMri'TEECREATED As the Senate wi)l remember, its first response--and I believe an appropriate one--to the initial revelations of Watergate was the passage of Senate Res01ution 60 establishing the Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities.. .This committee was clearly and specifically charged "to conduct an lnvestigation" and "to determine whether in its judgment byanytheoccurrences be) revealed investigationwhich and may study indicate the necessity or desirability of the enactment of new congressional leg-. islation to safeguard the electoral process." As every Senator knows this commit-. tee has devoted hundreds, l_erhaps thou-. sands, of hours and several million dol-. lars to fulfilling its mandate, and a,'; every Senator should know the leadership of the select cmnmittee has been mindful of this legislative aspect of it_; responsibilities from the outset. The opening statements of Senators ERVIN and BAKER on thecommittee's first day of hearings on May 17, 1973, are explicit in this reg'_rd. senator ERVIN. Of necessity the commit.tee's reflect ment report of thewillcomm itteotheonconsidered whatever Judg.new legislation Is needed to help safeguard the electoral process... Senator BAKER.This committee was created by the Senate to . . . find as many of the facts, the circumstances and the relation.ships as we could, to assemble those facts into a coherent and Intelligible presentation and to make recommendations to the Congress for any changes in statute law or the basic charter document of the United States that may seem indicated. When Senate Resolution 60 was con.sidered, there were :many strong and ringing statements in the Senate to the effect that a deliberate; thorough and unemotional investigation of Watergate was the appropriate and proper response for Congress to make in the face of the apparent abuses and illegalities which had been revealed to that point. The resolution was passed, the committee was created, and substantial sums haw_ been provided for its work. Of course, the ([ate for submission of the committee's report has been ex.tended beyond the original February 28, 1974, date. But the reason for this exten.- 471 S, 5648 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SEN!ATE sion is the massive job of the committee, hung on it, it boris down to basic el*:,-.. not procrastination or unreasonably dements that can be describod primarily in lay on its part. And the Senator from terms of the substant!ve c_iminat taw.. Kansas has heard t_o suggestion that deThis is what 'the indictments, tvia{s, a:t_d lay in submissima of this report would in grand jury proceedingg are alt about, any way detract from the value of its And as far as I can tell, the prosecute,rs legislative recommendationm ,have had no trouble in matching tit;lc _CTION_,ITI-IoqTrEXpEZTS'RECOi_/[ME]gDATIOlqS 18'S provisions to the conduct that _s_,; So why :-_xould the Senate---after charcome under their scruti:_y, teripg a new committee and expending _n::_XONSn_ TAX_SFOR S_MrZR sT_C_,'_ millions ofthetaxpayers'dollars to make But what has been done? Without. its legislative recommendations as thorwaiting for the recom_.aendations of :.l;s ough and complete as possible--now pass own expert committee _,nd in the face of a bill to deal with these matter,5 before criminal conduct which h_d no real re]s-. the select committee even has sm. opportion to campa.ign finances, an apparent tunity to file its report? This is clearly majority in the Senate is proposing to illogical, it makes no-sense as a matter spend milliot_s upon millions of t'.:Je of sound legislative procedure, and inAmerican people's tax dollars on care-. creases the danger that we will take paign, bumper sticker,'., buttons, tolemistaken or ineffective action, vision spots, newsp_.per ads, and If we are going to pass legislation billboards. without the benefit of our committees' These expen.ditures of tax doll.ars would, recommendations, why bother having be made on behalf of candidates w]lm, committees at all? Why not just save a seek 435 seat,'; in Con_'ess, 100 seats l:a lot of money and have the Senate sit as the Senate and the offLces of Preside_st a eommitb_ of the whole and hold hearand Vice President. ings and mark up bills and perform ail Multiply that by two or ]more parties the other jobs of our committee ,,_stem? in every race, primaries, run_)ffs and gertmmr TO "DO so_ETnn_G" eraJ elections, and you are talking abo/_t Of course, the immediate American a lot of bumper stickerm Axed it mounts reaction to any spectacular development up t_) a sizab!e sum of those tax dollars is to "do something." Whether that dethat are so important h, every citizen as velopment is Sputnik, a missfie gap, an April 15 approaches eac a year. energy crisis or whatever, the American For examph;, in Kansas alone a Senate people and especially Congress seem to race with Democratic and Republic_t_n consider immediate action, the necessary primaries couZ:.dhave a .taxpayers' priceand essential response, tag oil more tl_an $1 million. And adding That such action is not always rethe cost of five congres_ion_d races, y(,'_l qulred is a secondary consideration. And quicldy reach a cost of more than $2 milthis point was clearly illustrated by the lion for a non-Presidential election year. fact that the energy crisis came and went without any help from Congress a month or two back. But that is another whole story that we do not want to become tie_ down to today. I cite it, though, as evidence that pure "action" is not always m_essary to solve a crisis, Sometimes, however, events do point to clear requirements for consented elforts. The abuses engaged in by monop-. Plies cried out for the responses of the Sherman Act. Violence, disruption, and death in disputes between labor and industry were-unavoidable signals for onactment of the NRLA. There are count-. less examples of this uniquely American propensity and capability for responding to situations with sound, sensible, and highly beneficial legislation being placed on the statute books. And these political scandals may eventually prove to be such a case. wu_ _E W_ con_a _r_ W_E_E? But a look at the current trend of events in the Senate today gives rise to a real concern as to whether we 'will see such a result in the wake of what has become known by the shorthand term "Watergate." If this mass of unfortunate and deplorable happenings is held lip against the "action" that is being generated in response to, it, the American people must begin to wonder what imgoing on. Of course, "Watergate" has come to mean ma_g things to many people. But looking beyond the emotions, rhetoric, and other trapping._ that have been 472 April 1 O, 19 74 As far as I know we still subscribe to the l':,:ee enterprise system in this country. And a basic element of this system is the (fid saying that if you build a better motumtrap the world will beat a path to your door. I do not recall anything in the free enterprise ethic that mentions Government beating a path to your door with handouts merely if you want to build a better mousetrap. So why should there be any difference between mousetrap makers, shoe salesmen, lawyers--or politiciat::s? Wi_h a few notable exceptions, we have gotten along pretty well with this philosophy in. America. Newcomers have entered their chosen fields and found ,'mccess or failure on the strength or weakness of what they had to offer. ! see no reason for changing now. So far, no ()ne has made even a convincing ease to me tlxat giving away Federal tax dollars to help politicians buy bumper stickers will ,_ccomplish anything for the genoral good. It :might make it easier for lazy people to ge'l; into politics. After ail, if you did .not have to seek out financial support, it would make campaigning a lot less strenuous. And it would save a lot of polith_'al stomachs from fUndraiser over(loses of cold roast chicken and creamed peas. But politics does not need lazy people. It needs men and women who wfil go to the public, sell their ideas and programs and who will work to attract public support .:)f all kinds for their campaigns. And politics needs commitment and ps:rticipation the people---with time, With i:.heirby efforts and with theirtheir finances PUBLICFI:[qAlqCING ZSNOTREFOF,_[ given to the candidates who earn their The pending legislation is the so-e.aJJ_i_¢l support. Public Financing bill. A better name might be the Pollticim:_ There is much that' can be done t,o Subsidy Act..'.it has been the subject pi encourage more people to give to the long and heated debate both in and out candidates and parties of their choice. of the Senate, on and off of '_he "Today" SI'ax deductions and credits for small conshow. And the end is not yet in sight, tribul:ions are particularly appropriate since a motion to close debate fal.led cn and a sensible means of accomplishing Thursday. this most desirable goal. I supported enactmeni of the landmark X_rrF_C_XVERr_:r_ 1971 Federal Election Campe_ign Act ar_(l Public financing is also objectionable, the amendments to it v,hich passed the because it is an ineffective remedy for Senate last yea:r, so I fed that I speak _s t/be ills of W_tergate. In fact every pubone who is committed ';o campaign rl!_-, lic financing feature that is before the :form. But I csrmot give my support to a Senate today could have been in force '.proposal merely because some would la.- for 5 years, and still the Democrats' be1 it as "refor:m." And this is my positior_ headquarters would have been bugged, on public financing. F,11sburg's psychiatrist's office would have Basically, my objections fall into two been burglarized, coverups would have general areas: Concerns as tx)public pol.., been attempted, lies would have been :icy and the requlremenls of the Const'..... told---and OzuaL_) Foss would still be tution. Vice ]?resident of the United States. Lq the area c.f public policy, I am forced. Public financing is simply not a soluto the conclusion that public financing :i_ tigon :for human stupidity, lndividmd unnecessary, ineffective, and fundamencrimirmlity, or personal _eed. Perhaps _ally dangerous_ _)me might have felt better about the lYNNECESSARY ,,'rEPS Watergate mess if the hundred dollar Public financing is nnnecessa_ be-, bills that were floating around had come cause, regardless of all t_ e crocodile tears from the U.S. Treasury instead of a on Capitol Hill, there is money to support l_.(exican bank. But I do not see how it the political ;_ystem---cl eanly, honestly would have made much difference to the and ,,mfficiently--without milking the overal), outcome of the affair or to the Federal Treasury. The campaigns _ c_f criminal charges in question. ]Ba_s¥ GOLDWATERin lI_8 and Gw.o_a_ Other proposals have been made with ].VlcGovE_ in 1972 are tlae best evidence regar(1 to specific criminaI code changes, available that small contributors can be mxd I support many of them and believe tapped---even against hopeless odds---t,s they are responsive to some of the prob.,,rapport major oampaigns, lems which do exist in politics. [Apr// 10, 19 74 _,-m_o_s CONGRESSIONAL Z_P,-,CATZO_S I do not believe RECORD-these questions SENATE can be A third point of objection I have to the policy of public financing is the danger it poses to the political system. Admittedly, there are inequities in the present state of affairs. Incumbents may have excessive advantages--both official and unofficial. Wealthy individuals and their families may be able to unfairly outspend an opponent in a campaign, Big business, labor and any number of special interest groups may be able to pump too much cash into the campaigns of their friends, and television, news magazines, and syndicated columnists may have too much influence over the information conveyed about candidates and their activities, But is an artificial one-candidato, onedollar formula of equality among candidates really an improvement over what we have today? I do not believe so. When everybody gets the same amount ignored as public financing is viewed in a constitutional perspective, Of course, the entire area of campaign reform treads on some very thin ice in regard to the Bill of Rights. Contribution limits, spending restrictions, even disclosure requirements, call in to play some basic principles of our Constitution which should be examined closely. But foremost among all of these concerns I would rank public financing, for how can the Government force a person to support the advocacy of views in the political arena which may be contrary to his economic and social interests or totally abhorrent to his most basic religious, ethical, or personal beliefs? REFORM SHOULD aE PaESSrO Let me say, however, that, as I have indicated, there are areas of campaign reform that should be pressed, Tax incentives for small contributors of money, when everybody can only spend the same--what stresses will be put on the system as people jockey for new advantages? Will it mea n that the wealthy indtvidual will quLt his job 2 or 3 years is one point. Stiffer criminal sanctions for voting fraud and so-called dirty tricks is another, Overall, though, I believe the basic premises of the 1971 Campaign Act are still valid and should be maintained. Full ahead of the election, so an elaborate "non-political" publicity campaign can gain the exposure required for a successful race? If so, where does this leave an equally or better qualified man, say a young lawyer with a wife and family to support, who also might want to throw his hat in the ring? How could he hope to compete against such an opponent on an equal dollar basis after a headstart like that? As financial equality was imposed would we see more newscasters, astronauts, football players; and TV stars suddenly cashing in on their fame to become politicianS? And what about incumbents under load with lng of the our American basic rightspeople as free of citizens. tamperIn this regard, I invite the Senate's attention to a recent Rcader's Digest article by one of our most distinguished and respected former colleagues, Senator John Williams of Delaware. In a few brief pages Senator Williams, in the manner which characterized his great service to the Senate, se_- forth the basic requirements for constructive and effective campaign reform, I ask unanimous consent that the text orifice from June to November every election year, but then what would prevent NBC from broadcasting the sounds they made trying to get out? I dO not mean to be facetious, but this whole concept of forced equality in the political arena is a source of grave con- of at cern to me. _O_D _OLr_C_ ACTZVrfT Looking at the constitutional side, is public financing not a form of forced politica! activity which treads upon the first amendment's rights? It is one thing to require a person to (By John J. Williams) 1%Will probably be a long time before we can fully assess the impact of Watergate and related scandals .on American life. Indeed, at this point we cannot foresee what more may yet emerge from continuing investigations. But from the squalid evidence already visible, it is clear that political corruption in this country is not Just a moral problem, It is one that imperils the very survival of our democracy, There is, of course, no magic solution to the problem of corruption, and we should be wary of any political nostrum that purports to offer one. But the recent scandals do Illuminate one area where reforms are both essential and possible. For the reprehensible, clandestine political acts connected with Watergate were financed and made possible by an excess of campalgn donations, many of them secretly and illicitly obtained, Equally important, the flow of massive contrlbutions i_to both parties has created tho farmers want their taxes spentto elect a proponent of export quotas? How many parents would like to see their tax dollars put a probush_ candidate in the Senate? S 5649 among millions of Americans that the government af the United States can be To restore public confidence· in the lntegbought. rlty of government, we need to end the dependency of our candidates on special-interest contributions. This we can do to a sicnificant extent by Im,ducing the costs and Changing the methods of campaign financlng. I believe there are a number of reasonable steps that can be taken toward thi_, 1. Shorten the campaign. Political camgoal. palgns cost so much, in part, because they last so long. The custom of prolonged cam-. paignlng originated at a time when much of th_ country was sparsely .populated and[ a candidate had to travel by train or even on horseback for many months to com-. munlcate with made the obs,olete electorate. by the This Jettradi.. tlon has been air-. plane, television and other mass media. Yet our campaigns still drag on needlessly, con.. sumtng vast amounts of money and provid-. lng endless repetition. I recall Eisenhower once spoke that in myafter state President of Delaware, I com.. plimented him on his E;peech. "Well, Sena.. tor," he replied, "the fiJrst time I made that speech. I thought'it was pretty good. Tho next ten times I made tt, I thought it was okay. Now I've made it so many times I think it's terrible." I doubt that there is a politician alive who and detailed financial disclosure is the has not felt that way or who could not tel:t cornerstone of this approach. And cou- . the people all he knows and thinks in two or pled with effective contribution limits-three months. Thus, I believe that Congress which you will recall we have not really should fix a uniform, nationwide date for had yet--and with incentives for shorter the primaries and nominating conventloru_ and less costly campaigns, I believe the affecting all federal offices. By commencing American 15ecple can be provided with a the primary campaigns in early August, and much stronger and bgtter political systhe general-election campaigns in early Octo-. tern. And this can be accomplished withher, we would at onee sharply lower the cos_ out adding millions of dollars to the taxof politics. At the o_ samepolitical time, we would and lin.. prove the quality discourse such a system? How are you possibly golng to give some unknown first-time candidate equality with an incumbent Send~ tor or Congressman--or an incumbent President: Isuppose you could lock every Member of the Senate and House in his pay--through his taxes---for anytYdng, the paraphernalia and frivolities of polltics, which many men and women believe are wasteful and stupid. But what -of using a Catholic's tax dolto support a candidate who calls for unlimited abortion? What of taking a black man's taxes tdsupport an advocate of racial persecution? How many wheat impression his article be printed in the Rrcoav this point, There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the REcord, as follows: Arr_a WAT_RaATF.A PLA_ TO CONTaOr. CA1ViPAXGNBANKROLLj[]NfG heighten 2. Grant public lree television interest intimelt. an_ mailtniy rights. Candidates in the seven Congres.sional districts in and around Detrolt nsuaUy pay about $2000 for one minute of prime network television time. With costs in other metropolitan areas--New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia---even higher, it is not surprising that candidates for federal posts had to spend $32 million, for TV and $28 million for radio in 19_2. In urging free time for legitimate candidates, it is important to recognize that tolevision and radio sta-tions exist and make handsome profits because they have been given public property--namely, transmission channels, of which there are a limited .humher. So it seems to me only fair that the stations partially repay the public at election time by providing bona-.fide candidates with the means of free communication of theft political views. At the same time, the present law, which requires stations to give equal time to anyone claimin_ to be a candidate, whether he has any serious credentials or not, should be repealed. Congress should then promulgate criteria by which state-election officials can certify bona-fide candidates for national office. It should also stipulate bow much time sisttone must allot to them. This free access to broadcast media would greatly diminish what is often th e largest item in a campaign budget. The dependency of candidates on outsida contributions could be further lessened by allowing them to mail one or two polttlcat statements to all voters free of charge. Presently prevailing printing and mailing costs make such mailings prohibitive. Ii Senate candidate running in California would most likely need t0 spend at least $L1 million to reach every registered voter _t the state. In Ohio, the total would be xmca_ than $500,000; in New Jersey, $400,000;, t_t Georgia, $250,0D0. 473 S 5650 CONGRESSIONAL RJSCORD-- S_;NATE April 10, 1974 Incumbent Congressmen-and Senators are already permitted to make mass mailings of material that challengers promotes their "non-potlttcar' re-electloi_ efforts. By giving that are preclomlnantly Democratic or Re.publlcan, candtdatesoft:aele_s-favoredpa:ct_r would tax fundssup2)ort. vastly disproportlor_ ate to receive their popular Ill would in part: .4,1{1OW broadcast of debates between Inajor party candidate.,; _or all Federal limited mailing privileges, we would level the poiltlcal scales now tipped In favor of those in office. In Great Brltain, the practice of awarding candidates mailing privileges-and free television time---has proved bolla workable and effective, 3. Get bankrolling. Big Business and law Big has Laborlong out reco! poZitiea! The The federal-financing to impose a ceiling on pendttures by limiting date may spend and by donations to $i00. In scheme could easily lead paigns, with the layer federal of lng on another offices; ognized, In theory at least, that it, is wrong to allow corporations and unions to try to buy votes through political donations. As far back as 1907, Congress prohibited business contributions and unsecured loans by banks for political purposes, a ban that was reaffirmed byapplied laws enacted 1925 and 197].to Congress the samein prohibition dat_,_ themselves could :aot exceed speclfie_i limits, nothing would prevent so-cat]ed "public interest" organizations from m_;tng t4aetr own money to pr(,mote pollttclam_; of their choice. Nor court a wealthy ofli_2_ seeker be kept from prcmottng himself begoreAs heanofficially became to _[straight candidate. federal alternative fl_ xmions _n 1943 and and unload--as well parties--have flouted nanclng, I think we sh_nld adopt an first advocated, by President Kennedy. objective is to stimulate myriad small 1947. But corporations as both major political the intent of these proposal also seeks overall campatg[_ _:.v,o the amount a candYr,'stricting lndivkilnal lealltT, this sub_sJdi_ ';o even costlier c_Lm_ _;reasury While simply caI_d_-. ad.(t.. monet. Jtde;_ i['[_ con-. Place a $3.000 annual limit on all inand organization contributions; 1%estrict the amounts a wealthy candid,'-lte or his family could spend on a dividual calI_i0aign; Forbid cash contributions above $50; l_stablish a Federal election commlssion to supervise aU congressional and Presidential campaigns; Require full disclosure of every candidate's, officeholder's and high Federal t_mc:i, al's finances; Expand tax credits and deductions for smgi!], contributions; - S]:_orten the campaigns for Congress and the Presidency; Limit the use of the congressional franking privilege; and Establish strict penalties for voting fraud and campai_n "dirty tricks." This gives a broad outline of the leature_ of amendment No. 1127; but for a prohibitions with virtual Impunity. As of last December, for example, at least eight executives had publicly admitted that Shelf corporations made illegal contributions to the 1972 Nlxon campaign. But Democrats as well as Republicans have sharea in such political Dairy lobbyists in who $100,000 largess. to the Republicans 1969 gave aisc trib[ttions, which would leave candidates '_n _ obligated to ,, few big toners. Such stiz:ou_ lus could be provided by allowing taxpaTer_ a 50--percent '_ax credit ,m donations up _, say, $300. Thus, if a man earning $10,000 a:nd a roan earniug $100,00£ a year each con* trlbuted $300, the two _onld of tlhem woulda tax bc treated equally--each receive passed out hefty contributions to prominent Democrats In a position to influence Congressiena1 legislation affecting dairy Lt_terests. As for the unions, many, by a variety of measures, extract "voluntary contributions" from their members. These fixed "contrlbutions," regularly deducted from each mem.her's payclheck along with his dues, go into political funds controlled by union bosses. In rebate of $150 Shnultaneously, to discourage large c,_n_ trlbutions, Congress sho'_ld b.ar a c_andi¢t_te from receiving money _hrough more th_: one committ_,e and pr_.hibit anyone f_:om giving a canctidate mor,; than $3000---_:it_ stiff tax per, allies and Jail t,_rms for title,sc. caught cheating. Candidacies founded n:l>3y._ the spontaneous, truly v_luntary supper:l; o:_ the 1968 and 1972 elections, millions of rankand-fliers disagreed with the l_lltieal candi.dates subsidized by their donors. But they had no voice in the matter. Unions further aid favored candidates by financing "political education" and "voter registration" drives, Although nonpartisan in name, such cam.palgns are actually nitro-partisan because they are conducted only in those areas and among those voters known to favor the union leaders' candidates. Author Theodore icl. White notes that in 1968 unions registered 4.6 million voters, distributed ll§ million political leaflets, supplied 72,225 :house-to.. house canvassers, and on Election Day de.. ployed 94,500 volunteers for political pur... poses, To be .,iure, political activity--including genuinely voluntary _ contribution,s-should be encouraged among all citizens. :But Con-, gress should enact stringent new laws whlch effectively bar corporate and union contrlbu,, t_ons in an3[ form. many small contributors would be the _}¢,s_: Sec. 101. Campaign communications. likely to proc[ute the best political ret:_:.. T£TLE II--CR-MES RELATIN(_ TO ELECsentation for sJ[ the people. 5. En/oree tlte eampai7n-/_nding laws ]_:_ 2_[ONS AI_D POLITICAL ACTIVITIES properly enforced, extstl ag statutes are, bi!' Sec. ',2,01. Changes in detinltions. and large, adequate to deal with the individ.. Sec. ?.02. Expe,_dlture of personal and faroual instances of dishonestly tlmt will alwsy_ ily fu._ds for Federal campaign,s. be with ns. Thus, no new laws were ne_sSec. 203. Contributions to committees. sary during t_ae past tw3 years to succ_,_:s.. Sec. 204. Prohibition of contributions and fully prosecute former _0fce President Si>_ro expenditures by foreign lndlvidT. Agnew; Sen. Daniel Drowsier of l_.aryla_ad; uals. Representatiw_s Cornelius Gaillagher of _;'cw Sec. ?.05. Limitations on political contrlJersey and J.ohn Dowdy of Texas; _nd forLqel butlons; embezzlement or conIllinois Governor Otto Kerner. However, _oc. version of campaign funds; prooften, existing laws have not been en/orced hlbited acts. To provide lot enforcement of the reforrn.,: "Sec. 614. Limitations on contributions. that inevitably will be enact'ted, Congress.: "Sac. 615. Forms of contributions. should establish a feder_l-election co,mn:.is.. "Sec .616. Embezzlement or conversion of sion composed equally of Democrats and political contributions. Republicans. The assmance that futm'e "S_c. 617. Voting fraud. scandals will :oat be cov,_red up, no matter "Sec. 618. Prohibited campaign practices.". who ls involved, will oI itself help revlT_: TITLE III--CHANGES IN FEDERAL ELECpublic confidence. TION CAMPAIGN ACT OF 1971 4. Make smal_ contributors the backbone o! political financing. While reducing the costs of campaigns, we should endeavor to spread the legitimate costs that do remain, among as many citizens as possible. Teohnl-. cally, prese,nt law makes it illeg,_0 for anyone Watergate has damag_l th_ country, _md it would be ::'oolish to pretend otherwise, And beyond Watergate v'e see flaws, inads-quacies and ,multiplying problems :in m_my sectr_rs of our ;_>ciety. Bu';, for all its defe_:-i_, our democracy is still wcrth preserving s.r_d improving. Thus, It is v.tal l;hat the C_:,n.. gress begin now to cleanse ot_c politics ar d thereby our faith in the den'to... - to revLtalize cratic process. If the met. pre_,;ently in Congross do not act convincl:xg!y and effective'_i' .-. In the comingall months, th _nexercise at the polls November of us can the nex-_,; ol¢[.. Sec. Recognizing should not l_ecome beholden that to candidates a comparatively few large donors, Congress ls currently considerlng a proposal to have the federal govern- fashioned them with i_ec. ment finance campaigns for national office. Worthy as the aims of this pr_>posal are, I think such a plan is both undesirable and impractical.. For one thing, federal financing would make political partles um'esponslve to tho people. Guaranteed millions of dollars from the public treasury, a party could pursue extremist or outworn aims year after year simply because it would not have to go to the people for financial support. In areas Mr. DOLE. refornl measure and which has to givea donor a candidate ever, may r_umbers of_ local more than contribute committees How-. to$5000. unlimited established solely to funnel money to a candidate. big contributors continue to supply proportionate share of campaign funds. 474 Thus, a dis- American mer_ who re_mrse will. DOLE SUESTITUTE Senator from of replaclrg PROPOSAL The substitu_ campai_rt which I have authored been cosponsored by t_.,e Colorado (MI'. DOMINIC:I_) embodies my views on 5he proper direr:-, tion for the work starled ia 1971 to be contirlued. Alld in mo_t respects it ac-. cords with Senator Williams' recomme:il~ dattons. more detailed con,sent prin_ed There contents I_ECORD, T._TLE Sec. Sec. See. Sec. Sec. Sec. that in the picture, its I table RECORD ask of at this unanimous contents be point. b-:lng no objection, the table of was ordered to be printed in the aS J[01_0WS: I--CHANGES IN COMMITNICA-. TIONS ACT OF 1934 1_01. Changes in definitions for reporting and discIosure. 302. Registration of candidates and political committees. ',_03. Changes in reporting requirements. _!_04. Campaign advertisements. 305. Waiver of reporting requirements. _!_06. Contributions in the name of another. i:f07. Role of political party organization in Presidential campaigns; use of excess campaign funds; penalties. _._08.Applicable State laws. 'i['ITLE IV--FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION ,'Sec. 4{_1. Establishment of Federal Election Commission; central campaign committees; campaign depositmrtes; authorization of appropriations. Sec. 402. Indexing and publication of reports. _Sec. 403. Judicial review. sec. 404. Financial assistance to States to promote compliance. Sec. 4_i}5. Authorization of approprlatlone. April 1 O, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL TITLE V--DISCLOSURE OF I_IANCIAL XNTERESTS l_ec.501. Federal employee finaa_l disclosure requirements, T1TLE VI--RELATED IN'rE_NAL REVENUE CODE A_ Sec. 601. Increase in political contributions credit and deduction, see. 602. Repeal of existing provisions relatlng to PreGidential campaign financing. Sec. 603. Gift tax treatment of political contributions. TITL_- Vl_--_SCELL_m'EOUS PROVXSXONS Sec. 701. Pre_idontial preferenoe primary elections. . Sec. '/02. Congressional primaries, Sec. 703. Suspension of frank for mass mailLugsimmediately before elections, Sec. '/04. Prohibition of franked solicitations. Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I believe my amendment embodies a responsible and constructive approach to the job of campaignthat reform. Personally, I would prefer the Senate consider the Watergate Committee's report before acting in this area at all. However, if we must have action at this time, I feel we should build upon the basis of full disclosure and campaign costs limitations that was established in the 1971 act. My amendment is consistent with that act. It responds to the abuses and problems which were disclosed in the 1972 campaign and it avoids the pitfalls, uncertainties and dangers of such a radical experiment as tax-supported political campaigns, I am not putting it forward as a cornplete answer or the only possible answer to the problems we are facing. The cornmerits, criticisms, and suggestions for improvement from any Senator would be welcome. There may be oversights in its provisions and other Senators may feel it goes too far in some areas. But I believe my proposal would provide a basis for discussion and hopefully for agreemerit on the proper approach to be taken, It is offered in that spirit, and I would urge its favorable consideration by my coneagues, Mr. President, my proposal, the substitute, contains the repeal of the existlng tax return checkoff with respect to presidential campaigns. However, during the debate and discussion, it occurred to the Senator from Kansas that there is widespread acceptance for this idea of providing voluntary, national support for a truly national office. Therefore, I ask unanimous consent that my amendment No. 1127 be modified by striking section 602, or 502 as it was erroneously printed, on page 60, and renumbering the present section 603 as 602. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it isso ordered, Mr. DOLE. This does retain the volitnntary is appropriate. checkoff system, and I believe The PRESIDING O_'_'ICER. Will the Senator send the modification to the desk? Mx. DOLE. Yes. The modification is as follows: Strike section 602 on page 60 and tenureber the present section 603 as "602." Mr. DOLE. This substitute eliminates public financing and is campaign reform, RECORD-- SENATE S 5651 _ We have a clear choice, when the vote to have the people know. That is provided comes on this substitute, as to which in this substitute and I shall support the way we wish to proceed, substitute. l_r. President, I reserve the remainder The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senof my time. ator's 5 minutes have expired. I ask unanimous consent that the name Mr. COTTON. The 5 minutes I had of the distinguished Senator from Colowent by quickly. May I have a little more ratio (Mr. DOMINICK) be added as a co- time? sponsor of the amendment. Mr. DOLE. I have a minute and a hall The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without The Senator may have 1 minute of it. objection, it is so ordered. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under Mr. CO_I'rON. Mr. President, will the the rules, once cloture has been voted Senator yield? a Senator cannot yield his time to some Mr. DOLE. The Senator from New other Senator. Hampshire is allotted 5 minutes. Mr. COTTON. I have an hour of my Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I should own. I ask that it be taken out of that like to ask the Senator from Kansas to time. I do not want to crowd anyone else add my name as a cosponsor of the in thedebate. amendment. Mr. President, I ask unanimous con1Vfr.DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanlsent that I may be allowed to use 5 minmons consent that the name of the Senutes out of my hour, beyond the time ator from New Hampshire be added as a that was ordered by unanimous corment. cosponsor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection? Objection, it is so ordered. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I would Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I will try permit that 5 minutes to be charged to crowd into 5 minutes a few comments against my time on this particular on this bill. I felt it appropriate to do so amendment. when the substitute measure of the SenThe PRESIDING OFFICER. The rulator from Kansas was before the Senate. lng of the Chair is, if there is no objecDuring the time I served in the State tion to the use of 5 minutes of the Senlegislature of my State, we worked long ator's own hour on this amendment, that and hard to devise a corrupt practices will be ordered. However, it cannot be act that would be as effective and as aircharged against any other Senator's tight as we could bring about in the mattime, except by unanimous consent. ter of keeping campaigns clean and above Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, a parltaboard and in protecting the rights of mentary inquiry. those who are not heavily endowed with The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senthis world's goods to have an opportuator will state it. _ nity to run for office. During those years, Mr. CANNON. What I am trying to do I learned some practical lessons I have is this. We have a time limitation. I never forgotten, have so much time under the time limitaThere is no question whatever that we tion and the Senator from Kansas has want to do anything that is practica! and the other half of the time. I do not care reasonable and effective and in our power if the time is charged to me or not, but to satisfy the people of this country and I do have control of one-half of the time to keep our elective process as clean as in opposition to the amendment and I possible. But the matter of public/inanedesire to let the Senator have 5 minutes lng of political campaigns, in the opinion out of that time. of this Senator, who has completed 50 The PRESIDING OFFICER. The years of service--in the Sta_e legislature Chair would advise the Senator that the and various State offices, :including 28 parliamentary situation is that althougil years of service in Congress---is a very the Senator from Nevada has charge of impractical and ineffective approach; 12.5 minutes on this amendment, that and it is a wasteful and dangerous apcomes out of the Senator's I hour under proach. Despite the very obvious sinthe cloture rule. Five minutes of that 12.5 cerity of others--and I respect the opinminutes could be tra_Lsferred by unaniions of every Senator on this matter--I mous consent to the Senator from New am steadfastly against it. Hampshire and that additional 5 minutes I commend the Rules Committee, unwould then be charged to the Senator der the leadership of the distinguished from New Hampshire's I hour under cloSenator from Nevada and the distinture. guished Senator from Kentucky and Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, is it not others, for a job well done, considering proper for me to ask unanimous consent what they had to work with and what for 5 minutes or even 10 minutes from my many Members of the Senate seem to be own hour, and that it not be charged to demanding. They have come up with as the time allotted to this measure? reasonable a bill as possible. However, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes, it in the lastpurify analysis, the only way toclean efcan be done by unanhnous consent. fectively and keep elections is exposure. It cannot be done effectively Mr. COTTON. qmen I ask unanimotu_ any other way, in the opinion of this consent. Senator. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there We are hearing on every side--and we objection? Without objection, it is so are justly hearing on every side--about ordered. opening up so that the people may know. Mr. Co[IrON. Not more than I0 min-. Everybody wants to televise the proceedutes to be taken out of my hour and not ings on the floor of the Senate and in the charged to either the Senator from various committees, and they want the Nevada or the Senator from Kansas. people to know. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The The way to achieve pure elections is Chah' would ask: Does that mean an ad-. 475 S 5652 CONGRESSIONAL ditional 10 :minutes beyond the 5 minutes? Mr. COTI'ON. Yes, 10 additional mtnutes. The PRE.'3IDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered, Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, th'is is all I intend to say on this bill and I would like to have this time. Now, as I was saying when we got into this time situation, the only effective way to control elections is exposure. It is useless to put limits on contributions and limits on expenditures. Those limits are not needed if periodically during the campaign, not after- the campaign is over, after someone has been nominated or elected, but periodically during the campaign, twice a month or once a month over the preceding period, an d certainly 10 days before the plqmary or election, there shall be repor_;d by the candidates every expenditure made by him on his behalf, every cent that has been contributed and its source, every cent that has been promised and the source, every cent that has been spent and how it vtas spent, and every promise or contract made to expend money in the future. This would make public what we all know--that is, for instance, that if someone has a million dollars and I have only $50,000, and we sit down at the poker table, it does not make any difference what stakes we play for, he has the advantage because he can spare whatever he needs to use. There is no way on earth campaign expenditures really can be liraited because expenditures are simply ,driven under ground. But if we could have the kind of law that provides for rigid, cornplete disclosure, periodically during the campaign oJ[ every candidate, then contributions could not be passed around among various people, divided up, or driven under ground, I would set a penalty for falsifying in any way the receipts and expenditures of the candidate, and provided for an iramediate appeal to the court of highest jurisdiction in the State. If he were found guilty, his name would be removed from the ballot and he would be held to be ineligible: to hold public omee for 5 years. That would put teeth in it. From the experience of this Senator, in all the years he has been here, that is the way to do it. This matt;er of digging into the public Treasury and taking the taxpayers' money to finance campaigns makes me very sad. For many years I have served, as Senators know, as the ranking minority member of the Subcommittee on Health, Education, and Welfare of the Committee on Appropriations in the Senate. When I think of the needs we have, when I think of the taxpayers' money we ,could use in our campaign against cancer, when I ,,think of the people who are dying in remote areas of this country because they cannot get a kidney dialysis, when I think of the need, whether it is called the Kennedy bill, the adrninistration bill, or something in between for taxpayers' dollars to bring down the ,,.cst of hospitalization and health in this country, and when I think of the needs in education, it just grates on my nerves to be talking about digging 476 RECORD m SENATE April 10, 19 74 into taxpayers' money to f,nance political tes_lership of the Senator from Nevada c_npaigns, because if _e have strong for a e_nstructive job well done; but I laws that permit people to finance their cal,qnot vote for the bill and I cannot vote own campaigns, maintaining the bar Lo waste taxpayers' money in politics against labor unions contributing and when ii. cannot be done effectively. That, various other safeguards, there is no negd in a nutshell, is what I wanted to say on to use one single precious taxpayers' do1- the whole bill. I thank both Senators lar in politics wlhen there are so many for their cooperation. ci'ying ihuman needs we :must satisfy. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who We will soon be working on the situa-. _ields time? tlon of people facing t/se tremendous Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, how cost of catastrophic ilness, of people who much time remains? desperately need medical care. and every The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sendollar we take is taken from places where at_)r from Nevada has 12¥2 minutes on dollars are desperately needed. We can this amendment; the Senator from Kanpikace limits from now to kingdom come, sas has 1_/2minutes. we can say that there shat1 not be a mul-. tiplicity of committees, snd we can put Mr. C'ANNON. Mr. President, I am preall these restrictions in, 1)ut there is al-. pared [o yield back my time. ways a way arc'and every one of them. Il: Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I am prejlmt drives campaigns underground. The pared to yield back the remainder of my keynote today is exposur, e--let the public tirae. know. Lf they know--not after the elec-. 'The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time tions, but periodically--Lhen they car_ having been yielded back, the question know what is going on anJ they can take is on agreeing to the amendment of the precautions to prevent c_rtain happem Senator' from Kansas, as modified. The tags. yeas and nays have been ordered, and Those a_e the reasons why I shah sup-, the clerk will call the roll. port the substitute, even though I The legislative clerk called the roll would like to go furthe:_ than it goes Mr. i2OBERT C. BYRD. I announce Those are the reasons why I shall be that the Senator from Idaho (Mr. compelled to vote against the bill, al-. Crruac:_:), the Senator from Arkansas though I am a,; anxious as any Senator (Mr. .FULBRmHT), the Senator from to restore the confidence of the American Maine (Mr. HaTHAWaY), the Senator public in our elective process and in our from Iowa (Mr. HUGHES), the Senator public ..servants. from t._awaii (Mr, INOUYE), the Senator I should mention, Mr. President, that from Massachusetts (Mr. KENNEDY), the in discussing my own fee ings about thi_';; Senator from Louisiana (Mr. LONG), the bill, one Senator here object,ed on the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. McGEE). ground that periodic _,ccotmtings alt and the Senator from Mississippi (Mn through the campaign by a candidate S_'ENNXS)are necessarily absent. for the Senate or the Horse of Represem Mr. HUGH SCOTT. I annonuce that tatives would force the candidate to haw!_ a full,time or almost full-time account., the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. FONG), the ant to handle the work My answer is Senator from Arizona (Mr. OOLDWATER), that the events of recent years haw_, the ,'._enator from Michigan (Mr, been such that; any man running as a Gl{_¢F_r), and the Senator from Marycandidate on a statewidc basis or from land [Mr. MATmAS) are necessarily any congressional disk-irt, with. the absent. population we now have, ;hould have thc I also announce that the Senator from constant assistance of m_ expert in ac.- Virginia (Mr. WXLLL_ML. SCOTT) is ab-. countirlg, and I would not want to run se:at on official business. for office myself without such ar_ The result was announced--yeas 31, accountant, nays 55, as follows: Another reason in favor of frequent; [No. 131 Leg.] accountings rather thar limits on ex.., YEAS--S1 penditures is that the _,ccotmtings arc Aiken Curtis Hruska the fairest and most ef!ective method, Allen Dole McClellan since h_ some Sates television is an ira.. Baker Domlnlck McClure portant and effective wa_, of campaign.. Bartlett Eastland Nunn Bellmon Ervin Roth lng while in other States it is entireI.v Bennett Fannin Taft impractical--sometimes ])ecause no sta... Breck Gurney Talmadge tion reaches the entire _tate---and con... B_:ckley Hanson Thurmond sequently direct mailing.'; or some other Byrd, Hatfield Tower ]_Iarry F., Jr. Helms Weicker methods have to be resorted to by the cotton Holllngs candidate. NAYS--55 All measures that have been advocated over the last few years have tended l_:} Bayh Ahoure'._X Hartke Haskell Pastore Pearson present various new difficnlti,_ for some Beall Huddleston Pell candidates in certain sections. But any Bentsen Humphrey Percy way you slice it, artifi.-Aal limitations Bible Biden Jackson Javits Proxmire Randolph encourage evasion of the law, while rigid Brooke Johnston Rlbicoff requirements of disclosure to the people Burdick Magnuson Schweiker under penalty of being declared inell,. Byrd, Scott. Hugh Csnnor_Robert C. Mansfield McGovern Sp arkman gible for office would, although not per.- case McIntyre Stafford fort, in my cph_ion be the best way, and Chiles Metcalf Stevens Clark Metzenbaum Stevenson I think the only way, to accomplish ou: cook Mondale Symington patrpose, cranston Montoya Tunney Mr. President, I hope the, substitute Domenic[ Moss Williams Ea,gleto_x Muskie Young will be adopted, although I :).gain corn.- Gravel Nelson mend the Rules Committe_ and the m_r_ Packwood April 10, 19 7_ CONGRESSIONAL NOT VOTING--14 Church Hathaway Mathtas Fong Hughes McGee Fulbright Inouye Scott, Goldwater Kennedy William L. Grienn Long Stennts So, Mr. DOLE'S amendment (No. 1126)° as modified, was rejected. LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM--UNANIMOUS-CONSENT AGREEMENT Mr. HUGH SCOTT. Mr. President, I rise for the purpose of inquiring of our distinguished majority leader as to what is the pending business, and what he expects will be the business for the remainder of today and the remainder of the session before the recess. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. ABOUREZK). Will the majority leader refrain from responding until order is re_ stored? The Senate will come to order, Senators are entitled to hear the majority leader announce the program for the remainder of the week. Senators haylng conversations will please remove themselves from the Chamber. The majority le_der may proceed., Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, in response to the question raised, first, I would appreciate it if' there would be a show of hands of those Senators who still intend to offer amendments to the campaign practices proposal. (Counting) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7--it looks like 10 or 12. Not more than 15, anyway, and maybe not that many. Mr. President, if the Senate will agree that it be in order at this time, I ask unanimous consent that there be a time limitation of 30 minutes on all amendments to be offered from now on,' the time to be equaUy divided between the sponsor of the amendment and the manager of the bill Mr. HUGH SCOTT. And amendments thereto, Mr. MANSFIELD. And amendments thereto. · Mr. HUGH SCOTT. I have no objection, except as to the Mr. MANSFIELD. This would be all amendments excepting that of the Senntot NewnotYork (Mr.butBUCKLEY), may from or may agree, if he does who not agree, he still has the hour which is allocated to each Senator. Mr. HUGH SCOTT. As long as he is protected, that is fine. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there, objection to the request of the Senator from MOntana? Mr. theMr. rightTAFT. to object President, reserving The PRESIDING OFFICER. First, the Chair would advise the majority leader as to the parliamentary situation with regard to the 1-hour time limit. There is a time limit of 1 hour for each Senator under cloture. That also Includes any time on amendments. If there is a separate'time limit placed on an amendment, and it on is that used, amendment, the time any Senator speaks irrespective of what the time limit on the amendment is, is taken from his hour of total debate, and time is not transferrable, Mr. MANSe.r). That is the intentlon of the joint leadership, that It be RECORD -- SENATE taken out of the 1 hour allotted to each Senator. If any Senator wishes to object, I will be glad to withdraw the request. Mr. TAFT. Reserving the right to obJect Mr. MANSFI_.T.D. If the Senator will withhold that, may I say the purpose is Mr. PASTORE. May we have order, please, Mr. President? The PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes, the point is well taken. The Senate will come to order. Senators are entitled to hear this colloquy. Senators and staff members conversing will remove themselves from the Chamber. The Senator from Montana may proceed. Mr. MANSFIELD. The purpose in making this request at this time is that now we will proceed to the tornado disaster relief bill. There will be a number of amendments applied to that measure, and we will stay with it until it is concluded, even though there happens to be a time limitation. Then we will go back on the pending business. Under the recess resolution, the Senate goes out at the conclusion of business Friday. I am not offering a carrot or a stick, but if it would be possible to get the Senate out on Thursday, I would appreciate it just as much as any other Member. With that explanation, the Senator from Ohio may reserve his right to object, Mr. TAFT. I thank the majority leader for his explanation. Do I understand correctly that, should this unanimous consent request be agreed to, each Senator would be limited to 15 minutes in discussing any amendment? Mr. MANSFIELD. That is correct, but he would have the rest of his time under the cloture rule to discuss the amendmerit, and the amendment would not be voted upon until he has completed his time under the cloture rule. He may apply it to just the amendment, Mr. TAFT. Well, when would the vote on the amendment occur? If the amendmerit is called up, and the Senator talks for 15 minutes, and then desires to take his additional 45 minutes, would he be able to take his additional 45 minutes before the vote occurs? Mr. MANSFIELD. No, because in accordance with the agreement the time on the amendment would be limited, Mr. TAFT. That is my understanding, I have an amendment pending on which I would like to have an hour reserved. Mr. MANSFIELD. I would be willing to make an exception on the same basis as in the case of the Senator from New York, who is unavoidably absent. Mr. HUGH SCOTT. Mr. President, ! think that could be taken care of by the Senator discussing generally what he intends to do for the 45 minutes, and then going into the half-hour on the amendmerit. does not to call it up, in otherHe words, until need the end of the 45 minutes. Mr. TAFT. The Senator from Ohio does not believe that would be approprlate with regard to the procedures that might arise, S 5653 Mr. HUGH SCOTT. Then I would be willing to make an exception on behalf of the Senator from Ohio as well as the Senator from New York (Mr. BUCKLEY). The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Mr. BROCK. Mr. President, reservhlg the right to object, the Senator from Montana is not saying that an exception is made to the I hour under the cloture rule? Mr. MANSFIELD. No. Mr. BROCK. If the Senator from Ohio wants to spend his entire l hour on one amendment, that would be his privilege, but that would be all. Mr. MANSFIELD. That is right. In his case that is true, yes. Mr. BROCK. I thank the Senator. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is so ordered, that there be a 30 minutes time limitation on each amendment except for the amendments of the Senator from New York and the Senator from Ohio. Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield to the Sen.ator from Rhode Ishmd. Mr. pASTORE. I would assume that the votes on these amendments would occur with some rapidity. I wonder if we could have a unanimous-consent agreement to confine the voting period to 10 minutes on each of these amendments. I think sometimes we just sit here for 5 minutes waiting for the 15-minute time to run out for the call of the roil. Mr. HUGH SCOTT. Mr. President, if the Senator will defer that request until we can get the Senator from Oregon (Mr. ' PaCKWOOD) to the floor, who has asked that he be present when such a request is made, I would have no objection. I would like, if the majority leader will yield,'to clarify something else. Ant I correct that the time taken for the votes on amendments is not taken front the time of any Senator? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct. Mr. HUGH SCOTT. And upon any Senator noting the absence of a quorum, the time for the quorum call would come from the time of the Senator who makes the point of order, is that correct? Mr. MANSFIELD. No, a quorum call under this circumstance, or a vote, would not be charged to any Senator. Mr. HUGH SCOTT.' Then it is under-. stood that the quorum calls in no event are charged to a_ Senator; is that cor-. rect? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-. ator is correct. Mr. STEVENSON. Mr. President, _;-. serving the right to object The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is no unanimous consent request pending at this time. Mr. MANSFIELD. ! yield to the Senntor from Illinois. Mr. STEVENSON..Does the order limit the time on a motion to recommit? The PRESIDING OFFICER. No, the request was as to amendments only, and not as to motions to recommit. Mr. MANSFIELD. But if there is a motion to recommit, I would ask that 47'7 S 5654 CONGRESSIONAL there be a time limitation on the same basis. ,Mr. STEqJENSON. I would have to obJect to that limitation, and would hope an exception would be made if ;such a motion is made. Mr. MANSFIELD. I said I woulct agree to a time limitation on a motion to recommit, and I ask unanimous consent that that be done, a time limitation of one-half hour, with the time to be equally divided between the mover and the sponsor of the bill. The PR]_',SIDING OFFICER. _vVithout objection, it is so ordered, SENATE ]RES_ LUTION TO BELLMON TO NESS IN U.S. PERMIT OKLAHOMA Mr. HUGH Cd sent to the desk a its immediate standing the wfil state 30fl---RESOSENATOR AS A WITCOURT IN Mr. President, I tion and ask for notwithorder, The clerk the clerk resolution. The objection? There being tion (S. Res. agreed to. OIVFIC.ER. no 308) the I_; there the resoluconsidered and the resolution reads l_Ir. F:DWARDS 0:t iforala, Mr. RarLs;I_ACK, and Mr. of Arizona e_ members Commission for the Review of s,nd ,C_tates Laws Relati:ng to Wireta and Electronic ,']urveillance, on the _rt of the House. The message ouaced that the YIouse had passed following bills, i_ which it requested concurrence of the Senate: H_t. 421. An act to am Tariff Schedules of the United Stat s ';o permit the ira.. portatton of upholster iegulators, nphot,,;terer's regulating _s, and upholsterer's pins free of duty; and H.R. 14012. All act approprlatlor_s for the Legislative for t]ae fiscal ye_tz ending June 30, 1975, for other pu]:poses. HOUSE BILLS The following bills twice by their titles rated: H_. 421. An act to ame nles of tlle Ufitimd States portation of upholstery aterer's regulating pins free of duty. Referre_ on Finance. H.R. 14012. An act for the, legislative branch e,nding June 3C,, 1975, poses. Referred -;o the prlatlons, ' the Tariff Scheft.1;o pe:cmit the lrn'_gulators, upho]N and upholsterer's to the Com_nttte. e appropriations _fr the fiscal yeax 1 for other pul:mltt_;e on Appro- LEGISLATIV '2SESSION Mr. HARRY Iv. BY _D, JR. Mr. President, ]i move that the _enate resume consideration of legislati 7e business. The, motion was _ greed to, and the Senate resumed th( consideration of legislative business. DISASTER RELIEI_ ACT AMENDI_[ENTSC 5'1974 The, PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. ABOUR:I_ZK). Under t]e previous order, the Senate will now r :oceed to the consideration of Calenda · No. 751, S. 3062, which the clerk will ;rate. The assistant leglsl ,tive clerk read as follow_;: s. 3062,a bill efitttledthe "DisasterRelief sentatives Mr. tug clerks, byinformed pursuant to the of its readtheone Senate that, of section 804 Mr. IHARRY F. BYRD (lent, might say that tine Senate is now taking h:_s (b), Publichad Law _eaker ,Mr. aS amended, the I_.A._jTEItli/IEIER, with the member with a Whereas,of t[hls Henry L.served Bellmen, Subpoena to appear a witness before the I)tstrlct Court of States for the Western District of to testify at 9:30 o'clock a.m. the Sixteenth day of April. 1974.' in the C_ of United States v. Leo Winters, et al; Whereas, under Standing Rules of the Senate, no Senator absent himself from the service of the without leave of the Senate: be it Resolved, that L. Bellmon is granted leave to as a witnes:_ before the District Court of the United States in the Case of the ;tares v. Leo Winters, et al at a time when Senate is not sitting in Session; and be it Resolved, that a of this Resolutio_x be submitted to .the Court. OF A VOTE Mr. GRAVEL. Mr. President, on April 9, 1974, I was and voted "Yea" on an amendment by Senator KENNEDY tx) an adment of Senator STEVENSON. It iS vote 129. T:he RECO_D Indicates tlmt I was absent, I therefore ask consent that the R_.COSD be to reflect my vote. The PRESIDING objection, it is so I_[ESSAGE A message from 4'18 Without ; SIGNED armmnced that Committee, and thc ranking minority member of the Arme Services Committee. It was reporte_ unanimously this morning by the ArJ ed Services Cornmittem The PRESIDING _)FFICER. Without object:ion, the nomination is considered and confirmed. Mr. HARRY F. BY ._D, JR. Mr. President, Z ask unanlmm s consent that the President be immedi_ ;ely notified cd the confirmation of this nomination. The PRESIDING i )FFICER. Without obi ect:ion, it is so orde ed. THE HOUSE House of Repre- The ENROLLED message also were each read Ieferred, as indi- A o_l 10, 1973 Act Amendments of 1974t" The, PRESIDIN G qFFICER. Is there object:ion to the preseSt consideration of following had enrolled ,C_peaker affixed bills: his ;ignature to th_ the bill? ! S. 1866. An act to pro increases ic There being no objection, the Senate certain annultl_.s payable chapter S;S proceeded to consider the bill. of title 5, United States C( and for other The, PRESIDING ()FFICER. Debate purposes; and on the pending bill is imited to 2 hours H.R_ 13542. An act to ab ish the posltto_ to be equally divided; nd controlled beof Commissioner of Fish '_lldlffe, an_ tween the Senator fr ,m North Dakota for other purposes. (I_r. BVRDICK) and the Senator from New The enrolled bills w( subsequently l_[exico (Mr. DOMENIC1 , with 30 minutes signed by the Acting Pr_ pr() tern-, on any amendment in the first and secpore (Mi'. ALLEN). olld degree, and 10 miE _tes on any debatable motion or appeal. Mr. BURDICK. Mr President, I ask ]EXEC'UTIVE St]I m_animous consent dr 'lng consideration Mr. HARRY F. BYRD Mr. Presiof and voting on S. : D62 the following dent, I ask unanimous that the staff n_embers of the C _mmittee on PubSenate go into executive for no_ lie Works be granted _rivilege of access to exceed 2 minutes, to a non',,, to the iBenate floor: Ination now at the desk, which wa_ Clari_ Norton, John Yago, Philip T. reported earlier Cummings, M. Barr r Meyer, Bailey There being no the Senate Guard. Judy Parent _,, Steve Swain, proceeded to the of execu_aul ]._beltoft of my si _ff, Grady Smith tive business, of Senator DO_EN_CX'S ;taft, and George There being no the Senat,';; Shanks of the staff of _enator HARRY IV. proceeded to the execuBYRD, ih[rE. tive business. The PRESIDING Gl _FICER. Without The PRESIDING (Mr', objection, it is so orde_ _d. BrDEN). The nomination be stated. Mr. :BURDICK. Mr. 1 resident, the Disa_;ter P_eliefAct Ame_dments of 1974 come taefore the Sen: te in the tragic shadow cast by the i tornadoes that DEPARTI_[ENT OF afflicted five states in iid-.United States The second assistant clerk last week. The destrucf ton and hardship read the nomination of M. Maury, that fcdlowed in the wa] e of these storms of Virginia, to be an Ass Secretary has aroused the sympa hy of the Nation of Defense. and I i_now that the h, arts of each one as With its follows: was read RECORD --. SENATE the majority of and chairma:a the ths Mr. Presi... of th_ _en cleared leaders;, Servic(m oil us, _:o go sorely out totried. the ]I 1deed, eople who have been the realizatior_ that the bill be _re us is of prefound e_ns, significance Iegal but in human nott_ isimply _m_, must in weigh April -10, I (c) (1) Subtitle and Local Fiscal .t amended by addinl following "SEC. CONGRESSIONAL title the I of the State Act of 1972 is end thereof the AFFECTED BY MAJOR "In the this title the Secretary in data used in' of a State government govern'ment for a of 60 if that change--"(1) results a major determined by mt under the Disaster Relief t and "(2) reduces the of the merit of that State .nment or localgovernment.", (2) The made by .this takes effect on April 1974. EMERGENCY _LrNICATIONS SEC. 415. The is auth<)rlzed durlng, or In major disaster munications ernment to officials appropriate. EMERGENCY SEc. 416. The provide temporary service in a major emergency needs lion to stores, post offices, merit centers., and be necessary in munity to resume as soon as posslble, of, an emergency or temporary comto make such cornto State and local govother persons as he deems TRANSPORTATION is authorized to mblic transportation area to meet to provide transportaoffices, supply centers, major employother places as may to enable the cornpattern of life FIRE GRA2qTS SEC. 417. The is authorized to provide assistance, grants, equipmerit, supplies, and to any State for the suppression any fire on publicly or privately owned fore or grassland which threatens such as would constatute _. TIMBER : CONTRACTS SEC.418, (a) Where existing timber sale contract_between the Secretary of Agricullure or the of the Interior and a timber purchaser not provide relief from major physical _ not due to neglt'gence of the to approval of construction of any of specified road or of any other development facility and, as a result of a or disaster, a major physical change resul in additional constructlon work in with such road or facility by such with an estimated cost, as by the approprlate Secretary, (1) more than $1,000 for sales under one board feet, (2) of more than $1 per board feet for sales of one to three board feet, or (3) of more than $3,01 for sales over three million board feet, suc increased constructlon cost shall be by the United States. (b) If the .,late Secretary determines that are so great that restoration, or construction is not practical r the cost-sharing arrangement authorize, by subsection (a) of this section, he allow cancellation of a contract entered by bls Departmerit notwithstanding contrary provisions therein, (c) The _ecretary Agriculture is authorized to reduce to days the minimum period of notice requlred by the first sec of the Act of June 4, 1897 (16 U.$.C. in connection with the sale of timber f national forests, whenever the Secretary that (1) the sale of such timber assist in the constructlon of any area State damaged by RECORD -- SENATE S 5687 a major disaster, (2) sale of such timber will assist in the economy of such area, or (3) the Sale timber is necessary to salvage the of timber damaged in such major er or to protect undamaged timber, (d) The President, he determines it to be in the public ir crest, is authorized to make grants to any or local government "(b) The Recover, Planning Council (1) shall review existing development, land use and other plans fox the affected area; (2) may make such rev signs as it determines necessary for the ex mc,talc recovery of the area, Including. the development of new plans and the preps ation of a recovery lnvestment plan for t he five-year period following the declaration of the disaster; and for the lands purposetimber of owned a major disaster, privatelyof ;ed from as a resuli such State or local government is to make person for actually incurred by removal of damaged the amount that salvage value of such upon grants application, such _o any of expenses such person in the not to exceed expenses exceed the tuber, TITLE RECOVERY FOR AREAS lC Works and ECGof 1965, as amended, the end thereof the (3) may and make therec : nplementatlon ,mmendatlons for revisions of such plans to the Goverz _r _uld responsible local governments. The C_ uncll shall accept as one element of the re overy investment plan determinations mad under section 402(f) of the Disaster Relief _ ct Amendments of 1974. "(c) (1) A recove_T investment plan prepared by a Recover Planning Council may recommend the rE rlslon, deletion, reprograining, or addltlo:al approval of Federalaid projects and pre rams within the area-"(A) for which al dicatton has been made but approval not yE granted; "(B) for which ft ids have been obligated or approval grante but construction not yet begun; DISASTE SEC. 501. The nomlc Development amended byadding llowing new title: VIII--ECONO RECOVERY AREAS "PURPOSES FOR . It is the p rpose of this title to for economic recovery, after period of aid and re_f essential and services, of any disaster which has suffered a its economy of sufficlent (a) assistance in planning for to replace that lost in the di continued coordination of under Federalaid programs; assistance toward the of the employment base. "DISASTER RY PLANNING "SEC. 802. (a) (1) I: disaster area which termined requires asslsl and for which he has ance, the Governor, case of any major Governor has dece under this title ested such assistdays after the PresiPlanning each part dent, shall designate Council for such thereof, "(2) Such Council of not less than five of whom shall be local el, of pollttcal subdivisions wtt_ the areas, at least one of the and a representative of the During the period for rich the disaster is declared, the officer shall also serve x the Council. "(3) The Federal esentative on su, Council may be the Chai: of the Regional Council for affected area, or member of the Regional Council designated by the Chal man. The Federal representative qn such ( auncll may be the Federal Cochalrman of he Reglonal Cornmisslon established pur.' mst to title V of the Public Works and Development Act, or the Appala '.hian Regional Development Act, or his de: ghee, where all of the affected area is withl: the boundaries of such Commission. "(4) multiJurlsdictional The Governor ma' )rganlzatlon designate an isting as exthe Recovery Planning Court 11 where such organization complies witll paragraph (2) of this subsection with the addition of State and Federal representativ, s. Where possible, the organization deslgnat, _I as the Recovery Planning Council shall be or shall be subsequently designated as thf clearinghouse required by the Office of Management and Budget circular A-95. "(5) The Recovery Plan xing Council shall Include private citizens members to the extent feasible, and shall lc 'ovide for and encourage public partlctpatl_ in its deliberatlons and decisions, "(C) for whlch : Lnds have been or are Scheduled to be apl _rtloned within the five years after the dec _ratlon of the disaster; "(D) which may therwise be available to the area under any Irate schedule or revised State schedule of lc'iorltie_; or "(E) which may z _asonably be anticipated as becoming avails de under existirfg programs. "(2) Upon the ecommendation of the Recovery Planning _'ouucll and the request of the Governor, aiy funds for projects or programs ldentifiec pursuant to paragraph (1) of this subse, ;ion may be placed in reserve by the respc use in accordance tigriS. Upon the I and with the con( governments, such to the Recovery expendeci i_ the .recovery lnvestmen _UBLIC WORKS AN] Lsible Federal agency for _lth such recommendaquest of the Governor rrence of affected local unds may be transferred _lanning Council to be im_Zementat_o_ o! the )lan, DEVELOPMENT FACILITI'IES GEANq AND LOANS "SEC. 803. (a) _IT President is authorized to provide funds t any Recovery Planning Council for the im_ _mentation of a recovery investment plan ,y public bodles. Such funds may be used- "(1) to make 1o_ as for the acquisition or development of lan a and improvements for public works, publ:: service, or development facility usage, lncl tding the acquisition or developmen.t of p_ .ks or open spaces, and the acquisition, co_ structlon, rehabilitation, alteration, expans )n, or improvement of such facilities, inc ading related machinery and equipment, ant "(2) to make ,_applementary grants to _crease the Feder ,1 slmre for projects for funds are r, served pursuant to sublon (c) of sec lon 802 of this Act, or Federal-aid )rojects in the affected Grants an( to ar loans under this section State, local government, non-profit organization disaster area or part thereof. "(c) grant shall increase the of the cost of any project to mn 90 per centum, except in the case for the benefit of Indians or or in the case of any State or government which the President determll its effeclive taxing and capacity. "(d) Loans section shall bear interest at a rate mined by the Secretary of the Treasc :tng into consideralion the current market yield on outstanding atlons of the United States wt' periods to maturity average maturl- 47,9 S 5688 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --- SENATE ties of such loan adjusted to the nearest one-eighth of 1 _er centum, less 1 per centum per annurf "(el Financial I sistance uno{er this title shall not be extend _d to assist establishments relocating from o ,e area to another or to assist subcontraci )rs whose purpose is to divest, or whose economic success, is dependent upon dtw ;ting, other contractors or subcontractors of contracts therefore customarily performer by them: Prov/ded, k_owever, That such lin [rations shall not be cons_rued to prohi,bi assistance for the expansion of an . xistlng businea_ entity through the establ shment of a new branch, affiliate, or s_bsldi _ry of such entity if the Secretary of Coral _erce finds that the establishment of suc L branch, affiliate_ or subsidiary will not re: _lt in an increase in unemployment of th, area of original location or in any other are _ where such entity conducts business op_ :ations, unless the Sec-retary has reason tc believe that such branch, affiliate, or subsid_ _ry is being established with the intention of closing down the Dporations of the ex _ting business entity in the area of its or! ,Anal location or in any other area where it :onducts such operations, "DISASTER _;ECOVE] Y REVOLVrNG FUND "SEc.. 806. Funds ob ained by ,the Presld_;:nt to carry out this.title Lnd sollectior_s and repayments received ul _er this title shall .be deposited in a disa_ .er :_ecow_ry revolvl]qi fund (hereunder refe 'red to a.,; the 'fund_'), whicll is hereby established in the Treasu_:y of the United C_tat_ .and which shall 1),_ available to the Presld _rLt for the purpose o[ extending _inancial ssis_ne¢, under thi3 title, and for the pay: lent of all oblig_tio:m{ and expenditure_ ariai Lg i_ connection he_with. 'There are auth, rizei to be apprOpri., ated to carry out th _ title not to excet_(i with. 'There arc auth. rlze:L ,to be _pproprl$200,000,000 to e,_tabli such revolving fur.d and such sums as m, b_ ne(:easary to rL_,., plenish it on an annu: ba_ls. The fu_td shl_li pay into miscellaneous receipts of the Tream. ury, following ti_e close of (ach fiscal year, In.. terest on the amount of loans outstandir.,g under .this title corn ltec. in such manne:: and at such rate as .ay he determined by 'the Secretary cf the _e_sury, taking in'to consideration the cu Pen'; average mark_,,'; yield on outsta:_ding ] _arketable o_bligatlom_ of the United S:tates _ ith remaining peric_is to maturity compar, ble to the average - "LOA_ _U_mANTE_S "SEC. 804. The 'esident is a_xthorized to provide funds to Re :overy Planning Councils to guarantee loans I lade to prival_ borrowers by private lending institutions (I) to aid in financing any kroJect within a major maturities of ,,_uch lO,ns, adjusted to tlc nearest one-eig[a;_h of p_r centum, durir, g the month of June pr_ ;ed lng the risc:al yem' tn which _the loans wel ._ncade." TITLE VI--MIJ _EI,LANEOUS AUTI_iORTqY_[TO r _S(RIBE RULES disaster area for the of land and[ facllitl and equipment) fox usage including tJ buildings, and reh: or unoccupied bulb conversion, ,or enlar ings; and (_,!) for w lion with projects assisted under par application of sUcl such terms and coz may prescribe: Pro such guarantee sha per centum of the_ 'lng unpaid 'balance purchase or development ,_ (including machinery industrial or commercial e construction of new bilitation of _bandoned ings, and the alteration, ._men_ of existing buildEking capital in connecn major disaster areas ;raPh (1) hereof, upon institution and upon lttions a_ the ,President ided, kowever, That no [ at any time exceed 90 mount of the outstandof such loan. ":TECHNIC _L ASSISTANCE, "SEC. 805. (al In _ ,rrying out the purposes of this title the I_ sldent is authorized to provide technical a_ [stance which _'ould _be useful in facilitatlE economic recovery in major disaster area Such assistance shall include project plato ng and feasibility studles, management an . opera%tonal assistance, and studies evalua lng the needs of, and developing potentla ttles for, economic recovery of sqach arel . Such assistance may be provided by the resident through merebors of the staff, _ough the payment of funds authorized fol this title to _ther departments or agenel_ , of the Federal_,qovernment, through the i ,,mployment of private individuals, partners! .!ps, firms, corporations, or suitable lnstituti( _s, under contracts ehtered into for s'ucl purposes, or 'through grants-in-aid to app_ )priate public or private nonprofit State, are_ district, or local orcanizations, "(_) The Presider is authorized _o make gran_s to defray not _ exceed 75 per centum o/' _he administratl' _ expenses of Recovery Planning Councils ,_.b]ished pursuant to section 802 of _hls or. In determining the amount of the no: Federal share of such costs or expenses, q .e President sh_ll give due consideration t_ all c0ntribueclons both in cash and in kin, fairly evaluated, inoluding but not liml_ ;d help map his election strategy. A big-name Republican, Sen. Charles Percy, has appeared on Mr. Sparilng's behalf. Last weekend, Sparling campaigners put on a April 10, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL bli.tz"; several hundred volunteers came from outside the district to help. Mr. HART. Mr. President, now that the Senate has invoked cloture on the campaign reform bill, S. 3044, and · turned back repeated efforts to weaken its provisions, I am hopeful we can send a strong bill to the House of P_epresentafives and provide, the country with at least one constrUctive effort to remedy the disastrous effect of Watergate on our body politics, In these brief remarks, I wish not oniy to urge support for the committee bill, but also to respond to several disturbing themes which I have heard during tile past few weeks of debate, For several months the American people and the Congress have been told to "stop wallowing in Watergate" and to get on with "the Nation's business"--as if the problems of inflation, the energy crisis and our other dilemmas were unrelated to the preoccupations of the White House, or were unrelated to the corrosion of public confidence in their elected leaders, Now, during debate on this bill, a cornpanion theme has emerged: "Lets stop wallowing in campaign reform" we are told, "and lets get on with the Nation's business." Mr. President, I am confident that tactic will meet with as singular a lack of success in diverting the American people as has its predecessor. For the public understands full well that the election, of a representative Government--free from both the actual danger and the ap.pearance of undim influence--is very ,1,such their business, It is not necessarily true that he who pays the political piper will always c.all the tune. Nevertheless, it is hardly reassuring to the average citizen to know that big donors at least have access to go backstage before the perf6rmance and request a few favorite melodies, Sure, I can go to bed at night with a fair degree of confidence that my votes have not been improperly influenced by a contribution. But try to tell that to some of my constituents who disagree strongly with my views. And particularly after the revelations of the past 18 months, who can really blame them. It is surprising, however, that after all the scandals which have emarged--and the obvious repercussions this has had on public trust of elected leaders--some still seek to portray this bill as a greedy grab by those inoffice, as a pr:vate raid on the Public Treasury. Yet the President and Congress act on an annual budget in the hundreds of billions of d611ars. What wiser investment could a democracy make than a few dollars per voter each year--the best es"door-to-door timate of what this proposal would cost---to restore confidence that public spending decisions are made with the public interest in mind, and not the private interests of those who underwrite our campaigns. We are willing to pay for clean air. clean lakes and clean streets--at least Ihope we are. Weshould also be willing to pay for clean elections, Moreover, a moment's reflection also reminds us that perpetuation of thepres- RECORD-- SENATE S 5691 ent system of campaign financing is far major party House, Senate, and Presimore advantageous to we who are indential candidates are entitled to Federal cumbents, than would be a fair system payments equal to their overall spending of adequate funding insured for both limit. However, they may take as much incumbent and challenger alike, or little of this available fund as they We need not worry about the cry that wish, and raise the rest of their eampaig_ the only reason for the low rating of funds in allowable private contributions. politicians in the polls is a cynicism gertMinor party candidates would receive crated by our debate on this measure, ita proportionate share of the assistance self. Clearly that claim presumes an exavailable to major party candidates in aggerated view of the impact our debate general electiorm. here has on millions of citizens who alWithout discussing aU of the bfil's pr()-. ready have formed strong opinions about visions, I do wish to comment on fern' the trust their Government deserves; major criticisms which have been leveh_xl And it most seriously underestimates the against the committee bill. First, the devastating effect the past 2 years' revequestion of why any public financing is lations have had on the public's view necessary; second, the argument that of honesty and responsiveness in Washprivate financing should play the domiington, nant role; third, the opposition to includ-. Of course, campaign finance reform is lng primaries in any financing scheme; not a panacea for ail the ills of Waterand finally, questior_s about the propos-. gate: No one has suggested that. It will al's constitutionality. not provide a safeguard against perverWHY XSrHZ PWL_C rm*NCmG _rrcEssaRY? sion of _the processes of justice to cover The most fundamental objection to up scandal, or curb the potential for inS. 3044 is the claim that low contribu-. yoking "national ,security" to cloak contion limits will take care of the "co:r-stitutiona[ abuses, ruption image." If you eliminate the po.. But it is the single most constructive tential influence of large gifts that takes ' step wecan take right now to minimize care of Watergate, the argument goes, so the pressures for illegal actions, to rewhy get bogged down in the tricky prob.. duce the potential for financial maniplems of devising a fair, workable public ulations which generate their own cor- funding scheme? ruptive momentum, and to help restore This is a myopic view of meaningful the essential public confidence in Gevcampaign reform. We should not deal eminent, with the Watergate horrors in a way As Senator MANSFXELDobserved in his which will perpetuate and intensify the state of the Congress axtdress: pervasive advantage enjoyed by incum-we shall not finally come to grips with the bents in their bid for reelection. problems except as we are prepared to pay. In large states such as my own, Cali-for the public business of elections with fornia or New York, Senate campaign,s public funds, are costly. The funds for an adequately Now Jet us look at the bill before us. informative, competitive race will be dif.. Under the leadership of the distinguished flcult to raise, even for a weLl-kno_m in.. chairman of the Rules Committee (Mr. cumbent, in the small amounts we seek C^NNON) and the chairman of the Subto impose as contribution limits for mW committee on Privileges and Elections one donor. (Mr. PELL) the committee has provided a Without substantial public financing, comprehensive, fair yet far-reaching bill. the great danger is that nonincumbent The committee report indicates great challengers will have even more difficulty sensitivity to the issues.of policy such as raising adequate resources. the impact of its proposal on our party This crucial point has been obscured system, the constitutionality of schemes by repeated reference to the wonderful to screen candidates and distinguish beinvolvement of thousands of citizens tween major and minor parties, the contributing a few dollars from their problem ofFederalcontrol of campaigns, cookie jar for the candidate of their and other important questions. The rechoice. That is indeed an appealing ira.port, and the hearings of the committee, age and of course I encourage and en.belie the claim that the bill is based on dorse the desirability of full citizen in.hasty, ill-considered action, without adcvolvement in politics. But that does not quate attention to the underlying issues mean that truly small contributions will involved in campaign finance, be an adequate source of funds for large, S. 3044 incorporates the provisions for expensive campaigns. spending and contribution limits a_nd a The committee report focused this is-strong independent commission to ehsue sharply, at page 5: force the Federal elections laws, all of The only way in which Congress can ellmt.which the Senate passed, last summer as nato reliance on large private conirlbution.s part of S. 372 which now awaits action and still ensure adequate presentation to in the House. the electorate of opposing view-points el competing Candida'res L_through comprehen.'It provides for Federal assistance to sive public financiltg. qualified candidates in primary elections Modern campaigns are increasingly ex.. for nomination in congressional and pensive and the necessary I_tndralsing is a Presidential races. After raising a great dram on the time and energies of tt3e threshold/und to demonstrate some sigcandidate. Low cont.ributlon lhnaits alone will niflcant base of support, primary cancompound the problem .... Drastically re.didates would be eligible to receive Fedducing the amounts wlllcb may be expended by tho candidaq;e would ease this :ourden, eral assistance on a matching basis for but at the cost of increasing the present every $100 per contributor, disadvantage for non-l.acx__mben_ challenger,,_ In the general elections, once having ap.d endangering the wDole process of po.. received their party's nomination, all litical competition. 48:3 : S 5692 CONGRESSIONAL That, Mr. President, is why we must pass a bill with both contribution limits and comprehensive public financ, ing for Federal elections, PRIMARYRELIANCEON PUBLICFINANCING Some oil my colleagues who favor a RECORD -- SENATE April 1O, 19 7/_ CO,_,Sa'rrt'T_O_AL maizES ,:^isr_, RBC^RmNt; s. 3044 Finally, Mr. President a few words are in order in response to tke continued suggestions, although often vague, that th:i;; bill would be [ound unconstitutional, First, some suggest ib is unconstitu.. tional to limit the amok.nt which a per.. son can contribute to ray campaign, o:' to limit the total amount I can spend. However, the Senate has a_lready faced that issue twice, in 197[ and again las: summer. Each time_ we deci,sively found that the power to preserve the integrity of the electoral process, as well as the underlying purpose of the first amen(!, ment to prewmt oligopoly iii the polit!, cal marketplace by a powerful few, pro. vides ample basis for reasonabae regul_,, tion. Next it was suggested that the threshold fund used bo screen c ut frivolous ca_'tdidates in pri:mary elec';ions imposes SlX mlconstitutiorml burden on some politicai aspirants. But as t?e committee report notes, the Supreme Court has upheld the use of filing fees and other charges as ar. nouns'of _reventing a proliferation of candidate:;. Similarly, th_ Court has approved d:fferential trea':cent of major and minor parties, based on past_perfo::mance at the polls, if th _ difference is reasonably related to a stai;,_ interest such as the desire to avo:[,t splintering a coherent r arty system. Se_ Bullock v. Carter 405 'J.S. 134 (119711,; Jeness v. Fortson 403 U.S. 431 (1971). Thi._ committee bill would not free:;,_ the status quo; it does not prevent any political party from getting its candida';_ on th.e ballot, nor frorl organizing resources to support them. As the Supreme Court recognized ::_ the Jeness case: Sometimes the grossest ,nscriminatlon c_,:x lie in treating things th_,t are different :_s though they w._re exactly alike. 403 U.S. _t 442. Only a few weeks ago, the Suprem_ cent, No. 1013, be temporarily laid aside in order that I may call up my amendmeat :No. 988, and I do this with the understsnding that the Senator from Iowa (Mr. CLARK)not lose his right to the floor following disposition of my amendment. Thl_ PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. r)oMr:_ICI) Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. HUGI-I SCOTT. Mr. President, this is a very minor amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk willread amendment No. 988. The legislative, clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. HUGH SCOTT for himseif and Mr. KENNEDY (No. 988) follows: on page 19, after, the period in line 19, Insert the following: "The Secretary of the Treasury may accept and credit to the fund money received in the form of _ donation, gift, legacy, or bequest, or otherwise contrlbuted to the fund.". Mr. HUGH SCOTt. Mr. President, this i,; a v,ery minor matter which is proposed on be[lalf of the distinguished Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. KENNEDY) and myself. It has to do with the fact that under present law individuals may make tax-deductible contributions to candi.Jates. The Presidential election campaign fund at the Treasury Department is financed solely from dollars checked off on income tax returns, and therefore the Tres_,mry Department advises us it will not :.crept small contributions earmarked for this fund. Amendment No. 988 simply authorizes t]he Secretary of the Treasury to receive private contributions and earmark them for the fund is so requested. These contributions would be tax deductible, as is the case under present law, with respect to direct contributions to candidates. This has to do with a contribution of the S4mator from Massachusetts and myself of $75 each, representing payment for two newspaper r*"fies, which was Court reaffirmed these ]_rinciples in tw) decisions, Sto::er againsb Brown--.Mard_ 26, 1974--and American Party against White--March 26, 1974. On the basis of the:;e decisions arm other cases dealing with the regulation of elections and the treatment of majoJ, minor, and independent candidates, I a:_,_ convinced the measur_ would be uphelM tested 'in November at the end of the as a reasoinable, i_ and workabl_ campaign, and notELECTIONS at its outset, scheme to promote the integrity of oleo' SHOULD ]PRIMARY BE I_CLUDED tions, to insure the influence of man_ Unfortunately, I am sure that the same diverse points of view in the politicsl intense pressure to elimAnate primary marketplace, and to balance these goals elections from the public financing feaagainst the other first amendment artd ture of S. 3044 exerted during the Senequally protection inter(sts which are in_ ate's deliberation will also be felt in the volved. House. To end where I began, Mr. President, The logic ir, favor of including all electhis proposal for public financing woul_ tions is simple, but comp_iling. It is ira-. _ not guarantee the elec':ion of wise ani possible to justify the expenditure of 'honest men and wom_n. But it wou[:l substantial public funds in order to help remove the major cause of cynicism an:] purify the political process, if the candistrust in our system. Now is the time didates receiving that assistance must to act to remove the distorting effect cr still raise the full costs of expensive reliance on private fund:aising both fro: x primary campaigns from private conthe campaign ,'md from the operation cf tributors lin order to win their party's Government. nomination in the first place. MeaningMr. HUGH SCOTT. Mr. President, f ful reform, of campaign financing pracask unanimous consent, with the consent tires requires inclusion of primary as well of the distinguished Senator from Iow_ as general election. (Mr. Cr_K), that his pending amend- accepted by the Treasmy as a gift to the Trea,,;ury but which could not be earmarked. Therefore, the purpose of the amendment is to permit earmarking. It is not ex post facto at all. Mr. President, I understand the amendment has been cleared with the Senalor from Kentucky (Mr. CooK) and with the manager of the bill on the majority side of the aisle, and I ask for its immediate consideration. Th(_ PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time? Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield myself 1 minute. I _ould like to ask a question. The Sena(or said this amendment would permit earmarking for tax Credit purposes. I do not think it would permit earmarking other than insofar as its being deposited to go to this special account. _r. HUGH SCOTT. That is right. Mr. CANNON. So it could not be earmark_ for any other purpose. Mr. HUGH SCO2_r. Oh, no, not for any purpose except being channeled to this fund instead of being channeled to the general Treasury, as it is now. Mr. CANNON. The Senator also mentioned that a tax deduction could be modest of public oppose the an_tount availability of fullassistance, public fundlng. They argue that the availability of substantial[ public funds should turn on the candidate's ability to raise :first an equally large amount of private donations. At bottom, this reflects the view that if a candidate has less support at the outset of a campaign--perhaps because he is not as well known as his incumbent opponent--it is appropriate that he has less resources with which to cam;)aign. I would prefer a fairer approach to rompetitive elections, The danger of primary reliance on a matching fund approach is the selfperpetuating advantage for the candidate who is initially better known. He would usually be able to raise more private contributions of small derlomination than could his opponent. This would bring larger sums of Federal matching funds, and[ he could then mount a more elaborate campaign than his challenger to raise even more private funds, which would tahen be matched with more Federa] money, and so on. The use of matching funds to provide an ongoing test of support may be a valid screening technique in the pricaries. But once a major party has chosen a candidate, we are no longer concerned with screening frivolous candidacies. Both candidates in the general election should have adequate resources to seek support from the voters during the campaign, including the support of those initially inclined to favor their opponent, With primary reliance on matching small contributions, a lesshiswell-known challenger must bootstrap campaign by winning additional support before he can get enough Federal assistance to mount a fully competitive campaign. The Federal Government would be interposing a pre-election popularity contest before the voters have had an opportunity to hear a full debate of the issues, Instead, the voters choice should be 484 April 10, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE taken. I do not think it could be taken without another change elsewhere in the law. Mr. HUGH SCOTT. I am advised by the Treasury that a tax deduction can be taken, but only as a charitable contribution. This may be a surprise to the Senator, but the U.S. Treasury is considered a charity in this regard, Mr. CANNON. I did not think it was a charity, but a tax credit could be taken as a charitable contribution, With that explanation, I am willing to accept the amendment, Mr.' KENNEDY. Mr. President, I am pleased to join the distinguished minority leader, Senator HUGH SCOTT, in proposing the pending amendment. By authorizing the Secretary of the Treasury to accept tax-deductible gifts earmarked for the Federal election campaign fund, the amendment will establish a constructive supplement to the dollar checkoff under existing law. As we know, the preliminary results under the dollar checkoff for the 1973 tax year are highly encouraging. Approximately 15 percent of the returns being filed are using the checkoff. At the presell t rate, the campaign fund in the Treasury will contain upwards of $50 million by 1976, or more than enough to make the 1976 Presidential electio n a historic first--paid for entirely out of public funds, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Will the Senator restate the request? Mr. CLARK. I ask unanimous consent to make a technical correction in amendmerit No. 1013. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, may I ask the Senator to state the nature of the technical correct? I would iike to know whether it is going to cl_ange in essence some iraportant provision of the amendment, Mr. CLARK. It would not change any important provision of the amendment. It is my understanding it would not be in order if it did. We had talked with the Parliamentarian previously to make sure it was not a substantial change, I send a copy of the technical correction to the manager to look at. It simply clarifies a definition somewhat, we felt. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I have no objection, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is so modified, The amendments, as modified, are as follows: On page 75, line 21[ strike out "nomination for election, or". On page 76, strike out line 19 through line 22 and insert in lieu thereof the following: "(3) For purposes of this section, the term 'campaign' includeselection all primary, primaryrelated runoff, and' general campaigns to a specific general election, and all ptimary, primary runoff, and special election campaigns related to a specificspecial oleotion.", But more is necessary, dollar checkoff is to be nancing other Federal public My more hope checkoff funds. becomes Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following the disposal of this amendment my Amendment No.The 1118PRESIDING be the next OFFICER. order of business, Without especially if the adequate for fielections out of is that, toas taxthe familiar payers, its use will continue to increase, so that the 'Federal election campaign fund will be sufficient to pay for all Federal elections, In the interim, the pending amendment is a useful supplement the dollar checkoffmethod fund. to Under current law, taxpayers are entitled to a charitable deduction for gifts made to the Treasury. X-Iowever, unless there is a specific authorization in the law allowing gifts to be made for a specified program, the gifts simply go into the general fund of the Treasury. The pending amendment would enable taxpayers to earmark their gifts for the Federal election campaign fund, and I am pleased that the managers are willing to accept it. Mr. CANNON. I yield back my time. Mr. HUGH SCOTT. I yield back my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time having been yielded back, the question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by the Senator from pennsylvani,a for himself and the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. KENNErY), NO. 988. The amendment was agreed to. Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, on behalf of myself and Senators BELLMON,CRANSTON, HART, GRAVEL, MATHIAS, and SCHWEIKER, I call up my amendment No. 1013. I ask unanimous consent to modify the amendment to make technical corrections. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, what was the request? objection, it is so ordered, Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, as it now stands, S. 3044 sets a contribution limltation of $3,000for individuals and $6,000 for organizations, applied separately to primary, elections. primary run-off, and general Our amendment has one simple effect: it would eliminate the bill's distinction between primaries, primary run-offs, and general elections, setting a true contribution limit of $3,000 for individuals and $6,000 for organizations, applied to a candidate's entire campaign for public office, Throughout the debate on'S. 3044, many Senators have referred to the $3,000 contribution limitation in the bill. But, in fact, the limitation now in elfect in S. 3044 sets a much higher limit, In any given campaign, an individual might actually be able to contribute $6,000 altogether--S3,000 in the primary and $3,000 in the general election--or even $9,000 if there were a primary runOff. For organizations, the limit Could be as much as $18,000: The Rules Committee has ineorporated the contribution limits set in S. 372 in the present bill. But S. 372 had no provisions for public financing--it was merely an attempt to limit campaign expenditures and private contributions, However, with the comprehensive public financing system in the bill now, there is no need to allow such excessive contributions--up to $9,000 for individuals and $18,000 for organizations. This S. 5693 amendment would put those limits at $3,000 and $6,000 respectively. Three thousand dollars is a large chunk of money in any campaign. No individual contributed more than $3,000 to my campaign, and I am sure that many of my colleague§ had the same experience. Clearly, a $3,000 limitation, with $6,000 for groups, is not going to cause any hardship for anyone, whether or not they decide to use public financlng. Even the $3,000 and $6,000 limitations this amendment proposes are excessive--a person or organization contributing this much would obviously enjoy more access than the ave:cage voter, and I think everyone is aware of that. But more important than the actual effect of these large donations is the question of how they will be viewed by the public. To the average American, $9,000 or $18,000 is an incredibly large amount for a candidate for public office to accept from any sLngle individual or group. But the present legislation would permit just such contributions. The limits proposed in this amendment still represent big money, but a conl;ribution limit of this kind would at least be a step in the right direction. And the American people would know it. The Rules Committee bill represents a truly significant reform of the American political process. I think all of us have been continually impressed by Chairman CANNON'S skillful handling of the leg,is.lation, and by the CO_Lmitment to meaningful campaign reform demonstrated by a majority of the Senate. I believe this amendment is fully consistent with the scope and intent of 8. 3044, and I urge its adoption. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield myself 5 minutes. We have gone up the hill and down again on this particular issue. We have seen before, in the course of debate on the bill, amendments to change the limits on contributions. The Senator from Iowa has pointed out that the amounts ought to be cut in half from ,what we have in the bill now, because of the matching portion of public financing. But we do not authorize a candidate to go to public financing. If we were to adopt this amendment, it is quite likely we would force every candidate to go to public financing, whereas some of them if they were given reasonable enough limits, might desire to go the private financing route. But if they did, they would then be stiU more unduly restricted, as under S. 372, and much more unduly restricted than we have desired to restrict them. I urge that the Senate stand fast on the position it has already taken by voting to reject this amendment. Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. CLARK. Mr'. l_'esident, in answer to the distinguished Senator from Nev-ada on his particular point, I think it ls still possible and very practical for a candidate to run a campaign on private financing and.keep within the $3,000 or $6,000 limitation. I say that out of per-. sonal experience, because, as the REcoRr_ will show, in the 1972 campaign I ac.. cepted no contributions in excess o1: 48'5 S 5694 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SELNATE $3,000. There are many Senators who have cormnitted themelves to accept no more than. that in the coming cs_npaign of 1974. Some have a limitation as strict as $1,000; some $2,000; others, $3,000. They will not receive any public finarmlng in the 1974 campaign. So although some restrictions are imposed, a candidate cannot take $18,000, in the case of groups, and he cannot take in excess of $3,000, in the case of individuals. He can take only $3,000. That is the intent of the amendment. It seems to me that when we talk about taking amounts such as $7,000, $8,000, $9,000, or $10,000, from individuals, we are talking about a very, very heavy influence on the person who receives such a large contribution. Mr. Pr_ident, I ask for the yeas and nays on this amendment. The yeas and nays were not ordered. Mr. CL_RK. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. .Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consentthatthe order for the quorum call be rescinded, The PRiESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, :it is so ordered, Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the Clark amendment, The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I move to lay the amendment on the table, and I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered, The PRF. SIDING OFFICEI_. The question is on agreeing to the motion of the Senator from Nevada (Mr. CAN_O_)to lay the amendment of the Senator from Iowa (Mr. CLARK)on the table. The yeas and nays have been ordered, and the clerk will call the roll. So the motion to lay on tPe table wa s rejected, The PRESIDING OFt'ICER. The question recurs on agreeint, _ to the amendment of the Senator from Iowa (M_'. CLARK). On this question the yeas and na',_s have been ordered, Mr. CANNON. Mr. _resident, I yieli myself 2 minutes to explain to m_ colleagues what this amendment will d(,, because I think many of them do not un _ derstand what the amez.dment would dc. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Time o:x the amendment has expired. Mr. CANNON. M_. President, this Senator tlas not used all ol his time on th:_ amendment, lie used only 2 minutes on the amendment. No one else has used th time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct. The Senator from Nevada is recognized. Mr. CANNON. Mr. ?resident, under the---_ Mr. CHILES. Mr. President, would _ The legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I armounce that the Senator from Idaho (Mr. CHURCH), the Senator from Iowa (Mr. HUGHES), the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. INOUYE), the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. LON_), and the Senator from Wyoming .(Mr. McGEE) are necessarily absent, Mr. HUGH SCOTT. I annourtce that motion to table be in order after the time has been yielded back? Mr. ROBEB;T C. BYRD. Mir. Presider.u, I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from Nevada may proceed for 2 minutes. Th(: PRESIDING OFFICER. Witho:t objection, it is so ordered, and the Senator from Nevada is ::eco_mized for 2 minutes. the Senator from H'awaii (Mr. FONt), the Senator from Arizona (Mr. GOLDWATER), and the Senator from l_Schigan (Mr. GRIFFIN) are necessarily absent, I also announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. WILLIAM L. SCOTT) is absent on official business, Mx'. CANNON. Mr. President, the biLs provisions with relatior, to private contributions is such that a person can rs_ ceive a contribution of not to exceci $3,000 from another person for any one election--a primary, a :unoff, or a general election. The result was announced--yeas 37, nays 54, as follows: [No. 134 Leg.] YEAS--37 Baker Ervin Pastore Bennett Fannin Pell Bentsen Hansen Percy Bible Hartke Ribicoff Brock Hatfield Scott, Hugh Buckley Hathaway Stennis Byrd, Hruska Stevens HarryF., Jr. Huddleston Talmadge Cannon Magnuson Tower Cook McGovern Tunr_ey Curtis Metzenbaum Weicker Domlnlck Montoya Williams Eastland Moss If this amendment is _dopted, it wouli limit the $3,006 in contr:butions to a on,_time contribution for _.ny election--for the total election. So that irt a year, if _ person had a primary election, a runo! election, and a general election, the maximum private contribution that coul _ be received from one oerson would 'be $3,000 rather than $3,000 per election as it is under the bill. 486 NAYS--54 Abourezk Eagleton Metcalf Aikerl Pulbright Mondale Allen 3ravel Muskle Bartlett .murney Nelson Bayh :Hart Nunn Beall :Haskell Packwood Bellmon Helms. Pearson Blden Holllngs Proxmire Brooke :Humphrey B,andolph Burdick Jackson lq,oth Byrd. Robert C. Javits Sehwelker case Johnston Sparkman Chiles :Kennedy Stafford Clark Mansfield Stevenson cotton Niathtas Symlngt'on cranston :_cclellan _aft , Dole :_cClure Thurmond DomenicI :_clntyre _foung NOT VOTIN_q--9 ' Church ::-Iughes Scott, Fong. :[nouye William L. Goldwater Long Griffin iM[cGee This would automatically effect of driving'a candidate lic fillancing, because of to raise adequate amounts. have th_ toward pu!b _ his inabilis¢ April 1 O, 197], I yield back the remainder of my time. Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, I would simply like to add to the statement of the distinguished Senator from Nevada by saying that he states the amendment very accurately and very exactly. That is the intent of the amendment, to prevent _ny :individual from contributing more than $3,000 in that campaign--in other word_,;, in the primary, in the runoff, and in the general. Otherwise, we do not have a $3,000 limitation but a $9,000 limitation from any individual, and $9,000 from that individual's spouse ff they SO desire; or an $18,000 limitation in the case of organizations. Thl_t is the purpose of this amendrnent, to restrict it to $3,000 for individ= uals and $6,000 for groups_ The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time having been yielded back on this amendrnent, the question is on agreeing to the amendment of the Senator from IoWa (Mr. CLARK). On this question the yeas and nays have been ordered, and the clerk will eau the roll. The assistant legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that the Senator from Idaho (Mr. CHUaCH), the Senator from Iowa (_r. HuGs, ms), the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. INomr_), the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. ?LONa), and the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. I_CGEE) are necessarily absent. Mr. HUGH the the {_enator ,'!;enator SCOTT. I announce that from Hawaii Arizoxm (Mr. (Mr. Fo_), GOLD- WATE,0,theSenatorfromMiehigan (._'RIFFIN), the Senator from Prac'r), Dakota Illinois (Mr. (Mr. and YOUNG) the Senator from North (Mr. are necessarily ab- sent. I also announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. WrmLIAM L. SCOTT) is absent on official business. The result was announced--yeas 65, nays24, asfollows: [No. 135 Leg.] YEAS--_5 Abour',_zk Dole Metcalf Aiken Domenicl Metzenbaum Allen Eagleton Mondale Bartlett Ervin Moss Bayh Fulbrlght Muskle Beall Gravel Nelson Bellmon Gurney Nunn Bennett Hart Packwood Bentseu Hartke Pastors Bible Haskell Pearson Biden Hatfield Proxmlre Brook(_ Helms Randolph Buckl_y Hollings Rtbtcoff Burdick Humphrey Roth Byrd, Jackson Schwelker Harly F.. Jr. Johnston Stafford Byrd. ]_obert C. Kennedy Stevens Case Magnuson Stevenson Chiles Mansfield Symington Clark Mathlas Taft cottoK_ McClure Thurmond Cranst:on McIntyre Williams NAYS--24 Baker Hansen Pell Brock Hathaway Scott. Hugh Cannon Hruska Sparkman cook Huddleston Stennis curtis Javits Talmadge I)omlnick McClellan Tower Eastland McGovern Tunney Fannl:a Montoya Welcker April 10, Church Fong Goldwater Griffin 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL NOT VOTING--ii Hughes Percy Inouye Scott, Long WilliamL. McGee Young So Mr. CLARK'Samendment was agreed to. Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendmerit was agreed to. Mr. CHILES. I move to lay that motion on the table, The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. The PRESIDING OFFICER. under the previous order, the Senate will now proceed to the consideration of amendment NO. 1118 proposed by the Senator fro m Iowa (Mr. CLARK). The amendment will be stated, The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to read the amendment, The amendment is as follows: On page 7, line 9, strike out "$10,000;" and insert in lieu thereof "$5,000;". On page 7, line 14, strike out "20 percent" and insert in lieu thereof "10 percent", Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, I offer this amendment on behalf of myself and Senaters BEALL and MATHIAS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to modify my amendment, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I would like to know the nature of the perfecting amendment first, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The modification will be stated, The assistant legislative clerk read 'as follows: After line 4, insert the following: on page 7, line 17, strike out "$125,000;" and insert in lieu thereof "$75,000;" Sometimes RECORD -- SENATE lsa difference between support and collecting money. Sometimes one can get the votes but not the dollars to back up the votes. It seems to me that by using this formula, a terrible burden is placed upon those people who might want to challenge an incumbent in a primary, and I do not think that is in keeping with the purpose of the legislation, I started out by saying that I am not opposed to public financing combined w_th private financing. But I am opposed to public financing that discriminates against people who want to challenge the incumbents, demonstrating there public S 56915 of Representatives from $10,000 to $5,000 and in the case of a candidate for the Senate from $25,000 to $12,500. N0w it was the feeling of the commit.tee we should have some reasonable threshold amount to demonstrate that iL man had some sort of public appeal be.fore he could go the public financing route. As far as I am concerned, if the Sell.- clude public financing for many serious candidates as well. Some of the opponents of S. 3044 have The best example I can offer of the dangers inherent in this section of the committee bill is the Democratic races for the House and Senate in Iowa in 1972. Altogether, there were nine Democrats competing for the nominations for six House seats and one Senate seat. Mr. President, not a single one of us would have qualified for public financing under the committee formula, /_ld I am not talking about frivolous candidates. Of the seven who were nomi= hated, not one candidate received less than 45 percent of the vote in the general election. Four of us were elected to the Congress, and three of us defeated incumbents in the process. But again, not a single one of us would have been able to get public financing in the primary under the committee bill. It is also very interesting to examine the 1972 campaigns of the 13 freshman Senators. According to reports filed 5 days before the primary, at least 7 of the 13 would not have qualified for public financing in the primary under the present formula. Of the six others, of course, there were three incumbent Congressmen, an incumbent Governor, and an incumbent mayor of the State's largest city. The seven of us were not frivolous candidates--after all, we won. But under the committee's requiremefits we would not have been able to demonstrate enough public support to qualify for matching public funds, Mr. President, we are not dealing with a threshold which must be raised to receive a fiat subsidy. We are only talking about a level which must be met before the Government will match small contributions on a dollar for dollar basis, The Rules Committee correctly states in its report that one of our primary goals must be to-Ensure adequate presentation _o the elec_orate of opposing viewpoints of competing candidates through comprehensive public financing. ate wants to, it can take away all the threshold and just say everybody is eligible. We did not think it was a good idea. I reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, I yield to the Senator from Maryland (Mr. Br^LL). Mr. BEALL. Mr. President, I rise ill support of the amendment offered by the Senator from Iowa. As he pointed out, both Senator MA'rHtAS and I are cospon.sors of the amendment. He also alluded to the colloquy I had, on the first day of the debate, with the distinguished chairman of the Rules Committee on this sub.ject matter. I used the Republican Party of Maryland as an exarfiple of an unfair advantage that would be given t_ an incumbent if we allowed the 20 percent threshold to remain in the bill before a candidate would become eligible for his share of public financing. In the State of Maryland, unfortu.nately, there are only 480,000 Republicans, but 1.5 million Democrats. We would be allowed under the bill, because we have a voting-age population of 2.7 million, at the rate of 10 cents per vetinn age population, $270,000 in primary elections. If we take 20 percent of that, it comes to $54,000. I think it is absurd to expect that someone can raise $54,000 in a primary when only 480,000 voters are registered in his party. This is excessive. I think that it is impossible for any challenger to raise $54,000 when he is running against an incumbent, especially when he has only i80,000 voters registered in his party, because we have a limit on contributions, and it would 'be very, very difficult for anybody to chal.lenge an incumbent. I think if we are going to move in the direction of public financing, then we had better make sure that we are not making the Congress of the United States a self-perpetuating body. It seems to me that is just what we are doing if we are creating the high thresholds where challengers will not be able to get the kind of money they need to participate in public funds. I think it shouldgofurther, but I think called the bill an "incumbency protection bill," charging that public financing will inevitably favor incu_mbent office holders. Chairman CANNONand the Rules Committee have very scrupulously mainrained the rights of challengers in this legislation, _nd it should be done here as well. But the primary threshold amounts-set as high as they are---represent an exception. Incumbents could reach the threshold easily---a single hundred-dellar-a-plate 'droner might be enough, But for challengers, it would be an overwhelming task. As Senator BEALLsaid during debate on March 27: We can take a step toward achieving that goal by passing this amendment and cutting the threshold amount for public financing in the primaries, Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield myself2 minutes. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada is recognized, Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I do not have any strong feelings one way or the other about the amendment. For people who oppose public financing this means it is easier to get public financing. It lowers the threshold amount in the case it is extremely reasonable to lower the threshold from. 20 to 10 percent. There.. fore, I hope the Senate will adopt the amendment in order to make it fair to those who are going to be involved in future The primaries. PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time? Do Senatorsyieldbacktheir time? Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, I yield back my remaining time on the amend.merit. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yielcl back my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the modification? Without objection, the amendment is so modified, Mr. CLARK. this amendment would Mr. reducePresident, the threshold amounts required under the bill to qualify for matching public payments in congressional and senatorial primary elections. It cuts in half the levels set in the committee bill. Although these limits are intended to prevent frivolous candidates from receivinn public financing, the threshold amounts set by the committee are so high that they will almost certainly pre- 48/ S 5696 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD .-- SEN/rTE Apri,! 1 O, 19 7._, The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time having been yielded back on the amendment, the question is on agreeing to the amendment; of the Senator from Iowa (Mr. CLARK), as modified. The yeas and nays have been ordered, and thc; clerk will call thE; roll. The second assistant legislative clerk called the roi1. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I ammunce that .the Senator from Idaho (Mr. CHURCH), the Senator from Iowa (Mr. HUCHES), the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. INOUYE), the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. LONa), the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. McGEE), the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. FULBRIOHT), and the Senntor from Mississippi (Mr. STENNIS) are necessarily absent. Mr. HUGH SCOTT. I announce that the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. FON0), the Senator from Arizona (Mr. GOLDWATER), the.. Senator from Michigan (Mr. GRIFFnV), and the Senator from Illinois (Mr. PERCY), are necessarily absent, I also announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. WlT.,.L_M L. SCOTt) is absent onoffieialbusiness. The result was announced--yeas 34, nays 54, as follows: The assistanL legislative clerk read as follows: On page 15, Ii:he 11, after the word "held" insert the following: "(ex;ept that if the office sought is President or 1Senator the amount shall be :[4 cents)". Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, this amendment proposes to restore, for the offices of Prea;ident anti Senator, the amount of 14 cents per -oter instead of 12 cents which resulted from the Aller. amendment, which was successful here by a vote of 46 to 43. The reason for limiting it to President and Senator is twofold. First. not to reargue the Allen amei,dment, which would not be fair to Senator Allen nor to the Senate, I omit the Members of the, House of Representatives; and Second, because it real).y is not ILecessary to in-. elude the Members of the House o_ Rep-. resentatives, as they h_ve a limit of $90,000, which, considering the generai_ population of congress[ona:[ districts, which is under one-half mil:lion, is not out of line with. either th_ 12-cent figure, or the 14-cent figure. The amendment applies only to elcotions, not to primaries. I am not seeking to change that at all. But the fact is thai; The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Who yields time? Mr. CANNON. Mr. Prea;ident, I yield myself 2 minutes. I would hope that the Senate would not change the position it has already taken on this particular issue. It is true that the committee reported the 15 cents in the general election and the 10 cents in the primary, but that issue has been debated on the Senate floor, and we did reduce it by a vote to 12 cents and 8 cents. I voted for that amendment; I think it was a good amendment. I will say to my colleague that while he indical_s that in a State such as his he may be limited, the limit applies both ways; it also applies on whoever the op.ponent or challenger may be. One of the purposes of the overall bill is to t;::7 to contain or restrain the cost of camnpaigns. We _ire not going ix) re.strain them if we fix the limit that can be spc:nt at higher than is normally spent. Wit_, the exception of a few races in the la_;t election---I do not recall the exact number, but there were not many races that did exceed, though some of [No. 136 Leg.] YFxAS--34 Abourezk Cranston Aiken Hart Beall Hartke Bible Haskell Blden Hatfield Brooke Hathaway Buckley Humphrey Burdlck Johnston case Mathlas Chiles McIntyre Clark Metcalf Cook Metzenbaum NAYS--54 Allen Ervin Baker Fannin Bartlett Gravel Bayh Gurney BeUmon Hansen Bennett Helms Bentsen Hollings Brock Hruska Byrd, Huddleston Harry F., Jr. Jackson Byrd, ttobert C. Javlts Cannon Kennedy cotton Magnuson curtis Mansfield Dole McClellan Doment¢i McClure Domlnlek McGovern Eagleton Moss Eastland Muekie NOT VOTING--12 Church Hughes Feng Inouye Pulbright Long this is a qualified amencment; and the, reason I give the Senate this opportunity is the fact that really the amounts are getting down to the point .where, with any kind of big State, and small States are even more affected, where a Senator like myself or any other Senator who has had considerable time in the Senate has to go to the people with so many issues--. i'_ is simple, af=er all, to take a Senator apart when we vote here 400 or 500 times a year, and when votes are connected in philosophy or have a hisiorical relationship, or you have strategic or tactical situations that face you--and you try tc run around in a State with 15 million people, even 15 cents spe_=dily failm I do not mind telling the Senate I ran, with the aid of my Stale committee, a, campaign in 1968 that cost me, aside from the help they might give, about $1,250,000. That same c_mpaign woul0 COSt about $2 million today, and if you subtract tile State--and many State or-. ganizations now do not _ant to get involved with-Federal law--you run into a campaign that may cost $2,500,000 to $3,000,000. I cannot raise that. ] cannot afford i!:. But if the committee tnoucht 15 cenl_, was a reasonable figure, I think we ought to have an opportunity to vote on a figure them exceeded very materially, the limit we have set in the bill. I w,)uld Point out that under the limite(_ bill now, for the State of New York, _ candidate there could spend, in the pr!mary, $1,213,000 and could again spend $1,508,000 in the general election under the bill as it now stands. If the Senate should adopt this amendment, it would increase that amount for the gen-eral election by roughly $126,000, it would appear. So ,I say to my colleague that I be.lieve v,e have settled this matter in a reason'able fashion. I think if we are gc4ng ';o try to contain the cost of the campa:gn, we have got to fix limits, not just fi,_ a figure far above that which we have e:_pended. I reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. IAVITS. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays. The Teas and nays were ordered. Mr. JAVITS. I. will yield myself 1 more minut_ to reply, and that is all. We have very c:,)mpletely argued these questiorLs before. All t::mt Isay is this: It is as tough for the challenger as for the challenged, in view o: the enormous increase in costs, and I do not see any disposition on the part o:[ the American people not to want a campaign which reveals the positions of bot:a sides. That costa; money, un.fortun;,,teiy, in this particular society. Whe,a you realize that there are city camps:gna which cost $2 and $3 million for a c;mdidate for mayor, I do not think these :_ums, at a 14-cent level, are at all out of line. I have given t:he Senate my own figures. These I know. I sweated blood :raising them, so I know them only too well. I am not anxious to make them more, but it is simply, in my judgment, the ncmessJties of the situation. Finally, we always talk a lot about commistee deliberations, with the com-. mittee :hearing evidence, thinking it over, and debating it in committee, so that Mondal_ Montoy_,. Nelson Packwood Proxmlre Randolph Ribieoff Schweiker Weicker Williams Nunn Pastore pearson Pell Roth Scott, Hagh Sparkman Stafford Stevens Stevenson Symington Taft Talmadge Thurmond Tower Tunney Young Scott, William L. Stennls Goldwater McGee Griffin Percy So the Clark amendment, as modified, was rejected, Mr. CRANSTON obtained the floor. Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. CRANSTON. Mr. President, I yield to the distinguished Senator from New York. Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, I shall use my own time, of course, but I intend to limit my remarks on the amendment to 5 minutes, I call up :my amendment No. 1185 and ask thatitberead. The PRESIDING OFFICFR. The amendment; willbe stated, 488 larger toothan I eon-sider low. th:it now se:, which All you have to do is deduct onefifteenth from the colur, m 15 cents for 'the Presidency; that results in roughly $19 million for the Presidency, rather than the figures which are set up here, $21 million-so:mething tot the 15-con',; fund. and similarly down that column, I simply lay 'this question before the Senate: Under these conditions, the only chance we have to somewhat raise the figures, for purposes of regotiation with the other body, is in an amendment thai; is qualified. Th.is is qualified. I ask unanimous COlksent that the names of Senators MOND,,LE and DOLE be added as cospc, nsors of the amendment, April ! O, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD m SENATE they come to the right conclusion. Here we have a committee, and the manager of the bill says they did not come to the right conclusion, that he voted against lt. So, since he voted against it, he has got to vote against it again, I hope very much that will not be the logic of the Senate. The committee came up with 15 cents. The Senate, by a majority of 46 to 43, reduced it to 12 cents. Here is an opportunity to again come closer to the amount the committee, which deUberated, provided, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time? Mr. DOMINICK. Mr. President, I think I have an hour, ff I wanted to talk that long. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct, Mr. DOMINICK. I yield myself 2 rainutes, in order to back up my distinguished friend from New York. I am sure everyone will say that if he and I are on the same side on this issue, one of us is obviously wrong, but we will find out pretty quickly. I will say to the Senate as a whole that ! think, to begin with, this whole bill h unconstitutional. I do not think you can put a limit on the right of any individual to support in any legal way that he wants to the candidate of his choice. I think that is what we have attempted to do. One three-judge Federal court has already so raled, in connection with the bill that is now part of the law. The ruling has not been appealed. They ruled on that ground, that this is a violation reconsider has already been made and tabled. So actually this is a method of doing indirectly what the Senator is prevented from doing under the rules directly; that is, reconsidering that vote and offering his own amendment. The distinguished Senator had the opportunity yesterday. If he thought there was some magic to the 14-cent figure, he could have offered that as an amendment when the Senator from Alabama put in the amendment calling for a 12cent per person of voting age limitation on the general election. He saw fit not to do that. After the Senate has acted and a motion to reconsider has been made and tabled, the distinguished Senator from New. York comes in and says that a subsidy of $1,519,000 in a Senate race in New York is insufficient unless they recapture two-thirds of the reduction that was made on yesterday in order that the 100-percent Government subsidy for general election campaigns in New York and other States can be increased, The 2-cent increase does not sound like a great deal, but it amounts to millions of dollars throughout the entire Nation and, of course, the amount is several hundred thousand dollars in New York. As the distinguished chairman of the committee stated, this would provide for primary and general elections expenditures for the Senate seat. The 12 cents and the 8-cent figures would provide for a campaign fund in the primary and in the general election, of exactly the first what amendment, and I think that is it is. Second. I think we have sought to do If there were to be a run-off, it would be another million dollars, but just the primary and general election is $2 ¥2 million. So I believe a candidate could struggle along on $2_ million in a campaign, If the Senate thinks It should be increased, ofcourse, itcandoso; butIwant to stress that what the Senator seeks to do is to reconsider the action of the Senate, which has already been sought to be reconsidered, and the Senate refused to do so. The Senator limits it to President and Senator. As he stated, the House is already 14 cents above, anyhow. So actually there is a full reconsideration of the action of the Senate yesterday and a substitution of another figure which the Senator was at liberty to offer yesterday, had he seen fit so to do. indirectly, by what my distinguished friend from Alabama did and as a matter of fact what this' bill does, what we cannot do directly; namely, limit the amount you can expend; and you have to include whatever anyone expends, no matter whether they have any connectton with you or not, as an overall limltatiun; thUS we are denying them the right to support the candidates of their choice, Third. As I think everyone has known from the beginning, I am and always have been totally opposed to public financing. I think it is a real rip-off of the taxpayer. That is not a part of this amendment, which would seem to me only sensible, that if we are going to have an unconstitutional bill, which I think is a disaster from beginning to end, and I think we are all acting as masochists, ff I may say so, to the detriment of the taxpayer, then we ought to have a limit which is high enough. So I am happy to support it and will support the amendment but I am going to vote against the whole bill no matter what happens, Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I yield mySelf 4 minutes, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama is recognized for 4 minutes. Mr. ALLEN. What this amendment seeks to do is to go over ground that the Senate went over yesterday. It seeks, in effect, to reconsider the vote which was taken on yesterday, and one motion to So I hope that the ·amendment will be rejected and that we will be able to go on to other matters that the Senate has not yet considered about this bill. Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, I yield myself 1 minute to make a point which I think, is pretty interesting. I thought my friend from Alabama was a real expert on the rules of the Senate although he has served here a lot less than others have. I regret to say I must call this to his attention, that I could not move to reconsider yesterday because I was on the losing side. I thought that 15 cents was right, so I could not move to reconsider. I am not going to reconsider today. I am just saying that we have another chance, before we lock up the bill, to take another look at this, because S 5697 of the expertise, of the committee, and get closer to their :figure. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I did not say that the Senator should have moved to reconsider, because the Senator from Alabama made that motion yesterday. I said that the effect of what the Senator is doing here is to seek to reconsider. That action was sought to be taken yesterday and the Senate :refused to reconsider it because it favored it. What the Senator is trying to do now is to do indirectly what the rules forbid him from doing directly, since the motion to reconsider ha_ already been tabled and another motion is not in o_xler. Several Senators _tddressed the Chair. Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, I shotfld like to support the amendment offered by the Senator from New York. To begin with, to place an arbitrary limit on campaign expenditures based on a per capita figure is foolish, because campaign costs vary from State to State. The Senator of New York can reach a great many of his constituents, perhaps half of them, via the subway. But in my State, to get to the various major population centers, because of population dispersal, I have to lease an aircraft because many cities in Texas are not served by the commercial airlines. Of course, no one is served by trains any more and the bus service is not all that good. So campaign costs vary from State to State. To place an arbitrary limit on this :is stupid and foolish, in my opinion, in the first place, because it takes none of these things into consideration. The reason we have 50 sovereign States and different ways of exercising the police power in those States, is that situations, people, geography, and everything else, differ from various regi(ms of the country to others. But if we are going to place an arbitrary limit, let us e_T on the side of givlng too much rather than too little, because it is unfair to many people who are campaigning to be expected to get by with 12 cents a voter. We cannot do it. The figure of 12 cents is unrealistic, aa has been pointed out eloquently and ably and precisely by my friend from New York. So I hope the Senate will follow his urgings, that we raise the limit to 14 cents. Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I yield myself 1 minute to ask a question of the distinguished chairman. I think I understand it, but do these limitations---I am addressing my question to the distingulshed Senator from Nevada--if one is unopposed or at legist one is certain he is unopposed, he does not know it until filing deadline. What happens to tlle limitation so far as the primary is concerned? Mr. CANNON. The provisions in the · bill limit the amount spent to not more than 10 cents. If a person has no opponent in the primary, that is in addition to the amount permitted In the general. Mr. DOLE. That is the primary reason I am supporting the Senator from New York. Perhaps some of the one-party States, where we do not have any opponent, we are not worried about it. Perhaps the Senator from Alabama may be 489 S 5698 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --- SE_C_kTE unopposed---he probably Is-_but it does not make l_luch difference at this point whether it is 10 cents, 12 cents, 30 cents, or whatever. But 'maa two-party State, where we have a primary and a general election, it makes a great deal of differ- ,_g:ennedy .Mansfield .Mondale Pastore !PearsoIz ezlce. It makes a great deal of difference whether the opponent may have a primary and ',you have no primary. :He can spend up to the limit in the primary and the genera]., even though the primary opponent may be a token opponent. Some are getting resourceful and they are talking about setting up a toke_ opponent in a primary in order to bypass certain provisions of the law, which, indicates the foolishness cd this. So, to set up a strawman in the primary he can spend more money in the primary and get ready for the general election, As the Senator from Texas has stated, perhaps on this question, where the committee initiaUy recommended 15 cents per voter, the compromise should be at 14 cents because those States are there and everything depends on our own situation from time to time. For instance, in Kansas, which is a small State bordered by the State of Missouri, where television ,costs are high, we start our campaign _rly and try to play it straight and we have already spent 4 or 5 cents per voter and we are still far from the general election. We find many other things like that entering into the situati.on, so that we have been hiring people with contributions that have been corntrig in to ,)ur campaign, and every expence has 'been registered and every expenditure ihas been disclosed, but when we do thai; you soon learn, if you have an opponent, that 14 cents is not unrealistie.. The PRESIDING OFFICER, (M_. NUNN). The question is on agreeing to the York.amendment of the Senator from New On this question the yeas and nays have been ordered, and the clerk will cab the roll. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that the Senator from Idaho (Mr. CHURCH), the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. I_ou_r), the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. LONO), the Senator from Wyoming (1_. MCGEE), the Senator from Arkar_sag (Mr. I:'ULRRX0HT),the Senator from Ohio (Mr. METZENRAUM), and the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. STENNXS) are necessarily absent, Mr. HUGH SCOTT. I announce that the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. FoNd), the Senator from Arizona (:Mr. GOLDWATER), the Senator from Michigan (Mr. GRrFFZN), :and the Senator from Illinois (Mr. PERCY) are necessarily absent, I also announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. WILLIAM L. SCOTT) iS absent on official business, The result was announced--yeas 37, nays 51, as follows: :Bartlett Gravel Nunn :eellmon Gurne¥ Packwood :Bennett Hansen Proxmire Bentsen Helms Randolph iBible tIollings R[blcoff Burdick tIruska Roth :Byrd, Jackson 8parkman Harry F., Jr. _/iagnuson Stafford '.Byrd.Robert C. Mathias Stevenson :cannon _cClella,_ Symingto,_ ,Chiles ]_(cCIure T'._ft ,Cook ]scGovern Talmadge cotton _/IcIntyre T:hurmond curtis ]_etcalf Weicker Eagleton _5ontoya Eastland ]_oss NOT VOTING--12 Abourezk Bayh Baker Beall Bidexm Brock Brooke Buckley 490 [No. 137 Leg.] YEAS--37 Case Cranston Clark Dole Domenlct Dominick Hart Hartke Haskell Hatfield Hathaway Huddleston Hughe_,_ Hurnpktrey Javits Johnston _4P_,_ 10, _97._ Aiken ];'ell _lnney Schweiker Williams _;cott, Hugh Young _teven_ Tower NAYS---5:. Ervin ]duskte quest were modified to limit the time to 20 minutes on any amendment, to be e_uall!T divided? Mi'. PACKWOOD. Let me ask the Senator's intention in terms of attempting to finish tonight or going ow_r until tomor- ,alien Yannin rOW. Nelson Church lnouye _cott, Fong Long William L. Fulbright Z/IcGee S1;ennls Ooldwater Metzenbaun. Griffin Percy So Mr. JAVITS' amezLdment was re:. jected, Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Pres[dent, I move l_ :reconsider the vote by which the amen6.., :ment was rejected, Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I move to la._ ghat motion on the tame. The motion to lay o:a the table ws_; agreed to. The PRESIDING OFPICKFt. The Sen. ator from Ca[[ifornia is recognized, Mr. ROBERT C. BYR]D. Mr. President, will the Senator yield 1_)me? Mr. CRA N_TON. I am delighted to :Field. Mr. ROBERT C. BYR]D. Mr. Presideni, '.may we have order in the ;Senate? The PRESIDING OFFICER. Th_ Senate will bi; in order, UNANI_XDUS-CONSEr[T aEQ,_EST Mr. ROBERT C. BYR_D. Mr. President, 1YXr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Well, it would me either way, frankly. I will stay here e s long as Senators want to stay or go ow,r until tomorrow. But my thought was that if time could be cut down on _mendments, then it might be that we could go until _ or _ :30 this evening; or we could go over until tomorrow and finish tomorrow--or later tonight-whatever Senators prefer. Mr. PACKWOOD. If we could reach a unani:xxous-consent agreement to adjourn tonight at 7:30 and come back tomorrow I would have no objection to the limitation proposed. 1V[r..PASTORE. Mr. President, I came tO my office this morning at 8 o'clock. I have been busy today with a half dozen conferences, I have gone to every meeting it was my responsibility to attend, and I have been on the floor. Here it is 5:30 snd it looks as if these amendments are st:Il coming forth. We have had cioture imposed. I say there should be a sense of fairness ia the Senate. When we get to the hour of 6 o'clock we should quit and come back tomorrow. We have not had notice that we were going to stay tonight. Most of us have family obligations. I think that should be taken into consideration. I think this matter has gotter_ completely out of hand and the time :_hould come to put a stop to it. If ii; becomes necessary to stay late tomorrc.w night we should have notice so tlhat we can advise our families that we will l:Ot be home for dinner tomorrow SlJit evenh_g. li take the floor at this t:me, through th,_ We have been considering this bill .courtesy of the distinl;ulshed Senato:.' since _ill the happen latter part of btu March. I wonder what to the anyway when :from California, to inquire as to hovr it goes to the House, and here we are :many, amendraents remain to be caile_t straizfing ourselves and keeping ourselves up at this time. One, rarer, five, seve:c, from our families, which I think is a :nine--great injustice. I hope we can reach an Mr. ALL_,N, I have two amendmen_ agreement. Now there has been a request that will reqvAre only 5 minutes each. for avea and nay vote. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Very well. W_ lit t_kes 20 minutes. I have heard about :have 11 amendments r,_maining. 11 anendments, and then some other Mr. President, I haxe not discussed Serial or came along and put up his frothis request with the It adership on th_ gers. :[ do not think it was the "V" sign--.other side of the aisle nor have I dis _ i_ was two more amendments. That cussed it with anyone on this side of th,_ make:_ 13. That is 4 hours and 20 milxaisle, utes alone on rollcalls. Mr. President, I ask una_fimous con. Now, when are we going to go home sent that the time on any remainini_' and when are we going to finish the bill? amendment k,e limited to 15 minute_,, I say the time has come when we ought with 5 minutes to the manager of th_ to have an agreement to quit at 6:30 bill and 10 minutes to the mover of the tonight and come in tomorrow morning, amendment, at 9 o clock, 8 o'clock, 5 o'clock Mr. PACKWOOD. l_[r. ]President, [ SEVERALSENATORS.Five o'clock. object. Mr. PASTORE. Five o'clock, and finish The PRESIDING OF_ICE]_. Objection the bill, but please do not let that dinner is heard, get cc id tonight. Mr. ROBElq. T C. BYRD. Does the Sen _ Mr. HUGH SCOTT. Mr. President, will ator have an amendmer t? the Senator yield for an interjection? Mr. PACKWOOD. Ye:;. Mr. PASTORE. I will yield for anyMr. ROBEttT C. BYRD. WoUld th_ thing. Senator object if an exception were mad_ Mr. HUGH SCOTT. Mr. President, ff for his amendment? the Senator will yield for an interjection, Mr. PACKWOOD. Yes, I would. I WOl:Id like to fiote, for the Senator's M_. ROBE_T C. BYRD. Mr. Pres:[sched_fiing table, that I believe there are dent, would the Senator object if the re. about 15 Senators who are scheduled to April 10, 19 73 CONGRESSIONAL speak for 15 minutes each tomorrow, and that will chew into the Senators' travel schedule .like crazy ff we cannot figure out some way to get out of here by 3 o'clock tomorrow, We have about 25 Senat0rs who want to get out of here. Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, I would ask unanimous consent at this time that those 15 Senators who have 15-minute speeches begin to talk after passage of this bill and let them stay here until midnight tomorrow night. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, may we have order in the Senate? The PRESIDING OFFICER. There will be order in the Senate. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I will revise my unanimous-consent request in this fashion: That. time on any amendment be limited to 20 minutes; that time on any debatable motion or appeal, with the exception of a motion to recommit, which Senator STEVrNSON was interested in earlier today, ,be liraired to 10 minutes, to be equally divided; that the time on any motion to recommit be limited to 30 minutes; and that the vote on final passage occur at no later than 3 p.m. tomorrow, Mr. BUCKLEY. Mr. President, reservlng the right to object, Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. With this further proviso: that time on any rollcall, with the exception of the first rollcall tomorrow, be limited to 10 minutes, the warning bells to be sounded after the first 2¥2 minutes, Mr. BUCKLEY. Mr. President, reservlng the xight to object, I do have an tmportant constitutional point that I intend to raise, and although I do not belteve I would use my full hour, I do not want to give up my full hour. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Would the' Senator wish to speak tonight? I will be happy to remain, and he can make his speech tonight, Mr. PASTORE. It will be in the Rfcorr. We will read it. Mr. BUCKLEY. I would hope to get the ears of more than one or two Senators on that important constitutional question, Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I hope the Senater will make his speech this evening, because Senators are on notice that he is going to make the speech, and before the final vote they would look at the RECORr tomorrow and read it. Mr. BUCKLEY. With all due respect, I doubt that they will. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I am afraid that they would not stay to listen at this hour of the day, or even tomorrow, may I say to the Senator. I have been here 16 years and I have not seen anyone capture their attention in that way. Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I yield. Mr. TOWER. If the consent agreement is not agreed to, that would mean we could stay here tonight and Senators could bring up' their amendments, and have votes on them, unless there were a motion to adjourn, which would be debatable. Mr. PASTORE. No, there is no debate on such a motion, RECORD-- SENATE Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. A motion to adjourn is not debatable. Mr. President, I repeat my request that there be a limitation of 20 minutes .. Mr. PACKWOOD. Mr. president, if the Senator will yield, if we are including in that proposed agreement a vote at 3 o'clock tomorrow, can we have assurances of leaving here at 7 o'clock this evening instead of 10 o'clock? Mr. PASTORE. I will buy 6: 30. Mr. PACKWOOD. Six-thirty--fine. Mr. BAYH. Mr. President, resmwing the right to object, perhaps this is inappropriate, and I seldom find myself on the opposite of an issue with my distingulshed friend from Rhole Island, but, you know, Mr. President, we have been kicking this bill around for a long. long time. Some people have expressed strong reservations about it. I do not deny that every Senator has his parliamentary right to prolong the debate, but I will tell you, Mr. President, the people of Indiana would be glad to let Senators remain here so their suppers will get cold. It would be a pretty good precedent if we stayed here until we finished this bill for campaign reform. We have debated it at length, Two-thirds of the Senate have exercised their will to limit debate on it, and now we ought to be willing to give up our conveniences and work until we finish action on the bill. Mr. PASTORE. Come, corn!e, come, Mr. BAYI-I.This is getting to be a little ridiculolls. This Senator can sustain any inconvenience that is necessary to do his job.'AI1 I am saying is that it has been the custom and the ha'bit of this body that when we are going to stay here beyond 7 o'clock, we receive notice of it the day before. I do not know the obligations of the Senator from Indiana for his own faroily, but I have my family waiting for me tonight. When he talks about lnconvenience, ail I am saying is that we have been here for a month, and we are not going to finish this bill tonight. All I am saying is, let us come in early tomorrow mornlng and let us get started early and do our job. Mr. BAYH. Mr. President 1Vfr. PASTORE. I do not want to be a tinhorn hero, but I am a little surprised at my colleague from Indiana. He is not more conscious of his responsibfiity than the Senator from Rhode Island, and when he says we are going to give up our conveniences because this is importaut, whom are we kidding? [Laughter.] Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, may we have order? The PRESIDING OFFICER. Senators will please take their seats, Mr. BAYH. Mr. President Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, whohas the floor? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. How did the Senator from Indiana get the floor? The PRESIDING OFFICER. Because he addressed the Chair for the last 5 mtnutes while the Senator from Rhode Island wasspeaking. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Very well. Mr. BAYI-I. Mr. President, I hope my $ 5699 friend from Rhode Island will read what I said, and if he can point to anything which, either by direction or indirection, implied or suggested that my friend from Rhode Island was not one of the most dedicated Members of this body, willing to sacrifice his own conveniences, then I will stand corrected. I think he knows of my great respect Ior him. My statemerit goes not to any degree of piosity, but it seems to be clear to me that a lot of people are looking for us to stand up and get this thing behind us. I think we have a great opportunity to do so. I am not asking for any merit badges, but I am telling you, Mr. President, a lot of people think this is importaalt. This might give us an opportunity to do something a little exceptional and get it behind us, and what it does to my family is not going to be different from what it does to anybody else's. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, we could argue this point ad infinitum. I would hope we would try to reach an agreement. Let me try again. I ask unanimous consent that time on any amendment be limited to 15 minutes, with 10 minutes to the mover of such amendment and 5 minutes to the man.ager of the bill; that time on any debut-. able motion or appeal be limited to 10 minutes, to be equally divided in accord.ance with the usual form, with the exception of a motion to recommit, on which the Senator from Illinois (Mr. STEVENSON)wanted 30 minutes today and was assured of that by the majority leader; and that time on any rollcall vote be limited to 10 minutes, with the warning bells to be sounded after the first 2¥2 minutes; with the time allotted the ofcloture rule to3 of be rule vitiated; aunder waiver paragraph III; with and that the vote on final passage occur at no later than 3 tomorrow afternoon. Mr, HUGH SCOTT, Mr. President, will the Senator accept an amendment to bis request--that the Senator from New York (Mr. BVCKT._y) be recognized fir_t tomorrow at the end of the special orders and be allowed to use not more than 30 minutes of his on timeh_s at amendment that time andinmay then proceed the time limited? Mr. ROBERT C_ BYRD. With that modification. Mr. AIKEN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield fora question? Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Yes. Mr. AIKEN. I should like to say that for more than a week I have had six amendments te improve this bill very much. But in the interest of bringing consideration of this bill to an early conclusion, I have refrained from offering the amendments. However, if we come in tomorrow, I should like to offer the six amendments. I assume that they will be permitted ff we come in tomorrow. If we can finish tonight, I shall be glad to bring this unhealthy situation to an earlier close. Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. ROBERT C. '.BYRD. I yield. Mr. BAKER.Mr. President, the ptLrpose of my rising at this time is to ask the Senator from West Virginia, if I fully 491 S 5700 CONGRESSIONAL RICORD -- S_.;NATE April 1 O, 19 74 understand his remarks. Is the time on these amendments from this point fc_-._ ward to be limited to 15 minutes:, 10 min_. utes for 'bile proponents anti 5 minutes for the manager of the bill ? Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. The time al-. lotted under the cloture rule would be vitiated, Mr. BAKER. That is what I wanted to bring up. Is the Senator _tsking that the cloture vote be vitiated? Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. No. I would ask only that the time limitation under the cloture rule be vitiated, because otherwise the 15 minute agreement on any amendment would be worthless, Mr. BA]3LER. Do I understand that we are going to run for any very great length o[ time tonight? Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. No, I did not quest I now propose is only with respe_'[ to time on amendmen:;s, Mr. DOMINICK. Bat objection h_,_ already been made to that. Mr. I_OBER. T C. BYI_D. But I am nc w proposing a different consent request, Mr. AIKEN. If the Senator believes that we can postpone completing tiffs work tonight and come in tomorrow,_ would it be possible to complete the kill and get a final vote on it before tlc adjournment for Easts:-? Mr. ROBERT C. BYFtD. Yes, I think so. The idea, in trying to get a definile time limitation, is to a( commodate Se_:ators who wish to make plane reserv_tions to go afar. Some of them want lo get away by 3 o'clock ]).m. tomorrow. Mr. AIKEN. I would ke willing to agr,_e to a time limitation for tonight. If we the mtuation, and that is to move to table the ])ill. I move that the bill be laid on the :able, and I call for the yeas and nay,,;. Mi. ROBERT C. BYRE). Mr. President, the Senator from California had the floor before yielding to me. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from California yield for the purpose of allowing the Senator from .Alab:_ma to make his motion? Mr. CRANSTON. No, I do not. Mr_ ALLEN. I thought the Chair had recognized the Senator from Alabama. Th_ PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator l_rom California has the floor. The Senamor from California yielded to the Senator from West Virginia for a unanimou'_;-consent request. AI_END1VLENT NO. 1177 say that. I would have to leave that up to the Senate. Mr. BAI{_ER. I am perfectly agreeable to any time limitation. I was wondering what the leadership had in mind. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. With the number of amendments that have been adopted, and with the number of Senntors who want to speak tomorrow morn-, lng, it would be necessary to go for a while yet tonight, Mr. BAKER. Well, would the Senator say 7 or 7:30? Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Yes, in order to finish tomorrow at 3 o'clock, but even then, Senators may be shut off from debate on their amendments at 3 p.m. Mr. BAKER. My 'final concern is with reference to the statement by my friend from Rhode Island (Mr. PASTORE), that we would receive notice the day before if we were going to run beyond 7 o'clock. If that is so, I should like to be put on that list. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I know of no such list. Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, I object. ' The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard, Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. :President, I ask unanimous consent that time on any amendment be limited, to instead of 30 minutes, to 20 minutes, the time to be equally divided, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Mr. DOMINICK. Mr. President, reserving the right tx) object--and this is a point I wanted to make before--the Senator from West Virginia indicated to the Senator from Tennessee that this vitiated the 1-hour cloture rule. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Only if we were able to get unanimous consent to the package agreement earlier proposed, Mr. DOMINICK. I happen to be one of those who do not have amendments, but I may want to talk on an amendment or talk on the bill, and I would hate to give up my hour without any agree, ment. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Without an agreement, the Senator will not lose his right. Mr. DOMINICK. That is correct. Without an agreement, I would not be losing my right. But if w_ got a unanimousconsent agreement, I would, as I understand, Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. But the re- are to come in tomorrow, we might ju_,t as well strike this prop3sal, Mr. ROBEFT C. BYP;D. I will be gla t to try again. Mr. President, I ask unanimous eonsent that time on any amendment b_ limited to 15 minutes, 10 minutes to th_ proposer of the amendment and _ minutes to the manager of the bill,with time on any amendmert to an amendment, motion, or appe_l limited to l0 minutes, to be divided in accordance with the usual form, with section 3 of rule XI: being waived, with t!me under tht; cloture rule being vitiate, d, and that thc 'vote on final l;mssage cf the bill occur at no later than 10 o'clock tonight, The PRESEDING OF?ICER. Is there objection? Mr. PACKVfOOD an_l several othm Senators objected. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objectio:c is heard. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President I will make a final effcrt. I renew m:__ request that ti:me on any amendment bs limited to 15 minutes, to be divided 10 minutes to the lnover of the amendment and 5 minutes bo the manager of the bill with 10 minutes on any rollcall votes fo_ 'the remainder of the bill; and that the warning bells be sounde¢, afh_r 2_/2 min_ utes. I shall make no further request. Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, how long will we be going tonight? Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I am not going to attempt to an,,wer that ques., tion. When Senators are ready to quit, _[ shall be glad to move to s djourn. As long as Senators want to stay, I will stay. Mr. PASTOR,E. I object, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard, Mr. ROBERT C. BYRE. Mr. President, I ask that the time that has been utilized be charged to me under the rule and that no time be charged to the able Senator from California (Mr CRANSTON). Mr. METCAL_. Mr. P._esident, unde_ section 3 of rule XII, to whom is the de.bate that is taking place being charged/_ The PRESIDING OFFICER. It has been assigned to the Senator from West Virginia. Mr. ALLEN. NIr. President, ][ yield my-. self 1 minute. I have used only 1 minute, so the parliamentarian has advised me; and I certainly do not intend to use the whole hour. I believe there is only one way out of Mr CRANSTON. Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 1177 and ask that it be _tated. Mr. HUGH SCOTT. Mr. President, my congratulations to the Senator from Callfornis.. Mr. CRANSTON. I thank the Senator f.rom Pennsylvania. Mr. President, this is mainly a tech-' nical _mendment. Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question? Mr, CRANSTON. I yield. Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, as I underst_md, there is no time limitation. The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is an existing agreement of a half-hour on. each :_mendment. 492 Mr. STEVENS. I thank: the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. This is superimposed on the 1 hour that each Senator has under the cloture rule. The amendment will be stated. The legislative clerk read as follows: S. 3044 on page 5. line 19, following the word. "omce"_ insert the words '% an_[ if, in a State w[_ich registers voters by party, that said party's registration in such State or district is equE.1 to 15 per eentum or more of the total voter registration i_x said State or district". Mr. 2RANSTON. Mr. President, this is largeb a technical amendment which will, I believe, improve on the committee's intent in section 501(8) of S. 3044. As written, the bill provides that if only oz_e political party qualifies as a ma.jor party entitled to full funding, a po.litical :_arty whose candidate received in the last election less than 25 percent of the total votes cast in that election but more than 15 percent would qualify as a major party. I believe that that provision was included because of/ concern expressed bY several Senators,_including myself, that occasionally in a two-party State an incumbent may be sufficiently popular as to receive more than 75 per-. cent of the vote in a given election. I support section 501(8)-of the bill, but I wish to suggest that it be modified to take into account the following situation which has arisen this year in Callfolmia. 'rher_ are five incumbent Democratic Congre_smen who are facing no Republi,_an opponents this fall, However, in two of they're districts there are candidates April 10, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL seeking the nomination of the Peace and Freedom Party and of the American Independent Party. It therefore appears likely that on the November ballot these two Democratic Congressmen will find themselves opposed by nominees of these minor parties, it is entirely possible that Republicans or Democrats wishing to vote against the Democratic incumbent for whatever reason would vote for a minor party candidate. Thus, a minor party candidate will become the rectpient of such protest votes and could conceivably receive 15 percent of the total vote cast. As a result in the 1976 election, under the provision of the bill as it is before us, either of the minor parties might be entitled to receive full funding-as a major party. The fact is that in neither district does either party have as much as 1 percent of the total voter registration in the district, Therefore,' Mr. President, I would like to suggest that in addition to receiving 15 percent of the votes east in the previous election, a party, in order to qualify as a major party, should also have voters in the district equal to at least 15 percent of the total registered voters, That is what my amendment would do. It adds the language: and if, in a State which registers voters by party, that said party's registration in such State or district is equal to 15 percent or mor e of the total voter registration in said State or district, This would prevent the unjust enrichment' of the political coffers of minor parties who have no basis for being treated as major parties. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield myself 20 seconds. The eloquence of the Senator from California has convinced me of the merits of his amendment, and I am prepared to accept it. I yield back the remainder of my time. Mr. CRANSTON. I yield back the remainder of my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. All remaining time having been Yielded back, the question is on agreeing to the amendmerit (No. 11_7) of the Senator from California. The amefidment was agreed to. Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the _mendment was agreed to. Mr. CRANSTON. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motio n to lay on the table was agreed to. A_m_D_E_T :¢O. _2S Mr. CRANSTON. Mr. President, I call up my Amendment No. 1125, and ask for its immediate consideration, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated, The assistant legislative clerk proeeeded to read the amendment, Mr. CRaNsTon's amendment (No. 1125) is as follows: On page 15, line 18, strike the words "primary or". On'page 15, line 20, strike the words *'primary or". on page 18, line 21, strike .ghe words "(a) or". Mr[ CRANSTON. Mr. President, this amendment, incidentally, is cosponsored by the Senator from Kansas (Mr. DOLE). RECORD--SENATE S 5701 As presently written, S. 3044 provides that a candidate unopposed in a primary or general election can spend only 10 percent of what he would be able to spend if he had opposition. I have no objection to this restricted spending limit for a candidate unopposed in a general ,election. The primary, however, is a totally different matter, Let me give two examples of what might happen if the bill is enacted in its present form: The most likely situation would involve an incumbent unopposed in his own primary, while two--or more--individuals seek the nomination of the other party. The two challengers might well decide that the best way to win their party's nomination is to campaign against the incumbent--with each ehallenger ignoring the other. Thus the ineumbent would be subject for a period 'of several weeks or months to a campaign against him by two opponents, both of whom would be permitted to outspend him 10 to 1. A second example i:,volves a primary election where the incumbent has nomtnal opposition and the person seeking the nomination of the other major party is unopposed. The incumbent would ignore the opponent within his own party and campaign on his record for a pcriod of weeks or months during which time he would be able to outspend his real challenger in the other party by 10 to 1. Both situations are obviously inequitable and unfair, Let me point out the situation which I face this year, and what might happen under a public financing system with this .limitation on primary spending, As it happens, I have two virtually unknown opponents in my own Democratic primary in June. Neither man is conducting a visible campaign, to the best of my knowledge. It is for all practical purposes, then, that I am unopPosed, and it could well have been that neither man filed and thus I would have been actually unopposed. only 12;/2 percent of what my opponents could spend. Even if my amendment is accepted, with four opponents all of whom may be conducting their primary campaigns by running against me, I would be outspent 4 to 1. But at least no one candidate would be able to spend more than I would be permitted to spend. There is an additional disadvantage for an unopposed candidate of such a limitation in the primary. Much of thE: groundwork for the general election must; be laid in the primary. The candidate's campaign organization must be put together, for if the candidate waits until the general election, he will find that both staff and workers have been pre.empted by other candidates and cam.palgns. He must travel, he must speak, he must make public appearances--even though he may decide not to put on a substantial media campaign. All of these activities cost money. Pinally, he may wish to begin his direct mailing solicitation of small contributions during the primary--the cost of which, in a State like California, could 'quickly eat up the total mount a candidate would be allowed to spend. I suspect---and this is another very serious objection, I believe,- to the present language of the bill--that it the bill is enacted in its present form, no candidate of either party would ever allow himself to be unchallenged. This could lead to nonserious candidates put up by serious candidates of either party--or by the parties themselves--to assure that the serious candidate receives full funding. Such a situation would be unhealthy, unwise, and might well lead to a greater need for Federal funding than would be the case if an unopposed primary candi-: date were allowed to spend as much as an opposed prima_,y candidate--and if he chose to. Under a matching system_ I doubt that an unopposed primary candidate would, under normal circumstances, raise or spend as much as a candidate with opposition. My amendment, lqo. l125, would simply strike any reference to the primary from There are four highly visible, active section 504(c) of the bill. I urge Senators candidates seeking the Republican nomto support the amendment. ination for the U.S. Senate. All four are I am delighted to yield to my distinraising money and all foul' have to be guished cosponsor of the amendment, the classed as serious candidates for the ReSenator from Kansas (Mr. DOLE), on his publican nomination, time. As the bill is written, these four canMr. DOLE. I will use my time, but I didates would be entitled to spend $4½ would like to ask the Senator a question. million campaigning against me during Mr. COOK. Mr. President, a parliaa period of at least 4 months, while ! would· be able to spend only a hundred mentary inquiry. The PRESIDINGOFFICER.The Senthousand dollars defending myself ator will state it. against their attacks. Now it is true, under the bill the situation would be Mr. COOK. What does the . Senator equalized under the general, with each mean, on his Itime? Mr. DOLE. haw., 48 minutes left, or candidate able to spend the same amount. But the huge disadvantage of 43. being outspent better than 40 to 1 in the Mr. COOK. Well, there are 30 minutes primary might well create an insui'on an amendment. Is the Senator utilizmountable disadvantage from which a lng time on the amendment, or on his candidate could not recover, hour? There has been some suggestion that Mr. DOLE. Both. the 10-percent figure might be changed, Mr. COOK. All right. That makes allowing an unopposed candidate in a sense. primary to spend 20 percent. At 20 perMr. DOLE. As I understand it, the Sencent, I would be able to spend only 5 perator from California would strike section cent of what my opponents could spend. 504(c) ? At 50 percent I would be able to spend Mr. CRANSTON. We would strike the 493 $ 5702 CONGRESSIONAL provision that makes it impossible to spend more than 10 per cent in a prlmary. Mr. DOLE. ALl right. As a cosponsor of the amendment, I should know what it does, but ][ wanted to make certain, I agree with the Senator from California. As discussed with him earlier, I believe the :present provisions will lead to the serious primary candidate having a non-serious primary opponent, if he is faced with a tough general election to permit him to spend a greater total amount, We are going to see more and more cfforts to evade or avoid the !aw if this restriction remains. I support the amendment and am pleased to cosponsor it with the Senator from California. I also raise the question, How do we know when we are going to be opposed in a primary? In Kansas, the filing deadline is June 20. I started campaigning a year ago. :In the process, I have spent a gTeat deal of money--for a small State like Kansas--making preparations for a primary, i:[ I have one, and if not, then for the general election, I may yet have a primary because we lmve several months before June 20. Seems to :me this is one of the restrietions in the bill which makes the entire proposition at least appear to be unwork_ble. I have made expenditures based on the supposition that I could have a primary. If unopposed then I can only spend 10 percent and the rest must be charged, I guess, against what I might have spent in the general election. This is not fair so I believe the amendment woul.d be helpful. . Mr. CRANSTON. ! think the Senator from Kansas very much. Mr. CAi_INON. Mr. President, I think the Senator from Kansas has made a very good point about the fact that a person may be campaigning long before he finds out that they are not going to have a primary and he might well have spent more than the 10-percent limit we have in the bill. It is a valid point and'I am willing to accept the amendment, The PI_ESIDING OFFICEI_. The question is on s_greeing to the amendment of the Senator from California. The amendment was agreed to. Mr. BUCKLEY. Mr. President, during the course of the past 2 weeks we have examined and debated many facets of S. 3044. Many of us have questioned specific provisions of the legislation on conceptual and pracgical grounds. We have kluesti_ned the effect such legislation might have on our two-party system, on challengers seeking to unseat incumbent officeholders and on the faith of the American people in their elected leaders. In addition, several Senators have questioned the wisdom of spending millions of tax dollars to pay for political campaigns. Others have introduced amendments designed to tamper with the mechanics of the legislation; to raise this limit or lower that spending ceiling, I have supported many of these amendments and 2[have joined in raising practical and theoretical questions concernlng the wisdom of this approach to campalgn reform. The voting on the various 494 RI_CO_RD--SENATE April 10, 1974 amendments we have considered eonCourt as the test by which denials of vinces me that there is a majority in this free speech under the first amendment body willing '_) go alon_ with S. 3044 remust be measured. To me, no ceiling on gardless of the conseqt.ences, tota_t campaign spending in present cfrIt is clear that the pressure for recumstances can meet this test." _ form is enough to force many Senators i;o As we get into the discussion on this go along with a proposiL1 that might ee_,;- quest:ion I hope the Senator from Massafly create more probl,_ms than it wlll ehusetts and others who like to consider ever solve. Tlle argum(mt has been csmt themselves civil libertamans will try to in a 'way thai. allows those in favor of _. square their views on the first amend3044 to appear as heroes in the press :menll with their support of this legislawhile those of us wLo oppose it &.re 'lion. It is my feeling that try as they made to look like thc villians of the might they will not be able to do so bepiece, cauls I am convinced that S. 3044 dfIn fact, however, the legislation under rectly infringes on the freedom of speech discussion is far too ix_pom[ant and far '_nd _ssociation guaranteed to all Amertoo complicated to be decided on t]:Je J.cans by that amendment. basis of sloga:._ and lobbyist pressure. We I _reallze that there has b_en popular have an obligation to look at the fact,_, pres_;ure for reform in the wake of to armlyze the specifics of the legisl:s_- Watcrgate and believe thatmc_t oft hose tion before us and at lei_st to guess at the who are supporting S. 3044 _re doing so consequences that might follow its pasbecause they want to. respond to the sage. perceived need for some sort of reform, That, in my view, is whs_t those who and because they have not really though question the wisdom of the bill have about the constitutional questions that been trying to do for some time now. troubled the Senator from MassachuIt would be unfortunate ff we were sects only 3 years ago. to move to a vote or. this legislatio:._ But good intentions are not enougt_; without a. thorough discu,,sion of the good intentions alone will neither constitutional implications of some of [marantee good lawsnorprotectthelaws its provisions..As I indicated when I inwe do pass from a string(mt, critical exintroduced my amendrlent No. 1140, Iamination by the courts This is especially hoped thereby to stimulate a discussion true 'when we pats legislation that limits of these implications, freedom of speech--and that is exactly Briefly, my axnendment would elimi - what we are going to be doing if we ps,ss hate the expenditure _eilings imposed S. 3044 as presently written. by section 504 of S. 3044 on l?ederal can.Thus, as Prof. Martin Redish pointed didates, retaining them only as ceiling_ o.ut is:x a New York Unlw_rsity Law Reon the maxi::aum am, mnt of Federal view article: money a candidate might receive. Thu_ To argue that campaign spendfng limitswhile every major canlidate would be ti.oas may violate the First A_nen_rnents assured of adequate f_mds to wage [t l_ in no way to contend that the problems campaign, there would _ e no overall ceil.- with which these measures deal are not serlng on campaign expenditures on behai:. _ lous difficulties, nor, for that matter, that of a given candidate, they would be Ineffective in solving them. I have introduced th_ amendment i_'t But the courts have felt compelled to In. validate laws intended to foster legitimate this form because most constitutional societal interests because of their conflict experts who have analy_ed campaign re with the First Amendment in many situaform proposals of the irlnd we are de,.. Uons.* bating today have concluded, that limit._; on total expenditures raise the most serf... Redish's point is, of course, precisely ous constitutional questions. It is their the point that I have made: The fact belief that such limits are necessarily that S: 3044 was drawn up by well-meanviolative of t_e first t,,mendment and! ing men to solve a problem they perwould be found uncorstitutional if s, ceived as important will not get it past proper case were brought before the Su-. a court interested in defending the right preme Court._ of free speech as defined by the first In a mome_tt, I will Imalyze the rea-. amenc_ment. _,_oning that leads so many scholars to. Thus in 1971, with the best of intenthis conclusion. At this point, however, tions, we passed the Federal Election I would simply like to note that some Camp'_ign Act, portions of which have who are supporting ove_'all limits today already been struck down as unconstiwere not at ali sure of their constitu-, tution:al by a three-judge panel here in tionali.ty when we were debat:[ng the 197_ the District of Columbia. Federal Election Campaign Act. Just last fall, Judge Bazelon ruled for The senior Senator from Massachu-. the panel that title I of that act is unsects (Mr. Kr_rNErY), for example, who consstltutional. In the case of ACLU now seems so certain taat S. 3044 de-. against Jennings, the Court avoided a serves our support, evidently felt at the, general decision on spending limits per time of our earlier debette of this issue se, but did conclude that our attempt to that a limit on total expendi'¢ures would close spending loopholes _violated free _ise grave constitutional questions, speech guarantees. He said at that time that a ceiling And in an amicus brief, filed in that on total expenditures "is a step that can-- case, the New York Times described our not be justified except 'ruder the most; work :_s "shot through with constttu-. stringent circumstances, in accord with hional deficiencies" and "patently incon-. the standard of 'clear and present dan-. sistent with basic first amendment free-. ger', established long ago by the Supreme dc,ms." If we do not examine the con-. sti,tutional problems Inherent In the leg-. _ootnotes at end of artl¢le. _latlor,_ now before us we are liable to [April 10, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL have our handiwork described in even harsher terms by higher courts in the future, It is at least possible that the limited discussion of the constitutional problems inherent in this bill is a direct result of Common Cause's attempts to assure would-be supporters of the legislation that it does not present a constitutional problem. To this'end, Common Cause's lobbyists have circulated a legal memorandum that discounts the constitutional questions. I have referred this memorandum to Prof. Ralph Winter of the Yale Law School, for his analysis, Based on what Professor Winter tells me, the COmmon Cause memorandum may be charitably described as slovenly, professionally incompetent, and in its use or misuse of citations, grossly misleading, I ask unanimous consent to have printed at the conclusion of my remarks his analysis of some of the more obvious flaws in this memorandum, The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. 1V[cINTYRE). Without objection, it is so ordered, (See exhibit 1.) Mr. BUCKLEY. Mr. President, we should realize that in spite of Mr. Gardner's assurances to the contrary, constitutional experts feel spending limits do raise serious and probably fatal constitutional questions. Thus, a number of constitutional scholars have argued that the first amendment has as a primary objective the encouraging of the dissemination of information to voters so as to aid them in the performance of their electoral functions.' The Supreme Court gave voice to this aspect of the 'first amendment in New York Times against Sullivan. _ In that decision the Court gave firm support to the view. that self-government requires that the public be able to be exposed to a full range of opinion about matters of public concern. The case itself did not involve an election, but it did involve an. elected official about whom allegedly Iibelous statements had been published, The Court held that the first amendment precluded an award of damages in the absence of a showing of "actual malice." The Court's reluctance to countenance aCtions that might limit the public's right of access .to political information was also a deciding factor in Mills against Alabamaf a case involving a law passed for admirable purposes by wellmeaning men. The Mills case impresses me as interesting in that it dealt with an Alabama law prohibiting the solicitation of votes on election day. The legislature enacted the law as a campaign reform measure to prevent emotional or slanted lastminute appeals to which an opposition .candidate could not reply. The case arose when the publisher of the Birmingham Post-Herald was convicted of running an editorial on election day that urged voters to vote in a certain way. In overturning the publisher's convicrich, Mr. Justice Black wrote: Whatever differences may exist abOUt interpretations of the First AmendmenS, there is practically universal agreement that _ See footnotes at end of speech, RECORD--SENATE S 5703 major purpose of that Amendment was to protect the ofdiscussion of governmental fairs. This, course, includes discussions alof candidates, structures and forms of government, the manner in which government is operated or should be operated, and all such matters relating to the political processes. ? First . . . Amendment forbade Congress . . . to when they have found justified by pass, subordinating valid been government inter~ ests, a prerequisite to constitutionality which has necessarily involved a weighing of the government interest involved. _0 In commenting on the Mills decision, Professor Redish observes that: once itof is that a issignificant purpose the recognized First Amednment to insure that the public will 'be provided with informarion necessary to the performance of its self-governing function, it follows that information disseminated in the course of an election campaign must rank high in terms of First Amendment values, s The first category here includes cases involving advocacy of overthrow of the government, obscenity, and other cases where is offensive the public the safetyspeeeh or toitself Inorais. I do not to know of anyone who seriously contends that campaign rhetoric result£ng from present spending levels falls within this cate-. gory. Secondinvolving category situations includes ina which num-. berThe of cases A thorough reading of these cases demonstrates rather clearly that the Court views with suspicion any regulations or laws having the effect of reducLng the total amount of di_ourse or discussion on public questions. If this is so, it is difficult to see how the Court could uphold spending limitations of the kind included inS. 3044. Still, those who,support spending limits and have considered the constitutional problems seem to believe that the power and, indeed, the duty of the Congress to regulate Federal elections must be halanced against first amendment considerations and that in such a balance considerations of free speech must give way to the perceived need for such limits to guarantee a "clean" electoral system, No one denies that Congress has the right to regulate Federal elections, but this does not automatically mean that laws designed to accomplish this will not be struck down if in conflict with the first amendment. The problem has been summarized clearly in a 1972 article by the editors of the Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems: Any limit on a candidate's right to putchase the use of communications media liraits his ability to speak effectively to his fellow citizens, and may limit their right to be informed of his identity and positions on political issues2 It goes without saying that the same reasoning applies with equal or even greater force to any citizen not a candidate who is prevented from publishing his views of a candidate by virtue of limitations on spending, The question then is whether the restrictions on free speech contemplated by the authors of this legislation can be justified constitutionally. Though the majority of the Court has generally rejeered what might be termed the absolutist view of the first amendment chanXpioned by the late Justice Black, it has nevertheless been extremely reluctant to allow laws that limit freedom of speech to stand, Thus, as the Court stated in Konigsberg against State Bar in 1961, valid restrictions on freedom of speech must fall within one of two categories: On the one hand, certain forms of speech, or speech in certain contexts, have been considered outside the scope of constitutional protection . . . On the other hand, general regulatory statutes, not intended to control the content of speech, but incidentally limiting its unfettered exercise, have not been regarded as the type of law the the gov.ernment while in pursuit of some legitimate goal, restricts Or curtails free-dom of speech as a means of achieving that goal To validate a law in this category the Court conducts a sort of "bal.ancing test" of the kind alluded to in the Konigsberg language I quoted a moment ago. Some experts, such as larofs. Ralph Winter and Alexander Bickel, also of the Yale Law School, take the position that the balancing test would be inapplicable in a case involving expenditure limitations. As Winter has testified before the Senate Commerce Committee: There is no count_.,rvalllng interbst . . . to "balance" against a campaign restriction on speech inasmuch a_ the restriction is ina posed not to preserve some other legitimate interest of society but solely for the sake of restricting the speech itself . . ._x Thus, Professor Winter would find himself in agreement with Mr. Justice Black's opinion in Barenblatt against United States: There are, of course cases suggesting that a law which pr'nnarily regulates conduct but which might also indirectly affect speech can be upheld if the effect on speech is minor in relation to the need for control of the conduct. With these cases I agree . . . But (ttley {/id not) even remotely suggest that a law directly aimed at curtailing speech and politicai persuasion could be saved through a balancing processJ: The question then is whether a limit on political spending is, in fact, a law "directly aim4_ at curtafiing speech." Winter's position on the question seems most in line with recent constitutional thought, though I recognize that some would disagree. The Senator from Iowa (Mr. CLARE) quoted Prof. Archibald Cox on the floor of the Senate a few days ago to the effect that limitations on spending are not really limitations on speech because they are limitations "once removed." _ I have great respect for Professor C'ox and for his opinions:, but I am afraid this contention strikes me as a bit farfetched. Prof. Joel Fleishman of Duke University considered this question in a 1971 study of campaign reform legislation that is worth reading and quoting: It is exceedingly unlikely that the Court would create a new category of unprotected speech particularly for political speech and association, since it has been continually shrinking the vitality of the pre-existing categories of obscenity, libel, "fighting words" and "speech plus". With the possible exception of the last, those categories would 4.95 S 5704 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD .-- SENATE indeed be strange bedfellows fox' an activity that the Court has called "the essence of self-government" and to argue that the presence of money converts political speech into "speech plus" would . . . deny protection entirely to most forms of political campaigning'_' Mr. Justice Douglas would no doubt agree with Professor Winter and have trouble with Professor Cox's reasoning ff he still stands by what he wrote in United States against United Auto Workers some years ago: The making of a political speech up to now h as always been one of the preferred rights prote(_ted by the First Amendment. It usually c(xsts money to communicate an Idea to a large audience. But no one would seriously contend that the expenditure of money to print a newspaper deprives the publisher of freedom of the press, lq'or can the fact that it costs money to make a speech--whether it be hiring a hall or purchasing time. on the air--make the speech any the less six exercise of FirstAmendment rights._ Thus, Mr. Justice Douglas, like Professor Fleishman and Professor Winter, would be forced to class a limit on expenditures with a limit on speeclh By so classifying it, he would also be forced to rule it an tmconstitutional infringement of avltalfreedon_ To sum up thls point, let me return again to Professor Winter: A limit on what a candidate may spend Is a limit on his political speech as well as on tho political speech of those who con no longer effectively contribute morxey .to his campaign. In all the debate surrounding the Plrst Amendraent, one point Is agreed upon by everyone: no matter what else the rights of free speech and association do, they protect explicit-political activity. But llmltatlons on campaign spending and contribut_ lng set maximum lcal expressly activity in awhich personson the may politengage . . . The First Amendment prohibits %he setting of a legal maximum on the political activlty in which an individual may engage: This is the case whether or not the maximum ts imposed in the name of equal- The support_rs of limits of l;he kind ineluded in S. 3044 evidently believe they call meet this test by arguing that only I recognize that the Supreme has never faced a case involving limitations, but in analagous cases by imlx)stng such limit_ can we purify our electoral process. By _;uming the con.cept of free sm,x;ch on it.'; hes_i, they are forced to argue that the imposition of restrictions w£'_ have the effect Of ex.panding rather than contracting Firs_t Amendment rights, Mr. President, I find this second argument novel and worthy _f examination, But first I must point ou_ that many ex-[oerts disagree with the first argument, Indeed, after an examination of the evidence, the majority of tahose who haw; jority ihas always followed a line of rea° soning that ff applied to expenditures limitations would force a finding of unconstitutionality. Let us not forget that portions of the 1.971 act have already been declared unconstitutional and that we have an affirm:_[tive obligation to square our ac.. lions w/th the dictates of the Fotinding Fathers. There is no way we can do that and stir support S. 3044 as written. Before I conclude, I wmxld like to return to the statement by the Senator wrlttert on campaign relorm in general tic, ye rejected spending limitations a_; tlllWise, unneeded and probzbly uncon-, stitutional. Given this f_t, the author.,_ and supporters of S. 304_ will nndoubt-, edly have an extremely difficult time demonstrating the "indublt,[ble publk: advantage" the courts w_uld be looklrm: for as evidence that such a law should be, sustained, But let me red,urn now lo the argument that by limiting speech we would be expanding lt_ This argument was summarized in the 1972 issue c_f Harvard Civil Rlghts--lllvll Liberties Law Re_.[ew which argued that a limitation would prevent "either side from flooding tile media with a single point of view.., fr.01n lqlassachusetts (Mr. KENNI_DY) 3 years ago. I have read the memorandum Common Cause has prepared supportkeg the constitutionality of spending limits _nd I have read as much of the literature on the subject as time has permitted. The fact that strikes me is that to ar-. sue in .support of the constitutionality of these llimits requires one to accept a theerg of the first amendment that civil libertarians have uniformly rejected as arLtithetical to the concept of free speech in a democratic society, a I only hope that those who, like the _oenator from Massachusetts, have reversed :field and have eithe,_ accepted the argument that such limits on political (and) prevent one candidate from destroylng, bY sheer volume rather than by reason, the effectiven, ms of informational advertis]3_g present:ed by opposing c_mdidates.' m This iS an h_teresting view, but one ttlat Professor Fliestunar. rmtes_ Assumes that _>meone---l}restrmably Cong_ss---knows how much Information is tha right amount and reflects a basic: distrust tn the capacity of individual discount the greater volume c_fcitizens political tosalvert_sing in. reaching their declsion_* d_comr'se can be justified or are ignoring the question, realize that they are prometing a view of the Constitution that might ;0rove dangerous to the very concept of a free society. lit is a view that I, for one, cannot aceept amd I, therefore, urge the adoption of this _al31elldnl_nt. .'_tlr. Prosiden_;, I ask Ullanimous conson_; to have printed in the R_coal_ the fc_)tn¢_.es referred to in my prepared _ex_ There beingnoobjectlon, the footnotes were ordered to be printed in the R_.com0, asfollows: Foe?Nos-rs Professor Redtsh also ::ejects this rsther novel argument say_ng that while: It ts generally ..axgued tha_ a wealthy can- lzing or whether an actual discriminatory effect can be shown. Even under a "balanctrig" test, such regulation is invalid because dldate should no_ be permitted to "buy an election" with his finances and that legislated i_nl_ on campa!g_x spendtug aye therefore there Is no countervailing Interest (for example, preserving public peace) to "balance" against the restriction on speech. TM BUt even i[f we assume for the salve of argument _t Professor Cox and his friends at C(mamon Cause could convince a court that spending limits are indirect or incidents:[ as opposed to direct limits on political speech, it is still not at all clear that a court would find them con- m._essary. The _?asoning :mapll._lt in this argument seems to be that whe,n one can_ dldate's financial resources are limited, the oray equitable solution ts to _m_ClUirethe wealthier candidate to red,.ce his spending to approximating ir at o:: nent.a level In other words, if a portion ofhistheoppoveling public ts to be generally unfamiliar with or_ candidate's view and re:ords because of his financial inabGlty to bec)me wen kao_ it ts only fair th;_% the public I_: almost as utxinforrned abou%the other candidate. Such reasoning presents at the very le_t a prima :(aele comlict with the llrst :_mendmen_ pGIx_r of encouraging as much communication in the political retdm as poss:.ble. TM stttutional, Mr. Jnstice Rutledge described the burden supporters of laws incidentally alfeeling the publicizing., of citizens' views must bear in the 1948 Supreme Court case of United States against Congress of Industrtal Organizations: The lc_s Inherent in restrictions ulm>n expendltures for publicizing views . .. forces upon its authors the burden of Jnstffying tho contraction by demonstrating In dubit_ble public advantage arising from the rest_'_ctton outweighing all disadvantages, thus reversins tho direction of presumptive weight in other cases. _* This is a dillieult test and a heavy burden;a test and a burden, I submit, that the limits in this bin cannot pass and its authors are not able to bear. 496 April 10, 'l 9 74 Court these a ma- _See A. Rosenthal, Federal Regula_or_ o! ffa:o_pag_?r_ Finance: $om_ _>nstitutional _ue_tio:._ (Prinf_eton, N.J.:' Citizens' Re_ch Pouaxdatlc, a (ed.), 1972)i IL Aleamn_1_., Mone_ _ Politics, (Wa.-J_t-ffton, D.C., Pt_bllc ,Misers Pre_s, an_ 1972)Itke A.Oonstttu_o_ Roimn$1aal, Ga:q_pa_.g_ Fi_ancin_ (C_abrldge, Ma_s,' 8 Harva_l Journal on '.r.egqslatioa 359, 19_2): J. rlel_h_n_n, Free. I state that if my amendment is adopted we wfil retain Feieral financing ,gore o! ,gpeecl_ and Equality o! Political Op:_,_'tunity: Tl, e Co't_titutioqto2i_y o_ _/_,Federal El_:,tion Campaign Act o! 1971 (51 North _u.olin_ Law Review S89, 1973); M. H. Redish. .7arr_pai!_[_ $pendir_tj Laws arug flts First Amendment (46 N.Y. University Law Revle_ 900, 197:_); IL R. Penniman and R. Winter, _Tampai!;,n Finances: Two Views of tke Politt,;al and ,I7on_ti_utional Implications, (American Enterprise Institute, Washington, D.C. :_971); :aalph Winter, Campaign Firmncin_ anc_ Po_itioal Freedom, (American Enterprise at the stipulated levels, thereby assurlng all candidates of a(.equ_te money with which to bring their own platforms into the view of the public without yentllrirlg into the m_constitution,_d realm of stating that no raore than legislative lim-. _t_ may be spent !Crastltute, Washington, D.C.. 1973): T. t_aer,m,n.:_970.Th_: System of rreeaom of gx_e_io_. , Pres_; release of Senator Kennedy cited _n 8 Harvard Journal on Legislation 640, 665 [1971 ). . Redi.,_h, supra, at 903. , .See especially Redish, suln'a, at 900 and I have to agree with l_,edisla, Winter, and Fleishman on these l_oints. It seems tomebeyond question tha:;spendinglimltations of the kind under consideration are in _iolation of the first; amendment. _et_hn_m, generally. _:376 U.S. xupra, 254 (1964). *:384 us. 214 (1966). ,384 us. at218-19. , :fierily;ia, supra, at 910. , Campaign Spending Controls Unger the April 10, _975 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SBNA_ Feg, e'r_ E_eet_on'Campatg_ Act o! 1971, 8 Co1_ Journal of L_w and Social Problems 285, 299 (1972). l0 366 U,S. 36, 50-1, (1961). _xFrom Winter's testimony before the Subcommittee on communications, Senate Comm. on Commerce Hearings on S. 852, 92nd. Congress, 1st Sees. 576 (1971). 360 U.S. 10g, I41-4Z (1959) (dissenting opinion). = Congressional Record for April 5, 1974 at S, 5338. _4Fleishman, supra, at 441. 352 U.S. 567, 544 (1957). _sWlnter, supra, Mcneil, Politics and the F_st A_nencZznent, in Campaign Finances 45, 60. · TU.S.v. C10, 355 U.S. 106, 140-45 (1948). _s 7 Harvard Civil Rights, Civ. Lib, L, Re·fre_351 at 228 (1972). Fleishman, supra, at 455. 20Y0edlsh, s_pra, at 912. Emerson, supra, aa access or consultation". This sweeping charge alleges too much; for all kinds of political activity create an lndletinsuishably analagous situation. For example, Common Catme's willingness to spend large amounts of money to purc_a_ advertising attacking Congressmen who disagree with the group's views creates precisely the sem_ lmiirect form of "influence" and also guar_ntee Mr. Getter's lobbyists access to those Congressmmen who fear Common Cause's wellfinanced wrath, One may also question whether Common Cause is willing to make such a sweeping statement when directed at Congressme_ and Senators with whom it is in sympathy rather than with whom it disagrees. The logic of Common Cause's statement strongly suggests, for example, that Chairman Rodino is unable to exercise independent Judgment during the present impeachment inquiry because of the large contributions he receives from organized labor which strongly _and vigorously supports impeachment of the EXHIBIT I President. Such implications _hould be MEMORANIYU1V_ ON 'A'__-ICONSTrr_T_ONAL1TY 0F rejected, S. 3044 A_ DE_CT_ n_ _E COMMON CAUSE In the event ,that the Common Cause asMEMO_AI_D_Y_J[ON' W._E SUBJECT sertions are true, it is truly _ case of overThis m_morandum is in response %o your kill-to call for a widespread attack on ptiinquiry concerning the legal memorandum rate financing rather than more precise leglssubmitted by Mr. John Gardner of Common. lation air_l at bribery, Caues during Senate hearings on campaign Private caml_ign financing does, contrary reform last fall I am familiar wl%lx that to C_n Cause assertions, perform valumemorandum, and in my Judgment it misable functions in the political process and represents the state of present case law by must be viewed as an aspect of political misstating the important of revalant Sufreedom, premo Court dec,ions and by relying on "Ail political activities make claims on preceden_a whlck most scholars agree have society's resources, Speeches, advertisements, los_ their vitality. This analysis is not as broadcasts, canvassing, volunteer work_all detailed, and. specific as I would like beconsume resources. Money is the medium of cause such an analysis will require more exchange by which individuals employ retime to prepare, but I do herein attempt %o sources owned by others. If political a_tivlpoint out some weaknesses in the Common ties free are are left to choose to private whichfinancing, activities individuals to engage Caus_ argument. Ironically the Common Ca_ise menorahin, on behalf of which causes, o_ whether to dun relies on a number of decisions that do so at all. When the individual is deprived have long been the target of much criticism of this choice, either because government from many of those who now vigorously limits or prohibits his using money for posupport S. 3044. Common Cause's position litical purposes or takes his money in taxes incorporates what can only be described as and subsidizes the political actlvlties it a hors_ and buggy view of the first Amendchooses, his freedom impaired. Money is fungible is with other resources merit, suitable for political use and, distributional The Common Cause memorandum makes questions apart, the individual who eonseveral arguments to which I shall respond tributes a resource directly, for example, seria_m, time and labor, is in many ways indistlnx. CAI_IPAIG_qSI_E_Dr/_YaIS AI_ ASPECT OF FREEguishable, from the individual who con, DOM O_- SPEECPIAND RESTRICT'IONSTPrEREOI_ tributes money which In turn purchases · RAr_I_ CO_'£I'£o'z'J[OI_TA_'PaoBLEMS time and labor. Money, it must be conceded, Common Cause argues that Campaign though, is the most "fungible" resource, Financing is more action than speech and Campaign contributions, therefore, perthus more regulatable by Congress. Accordform honorable and important functions, lng to %ho memorandum, private Campaign The contribution of money allows citizens Financing should be 'viewed as essentially to participate in %he politl_l process. Peranalogou_ to picketing and demonstrations, sons without much free time have few alEven ff this is the case, however, the power ternatlves to monetary contributions other of Congress to impose restrictions must be than inaction, very, very limt_d, for it is quite clear from Campaign contributiofis are also vehicles relevant Supreme Court decisions that peaceof expression for donors seeking to persuade ful picketing and demonstrations which other citizens on public issues. 'Contributing merely advocate certain ideas of public into a candidate permits individuals to pool terest are not subject to governmental reresources and voice their message far more striction, If Common Cause is in fact right effectively than if each spoke singly. This in the argument it makes, then presumably is critically important because it permits Congress could pass a law restricting the citizens to Join a potent organization and number of demonstrators that could come propagate their views beyond their voting %o Washington on behalf of a cause. If the _is_r/c_s. Persons who feel strongly about law, as the quotation from Professor Freund appointments to the Supreme Court, for suggests, restricts the protection to acts of example, can demonstrate their convictions verbal communication, only then Congress by contributing to the campaigns of symmight declare that being a part of a large pathetic senators, peaceful demonstration is not protected by Nor is there anything inherently wrong the First Amendment. with contributing to candidates who agree Cknnm_u Cause also argues that privat_ with one's views on social an economic polCampaign Financing is "all too often only an lcies, even where those policies may benefit attenuated form of bribery: the donation of the donor. Obviously, groups pursue their money is likely to communicate to the canself_lnterests and seek support from others, didate the information that the donor seeks This is a salien_ characteristic o! a !tee poeither a direct q_ pro quo . . . or, more littcal s_/ste_. Those who seek to regulate usually, an indirect form of influence, such that kind of contribution can etand with S 5705 those who would deny the vote to welfar_ recipients to prevent that vote from being "bon_-' by promises at higher benefits. So long as we accept the bestowal of economl_ fav_ a8 a proper ftr_tion of go,_hment, potential recipients will tend to exchange this support for such favor_ Contributions of this sort may represent broa& interests tllat might otherwise be underrepresented. Suppese land developers mount a campaign against proposals to restrict the use of large undeveloped areas. Certainly they represent their own economic interests, but they also functionally represent; potential purchasers, an "interested" group that would otherwise go unnoticed since few persons would consider themselves future purchasers at the critical moment. These functions of campaign contributions are often ignored because critics of the present system mistake cause and effect. A senator may support union causes because he receives large union contributions but in fact it may be more likely that he receives contributions because he supports the causes. Contributions also _rve as a barometer of the intensity of voter feeling. In a mMo_d.tartan system, voters who feel exceptionally strongly about partlcular issues may _ unable to reflect thet_ feelings adequately in periodic votes. As members of the antiwar movement often pointed out, the strength of their feelings as well as thei_ numbers should have been taken into account. If a substantial group feels intensely about an issue, a sy_:tem which does not allow that feeling to be heard effectively may well be endangered. Campaign contributtons are perhaps the most important, and least offensive, means by which the intensity of feeling can be expressed. People who feel strongly about United States support for Israel, for example, are able to voice that conviction with greater effect through lnCarefullyperiodicdirectedelectionsCampaignin whichd°nati°nSthe stancethanof the available candidates does not permit a clear signal to be given. This function might be discounted contributions reflected only intense butif large ldiosyncretic views. For the nest part, however, intense feelings will not generate substantial funds unless large numbers of citizens without great wealth also share these convictions. Campaign contributors in _hese circumstances serve as representatives or currogates for the entire group. That 1_r. X, who favors free trade, can make larger contributions than Mr. Y, who does not, really matters little, if Mr. Z agrees with Mr. Y and gives heavily. Candidates seeking change, moreover, may have far greater need for, and make better use of, campaign money than those with established images or those defending t.he existing system. Money is, after all, subject to the law of diminishing returns and thus generally of less use to the well-known politiclan than to the newcomer. The existence of _ssed money" may be an important agent of change. The challenge to the arguments that ptirate campaign financing enlarges political freedom and contrlbutea stability to the systern is essentially d_strlbutional: because money is maldistrlbuted throughout the soclety, its uso in political campaigns uncleeirably skews the political process by allowing wealthy individuals too much power. As noted present evidence does not demonstrate that monetary support !S available only for certain ideas. Quite the contrary, it strongly suggests that a wide array of causes and movements on the right and left can attrac_ money. Still, individuals can increase their personal political power through contribu'rich% and even if they functionally represent like-thinking but poorer people, it might be 497 S 5706 CONGR[!SSIONAL KEI]ORD -- SEN.tSTE April 10, _ 9 74 argued that wealth ne;_ertheles,_ is skewing the process, This argument rests on the assumption that byreducing the personal pcfLitical power of the large contributor, political lnfiuenos will bo spread more evenly through the so_ ciety. Such an assumption seems almost surely wrong, for limitations on the use of money may aggravate rather than diminish any distortion. Direct access to the resources most useful for political purposes m_y be even more unevenly distributed than. wealth. For example, restrictioris on private campaign financing may well enhance the power of those who control the media, particularly 11' public subsidies are modest in size and thus increase candidate dependence on the goodwill of the media. LimitatiolilS on the use of money must also increase the relative power of individuals wltb, large amounts of free time and the ability to attract public attention, l_inaily, groups with the ability to take their money "underground" and oper_te independent "issue" (rather than "politicaF') campaigns will have their power Lucreased. It has been reported, for example, that unions favor a ban on contributions be- are seeking _tion on laws in _he h0Fe can be turned to the advantage of Insurethat they may bring about an advantage to bency so easily should be scrutinized with themselves and a disadvaILtage to their cornthe greatest of care. petitozs ... to disqualify peo]ple from seelsiv. s. 3044 CANNOT BE J1]'STl_'X_._, ON Lug a public p¢_sition In hatters which they OROUi_DS T_LtT rr E_CTUATES FirST axe financially interested would itself deprive Ai_l_rm_z_ RIGHTS OF LESS AFFL1TENT the governmen_ of avalLable source of _- ' criq2-_Ns formation and .... deprive the people of their right to petition in the very instances ia Conlmon Cause has argued that leglslawhlch that rig_2t might ]:e of the most ir¢_- tion such as S. 3044 Is Justified on the portsxLt to them". Easter;_ Rail I_oacZ Pre,,:.i- grounds that it protects first amendment _ents conference V. Noerr Motor Freigkt, 3,_5 rights of less affluent citizens by: U.S. 126, 127 (1961). (1) "protecting the ability of even poor Common Cause attempts to escape the canditLates to run for office, conclusions in these cases by distinguishing (2) by preventing the drowning out of between organizations which s,ddress themother political viewt_olnts by the best fiselves to public issues and do not endorse or nanced voices, support candid:_tes and organl;_,atiolis whicll {3) by assuring the equality of the voting do endorse candids, tes. Th _ distinction, howrights of the less affluent citizens by limiting ever. is totally irrational. Consider Commo:a the influence on candidates of affluent conCause's own advertisem, mts refen, ing t_ tribut!:ons." representative I:.tays. The legs,1 distinctio:lx Eveii if these goals might justify the severe Common Cause would flake discriminaf_s restrictions included in S. 3044, there is no between that kind of adv_,rtise:ment and tt_e _0asis to believe the legislation will effectuate very same advertisement which concludes by them. Quite the contrary, it is likely to be advising Hays' constituents to vote agains_ count_r-productlvE in that respect. him. Candidates and causes wlilch begin wirerout s_.bstantial sums have traditionally recause power would Common would bya¢.d to She communiadverti_, lied cji large contributors or patrons. What increasedtheiras own a result of the host r_of relatively "indirect ments now Call_,, pro!_[bited statute contributions" they can provide, cations by an organization to its membei_, they iieed has been called by some "seed mone_._"--and is likely to come only from a What emerges is the likelihood that; restrie_ But why should one's st_,temelits to mealsmall number of large contributors. S. 3044 tions on private campaign financing will not hers be covere([, while o_e's statements to does not give money to can_dates that do increase powerconcentrate of the people are of not,a newspaper si reply because they not ah'early have substantial support. generally the but political will further it iii one's appeal' neighbors in the form advertise,already powerful segments of the community, meat. . -There is no reason, moreover, to anticipate t:hat less affluent persons would be better off Ironically, the increment will largely fall to Beyond that, what,Common Cause sugges'_s nnder S. 3044. As I have already indicated various sectors of the well-to-do, hecaus_ djcreates a huge loophole in the act. Ail special above,, the greater advantage of the wealthy rect access to resources useful for political :interest organl:_attons need dc, now is u,,u_ ls the free time they can devote to politics purposes (free time, control of the media, their money to purchase a('.vertising suppor_>, as well as their ability to get into the public ability to operate "issue" campaigns) is conlng candidates on the l_ues but stopplrq,_ eye through "non-political" activities. S. eent_ated not an the poor but in the wealthy, short of explicLt endorsement. Indeed, the 3044 :maximizes rather than minimizing Private campaign financing in short may in statute for ths.t reason probably tncrea_:_ many of the advantages of the relatively fact be a means of spreading political power the power of sic,octal inter, mis over the clef.., more a_uent. and expanding the range of discourse, toral process and thereby further limits th_ For inany of the same reasons S. 3044 will The call for regulation of campaign fiinfluence of the individual clti_sr_ not prevent the "drowning out of contrary nancing ca_l be extended to other kinds of Finally, the distlnctior. Comnion Cali_ _lewl_oints or _ the equality of voting resource_ axed could easily become a call for 'makes Is not explicitly s(,t out in S. 3044_. r_lghts of less affluent citizens." S. 3044 will substantial limitations on political freedom. :indeed, it is not at all cl _ar from the laz_., not spread political power throughout the The allega_tions about the influence of money guage of that statute whett_er Common society. V/hat it will do is give an advantage reflect a basic and disturbing mistrust of the Cause's adverti_,_ment about Representati_ to tho_,;e with direct access to resources which people. :Hays would not in fact be prohibited if made _ce e_slly put. to political purposes. Those If. campaign financing really "distorts" during an electS.on eampal:_n, with free time (students and the wealthy), legislative or executive behavior, ca_idldates :az. s. 3o44 is Nor SAVEDFREM CONSTITLvTION._L t]lose who control the media (the wealthy), can raise its; effect as an issue and the voters CHALLENGE ON THE GRO_qDS q['HAT1T PR]_]". _[ld those organizations which can ruff can respond at election time. The call for SERVES THE INTEGRITY OF THE ELECTORAL ":issue:" campaigns (wealthy organizations) legislation must be based on the belief that PROCZSS will al]Lhave their power increased. The poor the voters cannot be relied upon to perceive Common Cause argues ir. its memorandtm:, and the powerless will be helped not at all. their own best interests. Zf one really believes _hat ceiUngs on (_mpaign contributions and. The whole point of the exercise now going the people are this easily fooled and in need expenditures axe constitutional because they on in Congress Is not the cleansing of the of this protection, however, there may be no are designed to preserve the integrity of tb._ p01itic:al process but the skewing of it. Those end to the campaign tactics eligible for reguelectoral process. This claha is an example o:r in power are seeking to maximize that power latlon and no end to calls for increases in Zhe group's grce, s misrepresentation of th_; instea,_i, a number of special interest groups the power of those "protecting" the public, effect this legislation niiuht have. Linitte,_. which attempt to wield influence to the use ][I. LIMITATIONS O_T PURCHASES OF POLITICAL tions on expenciitures necessarily assist in..- o:_ money in forms of money other than ADVERTISINGARE IYNCONSTITU'FIONAL cumbent officeholders. Tlqis Is particularly campaign contributions are seeking to inCommon ,Cause argues that it is portals_;rue when the In_mmbent is setting the level, crease their power, sible foron Congress to place or a committee limitation exof $1,000 _ay individual penditure on behalf of a candidate. It is ironic that the limit supported is a fraction of what Common Cause has spent on newspaper advertising attacking Congressman Hays for opposing this very kind of legislatlon under S. 3044. No one individual or committee would be able even to purchase a full page a41 in the New York 'rimes statLUg its views on the election of a particulax candidate trader the terms of S. 3044. That calls for such legislation come from organizations which have been wielding such financial power in purchasing advertising is both ironic [uld instructive, The Supreme Court has held explicitly that paid advertising whlch comments on matters of publlc interest ls protected by the First Amendment. This was the explicit holding in the New York Times v. Sullivan. Two other decisions of the Court made clear that such [he roll. time they are handed Mr. I_OBERT (. BYRD. Mr. President, to a repr,_sentative of I ask unanimous _'onsent that the order the People's Republic of for the quorum _ _11 be rescinded. The PRE$IDI_ G OFFIC_ Without Mr. President, '.[ objection, it is s( ordered. the vote by which sine Mr. _/[ of the by ob United over in 'the C'hina. Mr. E1ove to the bill was thc ,id court_ Mr. President, I ask t that the Senate prodiate consideration of in accordance the with has no ofbefore any Governmen_ country: be it Mr. GRJFF/]q., to lay that m0_, Resolved by the (the House o/_eptton on the table,. I rese_tatives ,sonCUrrin That it is the sens_ The motion the table w_; .of %he Congress efforts should be agreed to. naade by the of the United States through Late dlplornatic and international channels Coyernment of of VierMr, M_. I nam, the Irovisional Governs_2ggest tile _e of a merit of Vletna_n, the Lac I_atriotic The PRF_ID:I_ _ OFlqCER, clerk Front to comply with obligations wills respect to personnel or killed durwill call the roll. -_ lng the Vietnam and with respect The second m;,,slant to personnel still in a status; that proceeded to c_dl the roll every effort should be to obtain the Mr. GttIFFEN'. Mr. cooperation of con- _nanimous com_ _t that filct in Caml_dia in infoz:cnation quorum call be rt ,scinded, with respect to missing ih CamThe PI_ESIDE_'G OFF[CElt. Without bodia; and that efforts should be objection, it is .,x) ordered, made to obtain cooperation for search teams to inspect locations where lOSt, SEC. 2. 'I_e States should, use every_ such reciprocal actions _ peace agreements, incl rnent of the Republic Royal Lac Oovernment, to bring an end to of the Government of lie of Vietnam,, (_overnment of otis Front regarding ._zc. 3. The. Congress and sympathy for tlu_ of . suffered such deep long due to the ill a_t_s_l_, _c. 4. Ul_n by both Houses of the .tm'y of _he _enate .shall tion of the United _tates said court a-_thcelty of%0the compSe: _te the asat;tendance M[eml_er a witness r.President, I suggest ORDEJI_t FOR ( oNSIDERATION OF THE UNFINII HED BUSINESS, ,S. 3044, TOMOI_] ;OW Mr. I!%OBERT (, BYI_D. Mr. President, I '&sk _manimous _onsent that when tho orders for the rec ,gnition of Senators to.. morro_;, are conch ded, the SenateTesume consideration of xe unfinished business, $. 3044. The PRESIDE G OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ,)rdered. j C)t%DEI_ FOR TOMORROW _r. ask A_ _OURN1VIENT FROM _ _ 10 A-M. FRIDAY _:tOBERT unanimous completes C, BYRD. I inask Mr. President, that when the business tomorrow, merely until insurance 10 a.n_ for OFFICER. Mr _t_(; program I Ttxe Senate After the two have been recc order, the recognized, each minutes, and ]_IDEN, ROTH, ]_II)EN again, ]_ARTKE, ERVIN, '_TI;NNP_:, and Without )GRAM BYRD. Mr. President, is as follows: convene at 9:30 a.m. or tlleir designees under the standing Senators will be to exceed 15 stated: Messrs. JAVITS, 1VIATHIAS, _T C. B-_sm SENATE FLOOR DEBATES ON 5.3044 APRIL Tl, 1974 April 11, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE Organized labor ] much money to pursue its political _ In the 1972 prestdential campaign, spent an estimated $50 million. Nell labor wr{ter for the Associated Press, e timates that backing by COPE is worth $1(] million to a presidential candidate, Moreover, while is said about the contributions by bi ;iness _x)various political candidates, little h_ been said about labor's assistance which, instance, totalled $191,295 to of the House Judiciary Committee alone that total $30,293 went to Chairman l_odino, and all but $2,100 went to Del Indeed, some 98 F_ cent of labor's ditical muscle is exerted in ts. The AFL-CIO has some scalps hanging on its bel in the 1974 elections. More than a dozen groups were active in the 12th Pennsylvania to support the winner, John Murtha. Labor forces also claim for the election of Rep. Richard Vandel Veen in the 5th district in Michigan. Finally, not the source of confidence among labor lead that they are on their way to having a _-proof Congress is the determined pressure ton for pubitc financing and strict limitatlons on campaign . If the contributions to those labor opposes are redueed, then the uni non-financial contributions will be the more effective, receipt, the Committee shall submit returns to an intensive inspection audit for the purpose of determining If Congress has no tions it can do value on indirect as COPE so that all equal campaign assuring elecss of than place fair a dollar by such groups least have OF MORNING Mr. CANNON. an_ The HATHAWAY). IS lng business? If is concluded. . President, is there business? OFFICER (Mr. any further mornmorning business FEDERAL ELECTION ACT AMENDMENTS CAMPAIGN OF 1974 The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. HATHAWAY).Under the previous order, the Senate will now resume the consideration of the unfinished business, S. 3044, which the clerk will state. The legislative clerk read as follows: s. 3044, to amend the Fedreal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing of primary and general election campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend certain other provisions of law rela:lng to the financing and conduct of such campaigns. The Senate resumed consideration of the bill. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The pending question is on agreeing to the amendment of the Senator from Texas (Mr. TOWER), NO. 1153, with the time thereon to be divided 10 minutes to the Senator from Texas and 5 minutes to the Senator from Nevada ¢Mr. CANNON). Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, I yield myself such time as I may require. Mr. President, this amendment prorides that on or before JUly 1 of each year, the Joint Committee on Internal Revenue Taxation shall obtain from the Internal Revenue Service all returns of income filed by each Member of Congress for the previous 5 years. After these and the S 5829 equal branches of Gove:rnment, all three should be treated the same. First, Mr. President, I ask unanimous correctness with respect to the Member's tax liability. The report of the committee shall be forwarded to each Member and to the Internal Revenue Service. It does not take long to realize that this is the procedure which was followed on the income tax returns of President and consent at this time that the amendment which I have just proposed be considered in order as an amendment to the Tower amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the request of the Senator from Montana? Mrs. Nixon. The question posed in this amendment is simple: will Congress vote to bring upon its Members the same, intensive audit that President Nixon underwent? Today's vote will provide the answer, When certain :facts about the president's income tax were leaked to the Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, if the amendment is considered, does that bar me from the use of my remaining time? Mr. MANSFIELD. Not at all, because it comes within the 15 minutes, as I interpret it. Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, I will not media some months ago, President Nixon stepped forward and offered the joint committee the opportunity to review his return. The committee did so and found the President owing. But, much to his credit, the President said he would pay object, but I intend to speak against the amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I offer my amendment at this time and ask every last cent he owed-- and he even denied himself the appeals recourse available to every other American citizen. I believe it is only right that the Congress take the same steps to insure that that it be stated. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated. The legislative clerk read as follows: Amendment to amend No. 1153, on page one, line six, after "Congress" insert ", Judieach employee or official of the Executive, our quest for fiscal integrity not only extends to the executive branch, but to the legislative as well. If some members of Congress who were so eager to see the President's tax returns gone over with a fine-tooth comb would vote "yea" today, we would have passage with very few dissenters, cial, Legislative Branch whose gross income for the most recent year exceeds $20,000,. In this day of distrust for public office holders. I think it is imperative that members of Congress--as well as the President--open their tax returns for public inspection. The legislation which I propose is an important and essential part of any campaign reform. It, in my o_inion, would do much to improve the attitude of the American people toward their elected representatives. Virginia (Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD) be added as a cosponsor of the amendment, as well as the distinguished Senator from Kansas (Mr. DOLE). The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, I would I strongly urge adoption of this amendment, Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield 2 minutes to the Senator fr_m Montana (Mr. MANSFIELD). assume that as the sponsor of the Griginal amendment, I have additional time to argue against the amendment of the Senator from Montana (Mr. MANSFIELD)? Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield to me briefly, on The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana is recognized for 2 minutes. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, this morning, the distinguished Senator from Vermont asked for, through the leadership, and was granted, the privilege of consideration, It is my intention to make that same request at the conclusion of my brief comments, What I intend to db, if the Senate will allow me to do so, is to offer an amendment to the Tower amendment so that on page 1, line 6, after the word "Congress," to insert the following: Each employee or official of the executive, Judicial, and legislative branches whose gross income for the most recent year exceeds $20,ooo, Mr. President, this is a proposal which I have been trying to have accepted by the Senate for more than a decade, because I feel that as long as we have three my time, I would ask that the name of the distinguished Senator from Florida (Mr. CHILES) also be_added as a COsponsor of the amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, I think that the amendment of the Senator from Montana would impose too great a burden on the joint committee and its staff because it would involve thousands of people. They are not elected public officials. My purpose with my amendmen: was to have the elected Members ef Congress, the coordinate branch with the executive branch, submit to the same kind of scrutiny that the President of the United States has been subjected to. He and the Vice President are the only two elected members of the executive branch Therefore I think that the scope of the amendment should be confined at this time to elected Members of Congress. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mir. President, my intention is to ask for the yeas and nays on this, but first I ask unanimous consent that the distinguished assistant majority leader, the Senator from West 505 S 5830 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --- SENATE I do not argue against the merits of what my distinguished friend from Men-. tana seek_ to do. It would seem to me that some other mechanism might be used for that purpose, such as the Comp.. troller General of the United States. For that reason, I would not want to accept nor will I vote for the amendment of the Senator from Montana in its pres-. ent form. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield I minute to the Senator from .Arkansas. Mr. McCLELLAN. Mr. President, a parliamentary inquiry, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-. ator from Arkansas will state is. Mr. McCLELLAN.This amendment, il! adopted, will it be subject to further amendment after adoption? The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is the Senator asking whether or not he caB. offer an amendment to this amendment? Mr. McCLELLAN. Yes. After this amendment has been disposed of. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-. ator cannot do so without unanimous consent, unless this is an amendment; that has been printed and is at the desk_ and has been offered before cloture hms been invoked. Mr. McCLELLAN. I would have to have unanimous consent. Is that correct? branches of government on an equ:a[ basis. If we are going to ask Senater:; to lay out their tax returns, then I thl_xk that members of the judicial branch and members of the executive blanch earn:u_4,, $20,000 a year or more should accept t_.le same responsibility. I am prepared to do it. I would be willing to. I have been trying 'x) do so for more than 10 years. So I '_ouid be glad tx, modify the mnendmer t. Mr. President, I ask unanimous co:.%. sent that my amendment be modified along the lines of the suggestion made by the distinguished Senator from. Texas. Mr. CANNON. What is it'? Mr. MANSFIELD. I_ places it in the Comptroller General. Mr. McCLELLAN. I had an amen,_-, ment for that purpose. Ir. MANSFIELD. 'Will the Senator join me in that change? Mr. McCLELLAN. Yes. I do not think the Joint Committee on Internal Revenue m_d TaxatJlon should see our returns Jf we are not goi n[: to see theirs. I believe that this agency of Congress, the Comptroller ,General's (3f.. lice, is the proper one to do it. Mr. TOWFR. Mr. PJ'esident, I think Z can clear up this matte r. If the Senator front Montana would The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct, Mr. McCLELLAN. Mr. President, I ask: unanimous consent that I may offer an amendment after this amendment has been disposed of. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there tem[mrarily withdraw his ,Lmendment _: will ask unanimous consent to modify my amendment to bring _he entire mattel' under the jurisdiction of tlhe Comptrol-. ler General, and then ]' think that would make it a little more simple for the Sen-. ate. objection? The Chair hears none, and it; is SO ordered, Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, what is the time situation? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is now on the amendment of the Senator from Montana. The yeas and nays have been ordered, The Senator from Nevada has 2 mtnutes remaining. The Senator from Texas has 5 minutes remaining, Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, I would simply like to ask the distinguished Senator from Montana if he would not; alter his amendment to give this re-. s!oonsibfiity to the General Accounting Office rather than the joint committee,. because I think the joint committee should focus on the returns of the Members of Congress and that that attention should not be diluted by their having also to pay attention to all these other matters, Mr. MANSFIELD. The Senator is pro-. posing that the amendment offered by the Senator from Montana, which applies to the executive branch and the judicial. branch, be under the supervision of the Comptroller General rather than the joint committee., Mr. TOWER. That is my suggestion_ because I think the joint committee staff! would have to be beefed up just to handle the returns of Members of Congress. If we go into all the myriad of bureaucarcy,. it will be a formidable task. Mr. MANSFIELI_. I would be delighted, to agree to that, because I want to assert the principle that many of us have been, trying for more than a decade to assert, and that is to treat the three equal Mr. MANSFIELD. I must respectfully decline to do so. I am interested irt a principle I have been trying to achieve for raore than. a decade. I would not o o-. ject to the distinguished Senator from Texas changing it froln the Joint Coca-. mittee on Internal Revenue and Taxa-, tion, which would ha ?e supervision, to the Comptroller Gene:'al. But the pr:inciple I am trying to achieve has to stay in, so far as I am concerned; and it is the principle that the Senator from Arkm_.. sas, the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, is likewise trying to achieve, insofar as the mpe:rvisory factor is concerned, Mr. McCLELLAN. l_[r. l='re_ident, wilt the Senator _ield? Mr. MANSFIELD. I :Aeld. Mr. McCIX_.LLAN. I! we are going to do this, then the Joint Committee on l)_-. ternal Revenue and Taxation is not the body to examine the Senator's returns and mine. They are Members of tlr:J,; body. Who would audi'; their returns? It ought to go to the CoraPtroller General, Mr, MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I a. sk unanimous consent that, in one way m' another, instead of th_ joint committee having the supervisory responsibilil;y, that function be tr:msferred in the amendnffent :now pending to the Comptroller General of the Jnited States. Mr. TOWER. I think the Senator from Montana misunderstocd me. I was go_ing to modify my amendntent, which wo_ld make it easier for his amendment to be attached. That, then, would not require any modification on the part of hi:; amendment. Mr. MANSfiELD. Teat would be line, 506 April 11, 19 7,4 If the Senator will ask unanimous consent to make that substitution as to what and who the sulmrvisory agency wotgld be, I have no objeciion. I am trylng to retain in there the principle' I have been trying to achieve. Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order that I propound the unanimous-consent agreement to amend my amendment as fslic.wa The PRESIDING OFfiCER. Without objection, the amendment is so modilied_ The clerk will read the modification.. The legislative clerk proceeded to read the amendment as modified. 1V[r. TOVgER. Mr. President, I ask unamimous consent that further readLng of the modification be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so orderE_; and, without objection, the amendment as modified will be printed in the RECORm The amendment as modified is as follows: on. page 1, line 4, strike "Joint Committee Ga I:aternal Revenue Taxation" and insert "Comptroller General of tho United States". on. page 1, line 7, strike "committee staff" and insert "Comptroller General of tho Lrnit_;-qlStates". On page .2, line 3, strike "its" and insert "suets". on page 2, lines 3 and 4 strike "Joint Committee on Internal Revenue Taxation" and insert "Comptroller General of tho United States". On page 2, strike line 6 through "and to" on line 7. On page 2, line i0, after "proper." insert "The Comptroller General of the United Stat_s shall deliver a copy of such report and results of such audit and inspection to the Members or candidate coneeraod. "_ctlon 2. The Internal Revenue Service shall, assist the Comptroller General of the United States as necessary in administering the provisions of this title." Mr. MANSFIE. LD. Mr. President, a parl:[amentary inquiry. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will state it. Mr. MANSFIELD. What is the pendlng business? Tho PRESIDING OFFICER. :[he pending business is the amendment of the Senator from Montana. Mr. TOWER. Provided the unanimousconsent agreement I propounded is not objected to. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The unanimous-consent agreement has not been objected to; and it is so ordered. Mr. TOWER. So that now the amendmen_ of the Senator from Montana is in order. Is that correct? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct. Do Senators yield back their time on the amendment of the Senator from MoBtana? M:c. TowER. I yield back the remainder of my time. Mr. CANNON. I yield myself 1 minute. Mr. President, I would simply point out that this is exactly what we have required, in subtsance, elsewhere in the bill. OJ:l page 79, we adopted heretofore, in S. 372--and it is in this bill--a provision, the Cannon amendment, in section 401. April 11, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL Theony difference is between the amount of $20,000 and $25,000. In the bill as it now stands, it reads: Who is compensated at a rate in excess of $25,000 per annum. So the amendment of the Senator from Montana is $5,000 per annum more restrictive. But this requires a full and complete disclosure by every member of the executive, the legislative, and the judicial branches who is compensated in excess of that amount, and candidates for congressional seats, and the President and the Vice President, to make a full disclosure in accordance with the terms and provisions hereof; and it requires everything in there that is required on an income tax return. Mr'. TOWER. Mr. President, I submit that disclosure and audit are not the same thing; that the'Senator from Montana with his amendment and I with my amendment require an audit; whereas, all that the current provision of the bill provides is for disclosure, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment of the Senator from Montana. On this question the yeas and nays have been ordered, and the clerk will call 'the ro11. The legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that the Senator from Idaho (Mr. CHURCH), the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. FULBRmHT), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. HOLLINGS), the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. INOUYE), the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. LONe), the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. MCGEE), the Senator from Montana (Mr. METCALF), the Senator from Ohio (Mr. METZENBAUM), the Senator from WestVirginia (Mr. RANDOLPH), are necessarily absent, I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. RANDOLPH), would VOte "yea." Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. FONG), the Senator from Arizona (Mr. GOLDWATER), the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. COOK) ' are necessarily absent, I also announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. WILLIAML. SCOTT), is absent on official business. The result was announced--yeas 71, nays l6, asfollows: [No. 140 Leg._ YEAS--71 Abourezk Gravel Moss Aiken Gurney Muskie Allen Hart Nelson Bartlett Hartke Nunn Bayh Haskell Packwood Beall Hathaway Pastore Bentsen Helms Pearson Bible Hruska Pell BrookeBlden HuddlestOnHughes HibicoffPr°xmire Buckley Humphrey Roth Burdick Jackso_l Schweiker Byrd, Scott. Hugh cannonRobert C. Javits Johnston Sparkman Case Kennedy Stafford Chiles Magnuson Stevens Clark Mansfield Stevenson Cotton Mathias Symington Cranston McClellan Thurmond curtis McClure Tower Dole McGovern Tunney Domenlcl McIntyre Weicker Eagleton Mondale Williams Eastland Montoya RECORD--SENATE NAYS--16 Domi_ick Percy F.rvin Stennis Fannin Taft Griffin Talmadge Hansen Young Itatfield NOT VOTING -13 Church tIolllngs Metzenbaum Cook In0uye Randolph Fong Long Scott, Fulbright McGee William L. Goldwater Metcalf So Mr. MANSFXELD'Samendment to Mr. TOWER'S amendment was agreed to. Mr. PERCY'. Mr. President, I voted against the Mansfield amendment to the Tower amendment earlier today but voted for the Tower amendment as _mended as I wanted to make it clear I have not the slightest objection to having my own tax returns audited. Even though I am sympathetic with Senator MANSFIELD'S concern for equality of treatment for Members of Congress, I voted against the Mansfield amendment as I feel it is wrong to simply single out the tax returns for the past 5 years of all legislative, executive and judicial branch employees making over $20,000 a year 'to be audited. What is the manpower re_luired by GAO to do this? No one knows. How many employees would this involve? No one could tell me before the vote, but it was assumed the number probably is in the hundreds of thousands, How many millions of dollars a year will this cost? No one can tell me. On a cost-'effective basis, this could be an unnecessary waste of Federal Government funds. I am hopeful this amendment will never be implemented into law. The PRESIDINGOFFICER. TheSe. nator from Arkansas (Mr. MCCLELLAN) 1S recognized, Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. ]President, will the Senator yield? Mr. McCLELLAN. I yield, Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that, due to the very strong possibility of a number of votes Baker Bellmon Bennett Brock Byrd, Harry P., Jr. on amendments following one another, there be a time limitation of 10 minutes on roil'calls from here on out. The PRESII)ING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. McCLELLAN. parliamentary inquiry. Mr. President, a The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will state it. · Mr. McCLELLAN. believe I have unanimous consent to I offer an amendment at this time. Is that correct? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct. Mr. McCLELLAN. Mr. President, the amendment which I intended to offer, and which I will now not offer, is the same modification that the distinguished Senator from Texas made to his original amendment. That modification corrects one of the flaws I observed in the original amendment. I did not want it; I did not think it was wise to have the Joint Cornmittee on Internal Revenue Taxation auditing the Senator's return or my return. I did not know who was going to audit their's. I thought it was better to S 5831 have thc Comptroller General audit them. I am satisfied with the amendment. Mr. GRIFFIN and Mr. TOWER addressed the Chair. The PP, ESII)ING OFFICER. The question is on the amendment of the Senator from TeXas. Tile yeas and nays have been ordered. All time has expired. Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, I am supposed to have some more time, because was not time assigned to the Senator from Montana? The PRESIDING OFFICER. No. Mr. TOWER. That came out of my time? The PRESIDING OFFICER. No Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may proceed for 2 minutes. The PRESII)ING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, if I may have the attention of the Senator from Montana, was it not his intent that the results of such an extensive audit be made public information? Mr. MANSFIELD. Yes. Mr. TOWER. That is the intent of the Senator from Texs_; so I want that understood as a p_rt of the legislative history. Mr. BUCKLEY. Mr. President, when I voted for the Mansfield amendment to the Tower amendment, it was not ,ny understanding that the opinions of the Comptroller General would be published. I had assumed that the purpose of the Senator from Montana was to make sure that the tax returns of everyone in the Federal GoveiTanent receiving $20,000 or more would be given the closest scrutiny, so that any question or irregularities W(m]d be called to the attention of the proper authorities, and an_ questions resolved in accordance with normal procedures mid subject to normal safeguards. However, in light or the colloquy between the Senators from Montana and Texas,I willhave to reversemy position, and vote against the Tower amendment as amended. fact, I simply no legitimate purpose,iH to beseeservedthrough this gratuitous invasion of privacy. Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, a parliamentaryinquiry. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will state it. Mr. GRIFFIN. The question then is on the amendment of the Senator from Texasas amendedby the amendmentof the Senator from Montana. Is that not correct? The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct. The question :is on agreeing to tile amendment of the Senator from Texas, as modified, and as amended by tile amendment of the Senator from Mom tana. The yeas and nays have been or-. tiered, and the clerk: will call the roll. The legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that the Senator from Idaho (Mr. CHURCH) the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. FULBRIGHT), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. I{OLLINGS), the Sen- 50'7 S 5832 CONGRESSIONAL RE(;ORD --- SENATE April 11, 19 74 ator from Hawaii (Mr. INOVYE), the Senator from Louisiana '(Mr. LONe;), the Senator from Ohio (Mr. METZENBAVM), and the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. RANDOLrH) are necessarily absent, I further announced that, if present and voting, the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. '.RANrOLPH) Would vote "yea." Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the _enator from Hawaii (Mr. FONG) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. OOLrWaTER), are necessarily absent, I also announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. W_LLXAML. SCOTT) is absent on official business, The result was announced---yeas 69, nays 20, as follows: itation of 15. minutes )n this amend._, merit, 10 minutes for t_e distinguished ,'3enator from 'texas (Mr. TOWER). sponu, ,,;or of the amendment; and 5 minutes for l_he distinguished Senator from Nevada (Mr. CANNON), who is in charge of the: bill. Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. PrE:sident, I wonder if we could have a little more time on this amendme:nt. It is s very importartl; amenciment, and there are other Sen_. ators, including the junior Senator from lYfichigan, who are very muclh interested in making certain that tae Senate knows and understands what the araendment :i_; all about and how importa_t it is. Mr'. TOWElq;. Mr. Pre,' ident, I will cer_. rained by direct cash contributions tlr services rendered. The influence obrained, and the danger to the political process that this bill is said to address, is; not retarded or controlled when organizations are allowed to contribute thousands upon thousands of dollars in noncash services to candidates. Under the bill as currently before us, the individual American who wishes to contribute a small sum to the candidate of his or her choice is given a subservient status when placed alongside the types and levels of contributions this amendment seeks to control and limit. The integrity of the small contributor and his or her contribution remains in doubt. [No. 141 Leg.l YEA_%--69 tainly be agreeable to the granting o:!' ]more time. May we ma_e it 15 minutes to a side? Mr. MANSFIELD. Th_Lt is agreeable t(, ].Tie. Mr. President, I withe.raw my request., Mr. TOWEI_t. Mr. P:'esident, I yield myself such tirae as I may require, Thi'; is a very simi)]e amendment, Nevertheless, without it this bill canno: be objectively considerec, to be the "com.prehensive" proposal that the propo.nents of it maintain it is. This proposal amend,_ title III of the l_ill, specifically section 615, dealing with ][imitations on contribulions. As the bill _,[1ow stands, an individual contributi0_l :Is limited to $3,000 per c_,ndidate for each election and $6,000 for a political corn- This amendment treats corporations and organized labor equally. Admittodly ii; ha,'_; been labor unions which have impacted upon our political system by making their members available to ehgage in political activity by working on a candidate's campaign, doing direct mail solicitations and other traditional forms of activity. Nevertheless, I w0nder wlhether, if this bill is passed without ti:tis amendment, corporations also will shift their emphasis to providing services to a candidate rather than dfrect contributions. The end effect will be tlhat the political process will be' subject t_o the same abuses that were apparent long before this bill wa_ drafted. Mr. President, a recent article in tile Wall ;Street Journal highlighted the ex- mittee. The amendmeni; specifically addresses the nature of a contribution by :_uch a political committee by stating Lhat "for pur'ooses of lhis section with " respect to a political committee which es_ tablishes, adrrdnisters, and solicits contributions to a separate segregated fund supported by payments from a corporation or labor organization, as permitted under section 610, the term "contribu- tent to which noncash contributions have been utilized by one particular union--the International Association of 5_[achinists. I want to emphasize that the vast amou._t of contributions in the nature of services were only obtained through a discovery proceeding as part of a legal case brought by a number of union members who successfully alleged that tion" includes the fair market value of services which an individual who is an employee or member cf such corporation or labor organization, respectively, provides to such a committee for, or for the benefit of, a can(.idat_e, or which such an individual prov:des to, or for the benefit of, a candidate at the direction of such a coramittee." This amendment u ould, therefore, have the fair market value of services provided at tlhe directi3n of a political committee established by a labor organi- their dues money was being used illegally. If it were not roi- this discovery proceeding, the information would never have been made public. I ask unanimous c.onsent that the article be printed in the RECORD at this point. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed, in the RECORD, as roi[lows: UNIOn'S AND POLITICS: MONEY'S JUST ONE TOOL MACHINISTS USE TO HELP FAVORED OFF:OCr SEEKERS_INDIRECT AID IS A BIG [[TE:_,_, COURT RECORDSINDICATE; HOW DEMO- zation or a corporatio_L to a particular candidate cot[nted tow ._rd the politic_,l committee's contributien liraitation. MI', President, unless this amendme:_Jt or ail amendment similar in scope is approved, this so-called _ampaign reforra bill will be nothing mere than a shaln, !, myself, have some philosophical resetvations about imposin:; a contribution limit:btion on individLal expenditures, Nevertheless, such a lilt itation seems _3evitable. Therefore, if ';his legislation i.s to achieve the goal of controlling the CRATS BENEFITED (By Byron E. Calame) Los ANaELES.--Like the President himself, some of Richard Nixon's foes in organized labor have been surrending sensitive political records. The International Association of Muchinists, in a case initiated by a group of dissident members of the union, was forced by _ federal court here to release thousands of documents. They reveal iix unusual detail hew the IAM goes about electing its friends _) federal office. Thi_; rare glimpse into the inner workings aggregate impact whicL special interes_s ·)rocess, have on our electoral then rifle limitation must apply to all contribu~ tions and not just direct cash contribu~ tions, As far as the impact of special inte_ests are concerned, wl!_ difference does it make whether that influence is ob- of one of the AFL-CIO's largest (800,000 ,,;hows theremostis apolitically lot more active to a union's members)that and unions political clout than the direct financial contributions reported to government' watchdogs--and labor's political experts say the machlinists probably adhere to the campaign spending laws as closely as any union. The, documents indicate that direct gifts Abourezk Fannin Aiken Gravel Allen Griffin Bartlett Gurney Bayh Hartke Beau Haskell BeUmon Hathaway Bentsen Helms Bible Hruska Biden Huddleston Brooke Hughes Burdick Humphrey Byrd, Robert C. Jackson cannon Johnston Case Magnuson Chiles Mansfield clark Mathias Cook McClellan Cotton McGovern curtis McIntyre Dole Metcalf Domenici Mondale Eagleton Montoya Moss Muskte Nelson Nunn Packwood Pastore Pearson Pell Percy Proxmire Ribico!q Schweiker Scott, rmgh Sparkman Stafford[ Stevens Stevenson Symington Thnrmond Tower Weicker Williams Young NAYS--_20 Baker Domlnick Kennedy Bennett Eastland McClure Brock Ervin Roth Buckley Hansen Stennis Byrd, Taft Harry F., Jr. Hart Hatfield Talmadge Cranston Javits Tunney NOT VOTING--I 1 Church Hollings Metzenbaum Fong Inouye Randolph Fulbright Long Scott, Goldwater McGee William L. So Mr. TOWER'S amendment (No. 1153), as modified, was agreed to. Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, I call up my amen(lment No. 1131 and ask that it be read. The PRESIDING OFIVICEPt. The amendment WiU be stated. The legislative clerk read as follows: On page 76, between lines 18 and 19, in.sert the following: "(3) For ]purposes of this section, with respect to a political committee which establlshes, administers, and solicits contributions to a separate segregated fund supported by payments from a Corporation or labor organization, as permitted under section 610, the term 'contribution' includes the fair market value of services which an individual who is an employee or member of such corporation or labor organization, respectively, provides to such a committee for, or for the benefit of, a candidate, or which such an individuai provides to, or for the 'benefit of, a candidate at the direction of suclh a committee.". On page 76, line 19, strike out "(3)" and insert in lieu thereof "(4)". Mr. TOV/ER. Mr. President, I ask for yeas a_ad nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask unanimot_s consent that there be a lira- the 508 April 11, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL are often overshadowed by various services provided free of charge to favored candidates under the guise of "political education" for union members. The indirect afd includes some of labor's most potent political weapons; assignment of paid staff members to candidates' campaigns, use of union cornputers, mobilization of get-out-the-vote drives, TRIPS ,AND DINNERS Dues have also been used, the documents indicate, to supply IAM-backed candidates with polls and printing services and to finance "nonpartisan" registration drives, trips by congressional incumbents back home durlng campaigns, and dinners benefiting omce seekers endorsed by the machinists. Machinist-backed candidates are almost invariably Democrats. An important question is whether these dues-financed activities violate federal laws that for decades have barred unions and corporations from using their treasury funds to contribute "anything of value" to candidates for federal office. Money for such direct eontributions by unions must come from voluntary donations coaxed out of the members. The federal statutes do permit unions to spend dues for partisan politicking directed at the union's members and their families, on the theory that this sort of thing is internal union business, and the mon.ey used for this activity money," or "soft money." is called "education RECORD -- SENATE Even labor's critics concede that it is sometimes hard to draw the line between activities designed to sell a candidate to a union's members and those intended to sway voters tivlty--includlng such clearly legal endeavors as politicking directed at its own members and traditional union lobbying efforts. The real goal of the right-to-work foundation is to eliminate the forced payment of dues. A federal Judge dismissed the suit Dee. 19, largely because the union offered to start rebating the dues of any member who disagrees with the union's stand on political or legislative issues. Tile dissident group appealed the decision Jan. 10. One questionable arrangement of the machinists helped reelect Sen. McGee in 1970. Alexander Barkan, director of the AFL-CIO Committee on Political Education, asked the machinists early that year to put the names of 65,000 "Democrats in Wyoming" on the machinists' computer for the Senator's use in "mailings, registration, etc." The minutes of the Machinists Non-PartisanPolitical League executive committee show that Mr. Ellinger recommended handling the chore but warned that it would have to be financed with "general-fund money" (the league's separate kitty composed of vohmtary donations) and would be considered "a contribution toward the Gale McGee campaign." Despite the warning, internal records show that bills totaling $9,302.74 for the operation were 15aid out of the league's politicaleducation fund, built from dues money. Cornputing & Software Inc. was paid $4,696.84, Minnesota & Manufacturing Co. re- · ceived $414,Mining and $4,191.90 went to reimburse the IAM treasury for cards it provided. Doubts about such arrangements may be raised in the coming report by the Senate Watergate committee. Though Republican hopes for public hearings on union campaign contributions will probably be disappointed, the committee staff has asked unions broad' and potentially explosive questions about the services provided to- candidates, Watergate rew.'lations, some union politicians believe, have demonstrated that labor can never collect enough rank-and-file do- in general. A member of the machinists assigned to promote a candidate among other machinists may inevitably find himself woolng other voters as well. Still, the machinists' documents suggest that the union has often sought to provide maximum assistance to a candidate by use of soft money. "The problem," says one labor political strategist, "is that the machinists put too themuch in writing." Don'E1linger, widely respected The head lateof the Ma- nations to rlval campaign contributions by business bigwigs. "There is no way we can match them," says Mr. Holayter of the machinists. "It's silly to try." Hence the iraportance of the indirect contributions. This is one reason why tile AFL-CIO is pressing for public financing of federal campaigns: its strategists obviously figure that a ban on direct contributions would leave labor Itin isa in better relative to business than now. position chinists Non-Partisan memos.died in 1972, evidently If past chinists' The political activities of the machinists' union are, indeed, aimed at the union's merebets and are therefore proper, says William Holayter, director of the union's political arm, the. Machinists Non-Partisan Political League. DRAWING TYIE LINE Spending reports filed Political League had a penchant with the Senate who for for the 1970 campaign that the openly Machinists Non-Partisan Politicalshow League gave Sen. Gale McGee $5,000; the internal records now disclose that the Wyoming Democrat also received at least $9,300 in noncash asslstance. Direct donations to Texas Democrat Ralph Yarborough's unsuccessful Senate reelection bid in 1970 were listed at $8,950; one document indicates he got other help worth at least $10,680. While the league poured $15,200 directly into Democrat John Gilligan's unsuccessful 1968 bid for an Ohio Senate seat, the documents show it indirectly provided more, $15,500. RECEIPT UNREPORTED Available records indicate that few, if any, campaign committees for machinist-backed candidates listed indirect aid from dues money as contributions. Prior to a 1972 toughening of disclosure requirements, candidates evidently found it easy to spot loopholes that were used to avoid reporting such indirect assistance, The dissident machinists who forced dlsclosure of their union's files had brought their suit with the backing of the National Right to Work Legal Defense F0undation. The dissidents wanted the court to bar the union from using dues money for any political ac- supporter financing performance is any guide, union would still be a for political were its adopted. ance ofin thousands staffers' tens merits show. time of Itsfavorites indirect the mavaluable if public assist- alone hasthe totaled dollars, court in the docu- Printing Is another campaign expense that the IAM often helps its friends meet. With the 1970 elections coming up, an aide to Rep. Lloyd Meeds passed to the machinists a bill for the printing of the Washington Democrat'swent quarterly "The Second newsletter to every newsletter. home Jn the District," the aide rejoiced in one 'of the released documents. "We had a tremendous, positive response to it." Although the newsletter had been distributed far beyond the IAM's ranks in an election year, a softmoney check for $695.17 to the printer was quickly dispatched to a local union official, Early in the 1972 reelection, drive of Sen. Thomas MeIntyre, the Machinists Non-Partisan Political League agreed to spend $1,000 "for assistance in newsletters" put out by the New Hampshire Democrat. And earlier, during Rep. John Tunney's successful 1970 bid for a California Senate seat, the league picked up a $1,740 tab for printing of a brochure that compared the Democrat's vetlng record with that of the GOP incumbent, George Murphy. Some of the brochures were passed out at a ccunty fair. S 5833 The amountof union staff time devoted to candidates' campaigns is difficult to pin down. Irving Ross, a certified public accountant retained by the suing dissident machinisis to analyze the IAM documents, filed an affidavit giving "incomplete" tabulations. Mr. Ross says the time that IAM "grand lodge representatives" and "special representstives" spent on campaigns in 1972 was worth $39,175. The amounts were $58,241 in 1970 and $42,921 in 1968, he says. The IAM says the figures are too high, but it didn't challenge them in court. A status report prepared by the machinists political unit in late August 1970 shows that at least one field representative was working full time on each of over 20 congressional campaigns. IAM agents often become almost part of the candid_tte's campaign staff. When Robert Brown was assigned full time to Indiana Sen. Vance Hartke's reelection campaign in May 1970, he set up an office right in the Democrat's headquarters and had the title of chairman of the Indiana Labor Cornmittee for Hartke. Another IAM representative,, William Wolfe, was assigned to Yar' borough campaigns in Texas ir_ 1970 and 1972--and was being paid out of the union treasury in May 1972 even though a new law effective in April 1972 specifically barred a union from using dues money to pay for services rendered to a candidate, thus spelling out more clearly an old prohibition. The union also takes machinists out of the shop for campaign duty, giving thenl "lost time" compensation out of dues money to make up for the loss of regular pay. Thus, the files show, two Baltimore _nachinists got $282.40 a week while working for the Hulnphrey presidential campaign for five weeks i_l 1968. A Maryland IAM official said later that the two "did a first-rate Job, especially in smoking out the local Democratic politicians who were inclined to cut the top of the ticket" and persuading them not to do so. Rep. Richard tIanna of California got $500 from the machinists to help finance a $6,000 "nonpartisan" registration effort to help get him reelected in 1970. In a letter requesting . the union's aid, the Democrat predicted that the drive would "raise the district to at least 53.5% Democratic . . . because most of the unregistered voters are Democrats." He said the registrars would be preceded by "bird dogs," meaning tlhat Democratic workers would roam out ahead of the registrar to identify residence of unregistered Hanna supporters. The machinists' _[nion's airline credit card:_ come in handy wlhen incumbents are eager to get home in election years. Early in 1969, the executive committee' of the machinist political unit authorized the expenditure of $3.600 to buy plane tickets home for unnamed "western Senators" during the following year's campaign. The ,league's "education fund" provided Sen. Yarborough and his aides with $705.60 worth of tickets during his 1970 reelection campaign. The files show that $500 went to Sen` Albert Gore, Democrat of Tennessee, during his losing reelection elfort in 1970. Machinist officials contend the organization pays for suelb trawfi because the eandidate speaks to a union group or "consults with union leadership" in his district. But correspondence in the files indicates thai this is more of a rationalization ttlan a res,son. Take a 1969 Ellinger memo to Sen. Yarborough outlining procedures "for all transportation lnatters." It _'lates: "We would like our files to contain a leiter . . . indicating that you intend to be i:__ Texas on a particular date to consult with the leadership of our union. If a trip ineludes a member of your staff, the letter should also name the staff member as being included in the consultation.' 509 $ 5834 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--- SENATE April 11, 19 7'4 , "Appreciation dinners" for Senators and Representatives often serve as a conduit for "soft money."- Consider the ten $100 ticke_s thelAM bought to a 1969 testimonial gatherlng for Sen. Frank Moss, Democrat of Utah, who faced an election in 1970. "Since Moss is not yet an announced candidate, we can use educational money for this ewmt and later consider this as part of our overall contribution,' the minutes of the league's executive committee explain. MI'. TOWER. This is a matter that r ,dealt with in lny remal'ks. That wou[td be legal, provided he was not doing so 'under the direction of his Union or as :an officer of a aorporati¢ n, and it was not being done for or undeI the direction of :the corporation or organization, MI'. MAGNUSON. lq e could not be directed by the'union? Mr. TOWER. That is correct. In other you _nd you and you report to somebody's campaign headquarters and get to work and work 4 hours during the day," then you have to figure the fair market value of that 4 hours of labor as a part of the contribution. But if the individual tmion member, regardless of the fact that his union has endorsed a candidate, walks in and volunteers to work, that is his own business. Mr. ToP, rEP. Mr. President, I want to emphasize that this amendment is drafted with the intent of controlling these kinds of noncash contributions without restricting voluntary services which an individual renders to a candidate solely at his own initiatiw. · independent from the political committee. The amendment is aimed at work done by employees of the corporation or members of the union which is under the control or direction of the political commitres. The services could easily be contributed in the form of cash contributions but are not. Mr. President, I say to all of my colleagues that if we are sincere about limiting' individual contributions and consequently the aggregate impact which special interests have had on our electoral process, then we all must bite ghe bullet. It would be far worse to approve half-baked reforms than no reforms at al'.[, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time? Mr. AIKEN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. TOWER. I yield to the Senator from Vermont. Mr. AIKEN, Would the Senator's amendment inhibit the granting of the use of a WATS line of a corporation, labor union, or Member of Congress? Mr. TOWER. It does not prohibit it, but it must; be charged against the limit, as far as !its fair market value is con-. corned, that that organization can contribute. Mr. AII_rEN. If a corporation or a union feel,,; that it would like to lend a fleet of cars for political purposes, would the amendmentprohibit that? Mr. TOVVER. It would not :prohibit it, but it would require that it be considered as a contribution within the limits iraposed on the organization, Mr. AIEEN. It would be charged to their allowableexpense? Mr. TOWER. It would be charged to their allowable, that iscorrect. Mr. AIB[EN. I thank the Senator. I have an amendment similar to this which I shall probably put in the RECORD later, but as long as the Senator from Texas has proposed his, it is sc. nearly like the one I have in mind that I probably will not offer mine. words, if an ol_eial of BIPAC, let us sa_:, 'which is a business and industrial polit:[cai action committee, if an officer of 'that of that organizatio:a was working J.n a campaign at the direcuion of that cornmittee, then his services woul_i have 1;o be counted, Mr. MAGNUSON. But it in no way acts to prohibit an individual-Mr. TOWEZR,. No, I made that very ,clear, that thi,; impacts _ot at all against 'the activities of indiviiua]s not under afiy control or direction, Mr. MAGNUSON. They might taks time out to do [t on their own? Mr. TOWER. That is right. I have individual volunteers wor_ing in my campaigns, Mr. MAGNUSON. What would happen if a group of individuals got together on their own? Mr. TOWE:_. That _lould be legal _f they were not working under the direclion of a political acti(,n committee. Mr. THURMOND. Mm President, wi1 the Senator yield? Mr. TOWEt_;. I yield to the Senator from South Carolina. Mr. THURM. OND. In the even.t th:_:t an individual of that gcoup was or several were inspired by a nnion, then what would be the effect? Mr. TOWEl2. I think this would have to be a matter of adjud cation, probably, to determine it. If there was a complai:nt that someone was working at the direclion of the organization, it could, (:.f course, be a raatter for adjudication, Mr. THUR]ViOND. I_t other words, if the individual or the gr3up, of their own free will and accord, w: thout any dire('lion, suggestion, or instdratJ.on from the union, goes out and xxorks, that is all right'.) Mr. TOWER. The Senator is correct, Mr_ THURMOND. Iqut if they do _o under direction, sugge_, tion. or inspirs tion from them, that v,ould violate thl.s section, is tha':correct? Mr. TOWEt{. That is fight, Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, will t_Je Senator yield'.' Mr. TOWEI_. I yield. Mr. B1DEN. If the union endorses a candidate, and it so halcpens that an employee who is a membe? of a union encts up working for that _and:[date on h:s o_tm, is it assumed that he is working' for that union? Mr. TOWER. No, it is not, and tics would not be charged :tgainst any legal contribution that was rr adc to the candidate by the organizaticn endorsing him, as long as he _,s a self-starter, wor_ing ,on his own initiative and 'mt _mder the (_15_ rection of the contribuling organization, Mr. BIDEN. How is the direction determined? Mr. TOWE]R.. We!l, if for example, t]:,e union says, "All right, t,)morrow morni::,g Mr _BIDEN. It sounds like a fairly equit'xble thing, but will it not turn out to be a sham? Will it not be understood that we are pulling another fraud on the American people? Mr. TOWER. I think it depends on how the law is enforced. The whole act could be a sham, for all I know. Mr. BIDEN. How could anyone legitiraate]y enforce it, when there is no tighter determination as to what eonstitutes whether or not someone is working at the behest of a union leader? Suppose the union leader just says, "I think, Town:s, I like that guy B!DEN. Were I you, I would be out supporting the amendment and that ends it." Then you show up at my headquarters. Mr. TOWER. If I had been coerced against my will-Mr. BIDEN. You would not do that, would you? Mr. TOWER. I would file a complaint. Mr. BIDEN. I am not worried about coercion. I am worried about who determine_; whether _youare chargeable to me. Mr. TOWER. The court would make a determination of that, in a situation like that. The election commission--the organism set up in the bill The point I am trying to make is if someone were directing a person to work in a campaign on the organization's time, someone who is an employee of that organizationMr. CANNON. That would be a direct violation of section 610 right now. That wouh:l be a violation of existing law. Mr. TOWER. No, no--in a political committee. Mx.. CANNON. It is a violation for a union or a corporation to direct someone Mr. TOWER. That is not my understan(iing. Mr. CANNON. To work in a campaign. Mr:. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, I was riot :intending to comment on the question of the distinguished chairman. If it is really a violation, then there would be no abjection. Mr. TOWER. That is right. Mr. GRIFFIN. To accept the Senator's amendment. But I should like to ask a quesiion on a different point, for purposes of trying to determine what the amer_dment does and would mean. In 1970, in the election in Michigan for Governor, as I recall, there were allegations that the UAW gave members who were striking against Oeneral Motors :.at that time--in order to draw their strike benefits, they had to march in a picket line--the option, as I understand it, oJ.' going to work in the Democratic campaign. If they did work in the Democratic campaign then they were given credit as though they had walked the picket line and drew their strike benefits. W,:uld the Senator from Texas have Mr. TO_VER. I thank my friend from Vermont. Mr. MA_NUSON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. TOWER. I yield to the Senator from Washington. Mr. MA(_NUSON. Suppose a person wanted to spend 10 days working on my or the Senator's campaign who happened to be a member of a union. I-Iow would the Senator handle that? 510 April 11, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL some comment on what impact his amendment wouldhaveonthat? Mr. TOWER. It would be prohibited under the provisions of the amendment. Mr. GRIFFIN. I thank the Senator from Texas. Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. STAFFORD). WhOyields time? Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield myself 2 minutes, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada is recognized for 2 minutes, Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I simply point out that under section 610 of the Corrupt Practices Act at the present time, it is unlawful for any corporation whatever, or any labor organization, to make a contribution or expenditure in Connection with any election, and so forth. Certainly, if a corporation or a labor union pays f/he salary of an individual and puts that person out to work for a candidate, that is unlawful. It is unlawful under existing law. I should like to know whether the Senator intends to gobeyondthat, In section 610 as modified--We have amended 610 to clarify the definitions, and it says, as used in the section, the phrase "contributions or expenditures"-$hen it goes on to define them as follows: RECORD--SENATE Mr. CANNON. For answering a question? I am not answering a question, I amstill listening. [Laughter.] Mr. TOWER. And I have already providedthe answer. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time? Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, I yield myself 1 minute. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas is recognized for i minute. Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, most of this talk has been about labor organizations but the same kind of abuse can be practiced by a corporation as well. As I pointed out in my remarks, if this amendment is not passed, then corporations might be encouraged to contribute time and effort which is not measured in monetary terms, The unions are solidly against this amendment, which is true, so in all probability it will not pass. Nonetheless, it should be understood it cuts both ways, against labor organizations as well as business organizations, Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield myself 1 minute. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada is recognized for i minute. Mr. CANNON. It would appear that what the Senator is attempting to do is But shall not include communications by to prohibit any volunteers who are in a 8 corporation to its stockholders and their separate organization, on a voluntary families or by a labor organization to its basis, from working, without charging members and their families on any subject; that time. I presume that would apply nonpartisan registration and get-out-theto the young Republicans, to the young vote campaigns by a corporation aimed at Its stockholders and their families, or by a Democrats, or to any other organization. labor organization aimed at its members and Mr. TOWER. No. It applies only to their families; the establishment, administrasection 610. The specific reference is tlon, and solicitation of contributions to a made to section 610. separate' segregated fund to be utilized for Mr. CANNON. It certainly reaches into political purposes by a corporation or labor the "separate segregated funds' in which organization: . . .. we have already determined Is it the Senator's intention to change The PRESIDING OFFICER. The 1 any part of that existing law that I have minute of the Senator has expired. Just referredto? Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield Mr. TOWER. It is th e intention of myself another minute, the Senator from Texas. The language of The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senthe amendment reads this way: ator from Nevada is recognized for 1 For purposes of this section, with respect additional minute. to a political committee which establishes, Mr. CANNON. We have already tried administers, and solicits contributions to a to encourage the use of voluntary orgaseparate segregated fund supported by pay- nizations and to encourage the establishmerits from a corporation or labor organlzamerit of "separate segregated funds" tion, as permitted under section 610 .... both in union organizations and in manThe PRESIDING OFFICER. The time agement organizations so that they can of the Senator from N_vada has expired, participate on a voluntary basis in the Does the Senator yield himself addielection process. tional time? Mr. President, I submit that this is Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I am not just an attempt to reverse the position yielding to him on my time. He is using that Congress has already taken and is his own time. I cannot yield my time, so well established, I am not using up my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yields time? Chair is informed that the Senator Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, I yield yielded to the Senator from Texas for back the remainder of my time. a question onhis 2 minutes. Mr. CANNON. Mr. Presidefit, I yield Mr. CANNON. Well, Mr. President, unback the remainder of my time. der the rule on cloture, a Senator canThe PRESIDING OFFICER. All time not yield his own time. I would ask the on this amendment has now been yielded Parliamentarian if that is correct. I back. yielded for a question but the answer The question is on agreeing to the has to come on the time of the person amendment of the Senator from Texas whois answering. (No.1131). The PRESIDIN G OFFICER. The On this question the yeas and nays Chair would state that the time does not have been ordered, and the clerk will call come out of the other side. the roll. S 5835 The assistant legislative clerk called £ the roll. Mr, ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that the Senator from Idaho (Mx'. CHURCH), the SenatA)r from Arkansas (Mr. FULBRIGHT), the Senator from South Carolina (Mir. HOLLrNGS), the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. INOUYE), the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. LoNc), the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. MCGEE), the Senator from Ohio (Mr. METZENBARN), and the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. RANDOLPH) are necessarily absent. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. RANDOLPH)would vote "nay." Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the Senator from tIawaii (Mr. FONG), the Senator from Arizona (Mr. GOLDWATER), and the Senator from Oregon (Mr. HATFIELD) are necessarily absent. I also announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. WILLIAM L. SCOTT) is absent on official business. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Oregon (Mr. HATFIELD) WOUld.vote "yea." The result was announced--yeas 40, nays 48, as follows: [No. 142 Leg.] Curtis YEAS--40 Dole McClure Allen Baker Bartlett Domeniei Dominick Packwood Percy Beall Bellmon Bennett Biden Brock Buckley Byrd. Harry F., Jr. Chiles cotton Easthmd Ervin Fannin Griffin Gurney Hansen Haskell Helms Hruska McClellan Roth Stafford Stennls Stevens Taft Thurmond Tower Weicker Young Aiken McIntyre NAYS--48 Abourezk Hathaway Muskie Bayh Huddleston Nelson Bentsen Hughes Nunn Bible Humphrey Pastore Brooke Jackson Pearson Burdick Javits Pell Byrd,Robert C.Johnston Proxmlre cannon Kennedy Ribieoff Case Magnuson Schweiker Clark Mansfield Scott, Hugh Cook Mathias Sparkman cranston McGovern Stevenson Eagleton Metcalf Symington Gravel Mondale Talmadge Hart Montoya Tunney Hartke Moss Williams NOT VOTING--12 Church Hoilings Randolph Fong Inouye Scott. IVulbright Long William L. Goldwater McGee Hatfield Metzenbaum So Mr. TOWER'S amendment (No. 1131) was rejected. Mr. TUNNEY addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen.ator from California is recognized. Mr. COOK. Mx'. President, will the Senator yield to me briefly? Mr. TUNNEY. I yield. _.d_k OUTER CON'I_NI_:NTAL SHELF LI1ASES Mr. COOK. Mr] President, yesterday I was notified that the Department of the Interior had _accepted 91 bids for their Outer Cont_ental Shelf oil and gas drilling rights I_ff the coast of Louis- 511 S 5836 iana. At that 23 CONGRESSIONAL the same I was informed on the basis of insufficient returns the G overnment_ The total payments to the United States from _table bids were $2,092,510,853.50 the rights to drill on 421,2111 acres off Gulf of Mexico_ As the amount d for the 23 bids rejected totalled $82, ,84,660, I requested that I be informed to the value that the Govmmment on these leases per barrel of oil or M ft _ of recoverable gas. I s informed today by the Bureau of Land that a vsdue of $5.50, $6.50, and $7.50 per barroll of oil had been and a value of 45 cents, 55 cents, 65 cents _r M ft :_ placed on thegns. Mr. President, _s very interesting in that at the time ]he Federal Government ural gas be sold in further s_ts the be sold. Since this interstate market per M fP ,'md much establisl_ by the on the value of the that this natmarket amd which this gas rate in the some 27 cents than the price Government it would seem to RI_CORD -- SENATE button received as a sub_eripeAon, loan, advance, or deposit, or as a contribution )f products or services, skall lie taken in_o account. Mr.' MANSFIELD. N:r. President, will Senator yield? Mr'. TUNNF/k r. I yield, Mr'. MANS:FIELD. M :. President, I a:-;k unanimous consent th_,t there be a time limitation of 1.5 minutns 0n the pending amendment, 5 minutes to be allotted ,;c the manager of the bill, the Senator from Nevada (Mr. CANNON) md 10 minutes 'm the sponsor of the amendment, the Senator from California (Mr. T_NNF.¥).. The PRESIDING O?FICER. Without objec, tion, it is so order _d. Mr. TUNNEY. Mr. President, t]:Ji_ amendment relates onl:f toprimary campaigns and 9; specifies tha,_ only monothe Hc, wever, I see no difficulty in providing that language and I would be happy to accel;)t the language ff it; made the Senator feel better. It does not add anything to the legal portions of the bfil. Mr. President, I am willing to accept the _mendment. MJ _. TUNNEY. Mr. President, I am prepared to yield back the remainder of my time. Mm CANNON. I yield back my time on the amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time is yielded back. The question is on agreelng to the amendment of the Senator from. California. The amendment was agreed to. T[;e PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill is open to further amendment. AMENDMENT NO. 1176, AS MODIFIED FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1974 The Senate continued with the con-. slderation of the bill (_. 3044) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing of primary alld general election, campaigrkn for Federal elective off]ce, and to amend certain other provisions of law relating to the _]aaneing and conduct of such campaigns, AMENDMENT NO. 1136 to the contribution of ;ervices, producl;s and loans. These products, services, anc loans cannot be used I or the purpose 0f reaching the threshold of contributions which will then trigger the use of Federal funds, Once the _hreshold is met, the Is,nguage of the bill is sil(nt as it relates _o loan'; and co:atributions of products anc services, What could happen is that a person after' he reached the tl_reshold and is eligible for Federal cortributions, woulc have a fund-raising dinner at a hundrec dollars a plate, but t_e notice sent (iai; would read that the money contributec, would only be a loan Then, When the candidate received f:'om the Federal. Government on a matching basis the contribution ets specified by the legislation, that $100 loan v,ouldL be returnee to the invitee. I thin_ it would stari; _ new rage in political d:nners. I can fore.. see situation,; where nany people woulc'. turn out to the dinner with the idea that their $100 ws,s only going to be used on _. loan basis and that they were going to get the money back. Xhis would provide a greater contributio]l by the Federat C,ow_nment to the p:'ima:ry campaig.q_; than is envisioned in the law as written, because it is supposed to be on a 50.-5(I basis once the threshold is reached. This amendment ,vould close tha'., loophole and make tile donations co:a.. form to the language prior to the tirae the threshold is reach _d. Mm BROCK. Mr. President, I call up nly amendment No. 1176 and I ask unanimor;s consent that the amendment may be modified as indicated. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated. The amendment was read as follows: On page 77, between lines 5 and 6, irmert the following: "(p:) This section does not apply to contributicms made by the Democratic or Republican Senatorial campaign Committee, the Democratic National Congressional Commitmittfe, or the National Republican Congressions,l Committee,". The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the modifieation. Without objection, the amendment is so modified. M:c. BROCK. Mr. President, I raise this mather again because of the confusion we had in previous debate with regard to the effect of my exempting amendment of House and Senate campaign committees and the amendment of the junior Senator from 'Iowa which repealed, effectively, that first amendment. This amendment is far more limited in impact and would achieve my original intent. I have discussed this matter with the Cha:.rman of the Committee on Rules and Administration and described what it does specifically. It removes only the committees from the law insofar as contributions are concerned. But it speeifically does not affect their limitation of the _l,00O ceiling or the ceilingon contributions they can receive from an individual or group. I ihope the amendment will now prove satin;factory to this body. .I reserve the remainder of my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time? Mr. TUNNEY. Mr. President, I call up amen,_Lment No. 1136. The _q_ESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated, I hope the.. committee will accept ,51ac amendment, Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yicl([ myself 2 minu.tes, 1Vir. CANNON. Mr. President, I supported the principle of this amendment when the Senator first; presented it. I haw!; no objection to the amendment and The assistant legislative clerk read as follows: on page 9, line 24, _rike out all through page 10, ll_e 2, and substitute in lieu thereof the following: SEC. 503. la) (1) Every eligible candidate i_ entitled to, payments In connection: with his primary election campaign in a_: amoun% which 1_ _._tual to the amount of contrlbu.tions received by that candidate or his au.$hortzed committees, except that _m contri.- ! do not share any skepticism of _he reliability of ]people who are candidate3 for public off,ce, nor d o I assume a person would have time t¢ go out for a $100 - I am prepared to accept :it. Mr. CLARK addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does a-plate fundraising di:_ner to pledge the people that their mo ney would be returned after the c:mdidate received matching funds from the Federal G0v.. ernment. It would be completely ille_,al under the present act. ator from Iowa? Mr. CANNON. I yield to the Senator from Iowa on his time. Tihe PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen:ttor from Iowa is recognized on his time. me that we are the industry itself at a Accordingly, I intend to bring this _attention of the Federal Commission and the I)epartmen't of the Interior to determine if some can be made concerning valuable natural resources, On sew,_ral on the floor of! the Senate, I have my voice in opposition to the rams whJch have, forced this Nation to dependent; on foreigll powers its ener_,-y fuels, I am convinced that have not solved, our problems, and this Congress; has passed a few of emergency energy legislation, Ithing has been done to address the lot _-rangeproblems I submit to my cl ues that we must increase--not reuse--our efforts to find new energy s, and to de-. velop those know to be available, my 512 tary contributions will be eligible for re.imbursement from Federal[ funds. The contribution of services and produc't;s and loans would not be eligible :53r matching once the threshold has beer reached that will then ;rigger the contributton of Federal fun(_;. The way the bLl] now reads there is a lo(,phole as it relate_ ApNI 11, 19 74 Senator from Nevada yield to the the Sen- April 11, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, this amendment, of course, already has been debated and voted on. With respect to exempting the congressional and senatorial campaign committees from any contribution' limitations, it is exactly the same amendment that was repealed in this body on Monday by a vote of 44 to 35. The only thing that is changed about the amendment is one letter, which was just agreed to. Indeed, if there had been an objection to that change, the amendmerit would not have been in order, It Seems to me we are simply wasting a lot of the Senate's time by voting on substantially the same amendment we have already repealed. The Senate has expressed its will very clearly on this issue, and I, t'herefore, move to lay the amendment on the table, and ask for the Church Fong Pulbright Goldwater RECORD--SENATE NOT VOTING--.Il Hollings Metzenbaum Inouye Randolph Long Scott, McGee William n. S 583'7 cause tWO both spect. the Senator from Tennessee offered amendments, Nos. 1176 and 1181, of which are identical in every reAmendment No. 1181 is still avail- yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the motion to table. The yeas and nays have clerk will call the been roll. ordered, and the The second assistant legislative clerk called the roll. So Mr. CLARK'S motion to lay on the table Mr. BROCK'S amendment, as modifled, was agreed to. Mr. BROCK. Mr. President, I have another amendment; but before I address it, I should like to express my regret at the way the previous vote was brought upon us. I think that the Senator from Iowa (Mr. CLARK), as a matter of honest conviction, thought that the amendment I had offered was the same amendment as had been debated previously. He was in error. I have to ass utne that he did not know that. But the fact is that when we get into that kind of situation, when time is left on an amendment and a statement is made that could be rebutted, a motion to table precludes the opportunity for rebuttal. I regret very much that we did not have a chance to explain the amendment to the Senate. Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? I yield. Mr.BROCK. Mr. CLARK. The Senator from Iowa could Ifbe that able. calledamendment up at this is time, in order, and theit Parliamentarian could rule on its validity. Mr. BROCK. I think that even I would object to that, because it is identical 'to the original language in every jot and tittle. Perhaps that is how the Senator became confused ill saying that they were the same, verbatim. They were not. But I shall not pursue that particular matter. I do not think that enough Senators are in the Chamber to change the outcome. I am not certain that the outcome is not pretty well predictable. We have set our com'se upon legislation that simply cannot be enacted. We have decided to exercise our privilege to amend the bill to the point where it is a disaster. It cannot be effectuated by any stretch of the imagination. So perhaps we had. better proceed with the charade. I cannot obviously support the bill as it is written. I consider it an insult to the American people and to their intelligence. I consider it an abridgemerit of their freedom and rights. But that is something' they will have to decide' when they face the issue. Before I terminate my rather brief Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that the Senator from Idaho (Mr. CHURCH), the Senator from from Arkansas (Mr. FULBRIGHT) the Senator South ' Carolina (Mr. HOLLINGS), the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. INOUYE), the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. LoNe), the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. McG_._.), the Senator from Ohio (Mr. METZENBAUM), and the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. RANDOLPH are necessarily absent. I further announce that, if preSent and voting, the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. RANDOLPH) Would vote "yea." Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the consulted the Parliamentarian Yesterday after the amendment of the Senator from Tennessee had been offered, and got opinion from the Parliamentartan an that the amendment was not in order as it was written. That was the basis for my statement. Obviously, haylng been given consent to amend the amendment by one letter, the amendmerit was in order. As the amendment was printed, it was not-in order, according to the advice of the Parliamentarian, Dr. Riddick. That was the basis of my statement. Mr. BROCK. The statement is to the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. FONG) and the Senator from Arizona are necessarily absent, (Mr. GOLDWATER) I also announce that _he Senator from Virginia (Mr. W_T.XAM L. SC0TT) is absent on official business, The result was announced--yeas 49, nays 40, as follows: [No. 143 Leg.] ¥EAS--49 Abourezk Haskell Nunn Aiken Hathaway Packwood BayhAllen HughesHUddlest°n PastOrepearson Bible Humphrey Pell Blden Jackson Proxmire Brooke Javits Ribicoff Burdick Johnston Roth Byrd, Kennedy Schweiker Harry F., _r.C. Magnuson Stennis Byrd, Robert Mansfield Stevenson effect that the amendment was not changed by one word, not one phrase, not one fact. I would say to the Senator from Iowa to the. tocommittee's counsel, courtJim Duffy; Jim Medill, chief the minority that perhaps he did not read the amendscl of the subcommittee; and to Joe merit, or perhaps he saw the wrong verO'Leary, of the Committee on Rules and sion, because the amendment, even as Administraton. originally submitted at the desk, was not I wish also to thank Lloyd Ator and altered in a substantial way from that Bob Cassidy, of the legislative counsel's which was originally offered, from which office. we eliminated the section which resulted These men have done outstanding in the thousand dollar ceiling. We elimwork on this bill. They have assisted me inated the first paragraph in its entirety, with candor, ability, and integrity. I am That paragraph related to section 614, very grateful to them, and I desire to on page _5. have the RECOR_ show my appreciation. We changed the language in the seeMr. President, I thank my colleagues cud paragraph to be specific in terms of for their attention. the removal of exemption in terms of · Mr. AIKEN. Mr. President, I advised money. case Chiles Clark Eagleton ·Hart Gravel Mathlas McGovern McIntyre Mondale Montoya Moss NAYS--40 Symington Talmadge Tunney Weicker Williams But I would hope that Senators did not vote out of an erroneous impression, I am perfectly willing and prepared to lose a vote on the merits. I understand that. I hope that is the case in this par- Bartlett Baker Beall Bellmon Domlnick Don_enic! Eastland Brvin Muskie Metcalf Nelson Percy ticular instance. I wish we had had pienty of time to explain it. I would feel more had comfortable if Ipresent had lost after ofI had a chance to a point the Senate last nightI that six amendments which thought! had would strengthen the bill now before us and make it more acceptable and more workable. I-I_wever, I find that two of those amendments have already been discussed by this Senate. A third one was partially by thefrom amendment of.fered by covered the Senator Texas (Mr. BennettBentsen Brock Buckley cannon Cook cotton Cranston curtis Dole FanninGriffin Gurney Hansen Hartke Hatfield Helms Hruska McClellan McOlure SparkmanSC°tt' Hugh Stafford Stevens Taft Thurmond Tower Young view different from that of the Senator from Iowa. Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. BROCK. Certainly. Mr. CLARK. There is a very easy way to test the validity of that argument, be- TOWER), which was defeated earlier to.day; and I realize that no amendment is now going to improve the fortunes of this bill or of any other bill which pro.poses to strengthen our election laws at this time. I am very much in favor of stronger part in these proceedings, I should like to say one thing more. The members of the Committee on Rules and Admnistration have labored long hard on the bill[. The chairman, the and distinguished Senator from Nevada (Mr. CANNON), and the ranking minority member, the distinguished Senator from Kentucky (Mr. COOK), have endured graciously and with a great deal of self-restraint. They have done an exquisite job, and to them I wish to pay my respects. I should also like to pay my respects 513 S 5838 election CONGRESSIONAL laws. I realized when we virtu- ally insisted that the committee report out a bib by a certain date this spring that we were not giving them time enough to write a really good bill. As the bill now stands, it is quite ob- vious that no bill at ali will become which resembles this one as :it law now sgands, I apprecJ, ate the fact that the Senate has given me the right to offer these amendments, the four which I have left, even though they were not printed. But at this time I feel that I would like to simply offer them, with a short description of each, for printing in the tLEC0Rm They are four good amendments, which wotfild have made a better bill of this measure, but with the way the bill has been handled and treated up to now, with 'the amendments which have been def_ted and the .amendments which have than lief been approved, it is worse no bfil at all, and it is my firm bethat if this bill is accepted by the Senate it will mean no strengthening of the electi0¢l laws this year at all. It could be possible to strengthen these laws ff the bill were recommitted and the coErlmittee were to have a chance REI;ORD --- SENATE AMENDMETrT 'rrrLE VI--TrlV.[t,_S OF CONDUCTING FEI)ERAL OFFICE PRIM_LrtY ELECTIOIq'_½ AND NATIONAL NOMI_[ATINQ CGNVEN- TIGNS CGNO_¢,aSXONAL P{I_Ar;IES SEC. 601. (a) If, under the law' of any State, 1;he caudidate of a politics: party for electic_t i_) the Senate or to the House of Represen',>. atives is determined by _ priroary electiorL or by a convention conducted by that party, the primary election or convention shall be held on or after the Tuesiay after the firsb Monday in June. If a subsequent, additional primary electio:a is neces ;ary to determine the nominee of any politie;d party in a State, that additional election sic ail be held withizL 1;hirty days aft_;r the date of the first such primary election. (b) For purposes of thL, section-(1) 'the term "State" means each of th,) several States of the Unite, i States. the Contmonwealth of Puerto Rio(, the, Territory of Guam, and the Territory of the Virgin Is.. lands; and the District of Colu:mbia. (2) a candidate, for election as Residen5 Commissioner to fhe Uni';ed States, in the case of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, April 11, 19 74 States shall have jurisdiction, upon applicat:[on made by the Attorney-General, to enjoin t:ae members of a political party from conducting a national nominating convention f,yr that the purpose of party forof nominating election to the the candidate Office of President in violation of t/he provisions of subsection (b). P_SUM2 No. 2 Mr. President, the amendment I am offerlng would prohibit the short campaign advertising spot of ten, fifteen, twenty, or t:airty seconds or up to five minutes unless it is a live or videotaped presentation by the candifiate, speaking on his own behalf and without any props, backcirops or sound effc_ts. In other words, a candidate under this amendment can purchase short television advertising spots for his camrrafgn only if it is of his speaking directly to the electorate. He can be photographed seated at a table or perhaps standing at a lecturn, whatever his preference. The focus is directly on the candidate and the purq)ose is to communicate stands and i,';sues. RECORD, as follows: R_suM2 No. 1 Mr. President, one way to cut down campaiga expenses is to cut down. campaign costs, and one way to do this is to shorten the time for campaigning, It will cut down the. time for spending, There is no sense why we spend so much time campaigning. The British and the Canadians accomplish the same end result in a far shorter time and for a fraction of our costs. or as Delegate 'to the Hm se of P_epresenta.. tires, iu the case of the Te_'ritor 7 of Guam or the Territory of the Virgin Islsxlds, shall b_; considered to be a candid;_te for electlon to the House of l_epresentati yes. PRrSZDENTL_L rR_EaENCE iazacAaY ELECTZO_m SEC. 602. (a) No State whic:_ conducts a presidential preference prb aaxy election shall i_)nduct that election before the first Tues.day after the first Monday in June during Inay year in which the electors of the Presi.. dent and Vice President a:e appointed, (b) :For purposes of ;his section, the term-(1) "presidential prefcr_ nee primary elec.. ilea" nxeans aQ election conclucted by a State, in whole or in par ;, for the purpo,*_ of--(A) permitting the voters of that State t_) express their preferences f_)r the nomination of candidates by political parties for electior_ to the office of President, or (B) choosing delegates to the national.'. nominating conventions held by politic_I parties for the purpose of nomanating such candidates; and (2) "State's' means eac_ of the severt£_ States of the United State;, and the District; of Columbia. NATIONAL NOMINATrNG CON_,ENT_ONS That is really what a campaign is abouty-f_) get one's positions and ideas to the voter to to persuade the voter that these positions and ideas would best serve him. Our campaigns have become too much of a Madison Avenue image and candidates are packaged as a commodity to be bought and sold. And they are sold like many of our products on the market today--by the short spot which develops an image, but tells us mzbst_ztially little about the product itself or the ingredients which make up this product. A ca_xdidate can speak for himself. Madison Avenueisn't needed. Our campaigns are expensive and costs are increasing rather than being cut down. And television advertising is a prime expense. If ac[opted, this amendment will encourage discussion of specific issues. I_ wiU also cut down costs because it can't ba expensive to produce the short spot in which the candidate stands in a television studio in front of a television camera. This is also an easy restriction to enforce. If we are seriously interested in cutting dawn our campaign costs, tihs is an ideal amendment to support and include in this My amendment although not the is pending before SEC. 603. (a) The Congress finds that-(1) the Presidential p:'eference primazh, election (a_ defined in s_tion 602(b) (1)) legislation. _md the convem;ions held _)y n_tiomal polit-, iced pa_ties for the purpose o1' nomi_ating candidates for the office of )'resident and Vice ]'resident constitute an integral part of th_.' process by whic:a such Gift,ers s,re chosen by the people of the United States; (2) by limiting the lenEth of time during which 'the general election mmpaign for election to such offices occurs', the integrity oJ! the electoral process is b_tter secured; amc[ (3) in order to protect t_e in'm_grity of th.c, Presidential election process and to provide for the geDeral welfare of the Nation, it !is necessary and [proper for the Congress t_, regulate the part of that proce_ relating t_, the nomination of candidates -for electior_ to the Office of President by prescribing the time during which such elections and con. -. ventions shall be held. (b) Any political party which norninate_; its candidate for election to '_he Office of President by national no:nina_;ing eonven.-, tion shall hold that comentlon heginninE on the third Monday of August; of ttxe year in which the electors of I he President and Vice President are appoinled. (c) The district court., of the United. On page 26, between serf the following: to profit by the examples of the past 2 weeks. But I am not going to make the motion to recommit. If it is to be recom- mitred, that will have to be moved by those who have been strongly iii favor of the bill. As it is now, I ask tmanimous consent that my four proposed amendments and a r_sum8 of each be printed in the RECORD. There being no objection, the rSsum_s and amendments were ordered to be printed in the follows language, the House tt_e intent, of S. 343 which Elections Sub- committee. This should be part of S. 3044. This am_:adment requires that primary elections for Federal office be held during a period that extends from the Tuesday after the first Monday in June until general cleotion date. TBks will change our present situation which has primaries among the States scatterb_d throughout the calendar year from Winter to Fall, but it still gives the States wide latitude in picking or bhoosing a time for their primaries to suit their specific requirements, Presidential preference primaries would also be held anytime after the first Tuesday after the first Monday in June until convention time. Party conventions would be held beginning the 3rd Monday in August. This amendment falls in line with the objectives of S. 3044 which seeks to reform our electica_ laws. This amendment down cazr election On page. 86, ing: 514 is a step towards cutting costs and expenditures, line 17, insert the follow- AMENDMENT lineq 17 and 18, in- (d) ;Section 315 of such Act (47 U.S.C. 315) is, amended by redesignating subsections (d), (e), (f), and (g) as (e), (f), (g), and (h), respectively, and by inserting after subsecti on (c) the following new subsection: _(d) No television brOaqcasting station may sell or otherwise make available broadcast time in segments of less than five miautes duration for use by or on behalf Of a legally qualified candidate in connection with b:[s caxapalgn for nomin_t4on for election, _r election, to Federal elective office. The prem_ing sentence does not apply in the case of a personal appearance by a candidate p[botographed in a broadcasting studio without pl].otographtc, musica L or other embellishment, whether for simultaneous trarm:m.ission or through the use of videotape, durlng wl_ich the candidate speaks for the duration of the broadcast." On page 26, line 18, strike out "(d)" and insert J[n lieu thereof "(e) ". On page 27, line 14, strike out "(e)" and :insert in lieu thereof "(f)". April 11, 19 74 R_su_ CONGRESSIONAL No. 3 Mr. President, this a_nendmen,t would prohtbit corporations or labor unions from setting up a special, segregated fund for the purpose of collecting funds for contribution to a candidate or to a campaign committee or other aotivities to exert influence in an election, This does not deny an individual his constitutional rights, This amendment still permits individual corporate employees, the president, clerk or line assemblyman---or a union member-local president, shop steward or journey,man--to participate in a campaign. They all can contribute the dollar amounts allowed by law and try to persuade their neighbors to vote ,their way. It would eliminate the potential political mischief and _buse. This amendment returns to the situation prior to 1971 Federal Election Campaign Act when Congressional sanction was given for corporations and labor unions to establish and administer separate, segregated funds for political purposes, It would lessen to some extent the lnfiuence of these organizations in our campaigns and give the individual citizen a greater role In our elections, which election reformers say is needed, That is what they are arguing: eliminate the force of ,the vested interests and give the man-in-the-street a more dominant lnfluenee in our elections, One start in that direotion is to eliminate the source of influence that can be exerted by an organization--business or otherwise-and by the poli¢ical money p_ts these organizattons can muster up. AMENDMENT On page 28, line 7, after the semicolon insert "or". On page 28, line 11, strike out the semicolon and insert in lieu thereof a semicolon, closing quotation marks, and another semicolon, On page 28, strike out lines 12 through 16. on page 29, beginning with line 1 strike out through "organization" In line 5. On page 30, beginning with line 19, strike out through line 2 on page 31 and insert in lieu thereof the following: "(3) does not include the value of services rendered by individuals who volunteer to wbrk without compensation on behalf of a candidate;"; On page 65, line 22, after the semicolon insert "and". On page 66, line 2, strike out "party; and" and insert in lieu thereof "party.". on page 66, strike out lines 3 through 5. On page 71, strike lines 1 through 12 and insert in lieu thereof the following: PROHIBITION OF THE ESTABLISHMENT oF SEPARATE SEGREGATED AND POLITICAL FUNDS BY CORPORATIONS LABOR ORGANIZATIONS .SEC. 303. Section 610 of title 18, United States Code, is amer_ded by striking out the last paragraph and inserting in lieu thereof the following: "It is unlawful for any national bank, corporation organized by authority of any Law of Congress, other corporation, or labor organizatiou to establish, administer, or solicit contributions to a separate segregated fund to be-utilized for political purposes or to encourage any person to make a contribution or expenditure by physical force, job discriminatien, financial reprisals, or the threat thereof, or by requiring any person to make a contribution or expenditure as 'a condition of employment or as a condition of members,hip in a labor organization.". on page 74, line 21, after the semicolon insert "and". On page 74, line 23, strike "party: and" and insert in lieu thereof "party.". RECORD -- SENATE On page 74, beginning w_th line 24, strike out through line 4 on page 75, - R2SUM_. No. 4 Mr. President, if we want to control campaign contributions and expenditures. This amendment aims to cover one area pretty much left untouched by S. 3044. When it comes to monetary contributions, the Committee is specific, An individual can contribute no more than $3,000 to any single Federal candiate and no n_ore than $25,000 in total political contributions during a calendar year. Contributions of $100 or more must be by written instrument, There is nothing to prevent my offering the use of my office in Town X, lis desks, telephones water lines, Xerox machine for campaign workers to use for one day, one weekend or more for the purpose of contactlng voters or getting out the vote, or mass produced articles.' This is as important in a close contest as the television broadcast or the mailing, but there is a difference, There is no way that this "in-kind" ,:ontribution is required to be on the reports of the candidates. This amendment allows the monetary contribution; it allows the services of a Campalgn volunteer, This amendment would require, however, that a candidate purchase and make a menetary expenditure for this campaign service, Such an expenditure would have to be realistic and in accordance wtih going rates and expenses in the area for office space and equipment expenditures, A dollar would not cover the cost of uslng, for instance, a mid-city office or even the basement of a home for a fund-raising cocktail party, These are all extras that benefit a eandidate and should very much be counted as part of his campaign. ' To omit would be to misrepresent the actual campaign cost and violate the spirit and intent of S. 3044, which is to have complete disclost_re and accounting for campaign activities, AMElgDMElq_r On page 77, line 10, strike out "No" and insert in lieu thereof the following: "No person may make a contribution of goods or services or for the benefit of, candl- a date or to, political committee otherany than contribution ices."No". of that person's personal sero- Mr. AIKEN. I am sorry that the situation has turned out as it has. I very much wanted to strengthen our election laws, but I think any prospect of strengthening them hasgone down the drain. I cannot even vote for the bill :itself as it is now. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield to the majority leader. Mr. MANSFIF, LD. Mr. President, could we have a show of hands as to how many amendments there might still be to be considered? It looks like three or four. Would the Senator from Ohio, who is to be recognized next, consider a further time limitation? Mr. TAFT. Yes, I would be agreeable, Mr. MANSFIELD. 15 minutes to be equally divided, or 10 minutes? Mr. TAFT. 15 minutes would be adequate. Mr. MANSFIF, LD. I make that unanilnous consent request, Mr. President. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered, S 5839 AMEIq])MENT NO. 2251 Mr. TAFT. Mr. President, amendment No.. 1151, and I call up my ask for.its ira- mediate consideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to read the amendment, which is as follows: On page 52, line 8, change the period to s. comma and insert thereafter the following: "except that a political committee described in section 301(d) (2) may be designated as the central campaign committee of more than. one candidate for 'purposes of the general election campaign.". Mr. TAFT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to substitute a perfecting amendment changing the language of the bill. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendnlent will be so modified. Mr. TAFT'S amendment (No. 1151, as modified) is as follows: On page 52, line 8, change the period to a comma and insert thereafter the following: "except that a political committee described in section 301(d)(2) may be designated as the central campaign committee of more than one candidate for purposes of the general election campaign. And if so designated, it shall comply with all reporting and other requirements of ]aw as to each condidate for whom it is so designated as if it were the centzal campaign comrr,ittee for that candidate alone. Mr. TAFT. Mr. President, ment would exempt national political party organizations striction that a "political this amendand State from the recommittee" can serve as the "central campaign cornmittee," or financial administrator, for only one political candidate's general election campaign. Its purpose and el'feet would be to allow the national and State party organizations to perform this bookkeeping function for as many candidates as desired. The amendment does not change the accounting and disclosure requirements which the bill imposes on each candidate's campaign operations, nor does it change the amount of*contributions and expenditures allowable either for any single candidate or for the :political parties acting as independent entities. I believe that this amendment is necessary so that the political parties will be able to administer financial operations for any candidate who agrees that this approach is desirable, as the parties do now in some cases. As the Vice President emphasized in Chicago last Saturday, if the Republican National C0mmittee had been responsible directly for financial administration of the 1972 Presidential campaign, the chances of a Watergate occurring might have been eliminated. BY permitting total party financial operation of general election campaigns at the State and national levels, my amendment should provide all alternative that in some cases would foster better supervised and more professidnal campaign operations. Specifically, it would eliminate the problem that has been pointed out so vividly with regard to CREEP. With this bill, as now amended, for all practical purposes we have institutionalized 515 S 5840 CONGRESSIONAL CREEP. We make it absolutely necessary and required by law that the national, and in the case of State elections the State, campaign committees could not act as the central campaign committee for financial or other purposes of the candidates who are nominated. This, to me, is sheer foolishness. I have tried to get this amendment in previously. Zt is not in any way an attempt to change' the reporting requirements. I think the language of the amendment as modified makes that abundantly clear; I thought it was clear previously, For the purpose of the record, I would also say that a number of candidates in my own State in recent campaigns have used the State committee for this putpose, and it has been, I think, a very economical way to handle the campaigns. The present Attorney General of the United States, William Saxbe, as I recall, in his Senate campaign in 1968 used the Ohio State Committee as his campaign committee to do all the reportlng required federally, stat4.'xgi(ie, or otherwise, I think t]his is a change tlq.at makes sense. The bill still has a great many problems in it, but I think we at least ought to get this on record as expressing the desire of the Senate. Mr. CANNON. I yield to the majority leader, Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President;, I ask unanimous consent, after discussing the matter with the interested parties, that on the Packwood-Baker amendment there be a 15-minute limitation, 10 mtnutes to the sponsors of the amendment and 5 minutes to the chairman of the committee, and that on the Allen amendmerits there be a 10-minute time limitstion, 5 minutes to each, the time to be equally divided, Xqle PRESIDING OFFICER. _rithout objection, it is so ordered. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield myself 1 minute. ' In S. 372, passed just last year, 'we had a precise prohibition against a central campaign committee aetin_ as such for more than ,one candidate. I think that is probably the reason it was carried over here in this bill. The Senator from Ohio has now modilied his amendment to make it absolutely clear that the campaign committee, if it were designated the political committee or the senaterial eampaign committee for more than one candidate, would have to comply with precisely the same reporting provisions as ff that were the sole candidate they were acting for. With that restriction, as he has now modified his amendment, I am willing to accept thai;. I have discussed it with the minority representative, and we are willlng to accept the amendment, Mr. TAN_r. I thank the chairman. I yield back the remainder of my time. Mr. CANNON. I yield back the remainder of my time. The PRESIDING OFFIC;ER (Mr. I-IELMS). All remaining time having been yielded back, the question is on agreeing to the amendment (No. 1151) of the Senator from Ohio, as modified. The amendment was agreed to. 516 RECDRD--SENA]TE AIVIE_[I}MENT _O. xoss Mr..ALLEN. Mr. President, I call Ul:, my amendment No. 1058 and ask that it be stated, The PRESIDING CFFICER (Mr. I_.[ELraS).The a:mendmen; will be stated, The legislative clerk ret,d as follows: On page 8, linE; 7, strike ;he period, insert in lieu thereof a comma and add. the follow., lng: "with not less than $2500 i:a matchable contributions having beell received from legal States.".residents of each of at least forty Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I yield myself 3minutes, The PRESIDING OFFiZCEI:'. The Senator from Alabama is r_cognized for 3 minutes. Mr. ALLEN. This am(mdment has to do with the threshold amount required I:or a candidate for tlae Presidential nomination of one of the major parties, The threshold amount, before participa.tion by the Federal Go-ernment is required, is set at $250,000. That could all be obtained in one city, one county, o:c one State. It would enc,_urage the pro.. liferation of minor canffidates for the Presidency, with more Federal subsidies, and would not limit the race to the real contenders. The purpose of the a:nendment is to say, in effect, that a per, on must have a national following before her is able to obtain Federal subsidie:;. It would re.quire not less than $2,500 matchable contributions---these ccntributions up to $250,000--not less than that wouhl have to be received from legal residents of 40 States, at least; in other words, $100,000 or $250 would have to be scattered out equally among the 40 State& assuring that we would have men of national caliber and reput_.tion participatlng in the Federal subsily a:ad it wouhl discourage entry of one-issue candidate& candidates of localized i)ressure groups, I am hopeful that th,_ chairman and the ranking minority l_ader would accept the amendment. It would strengthen the bill, if we already haw; public fi_ nancing, which I hope v,e will not haw;. Mr. CANNON. Mr. P:'esident, I yield myself 2 minutes, The PRESIDING OF_ICE]?t. The Sen.. ator from Nevada is r_cognized for 2 minutes, Mr, CANNON. There is a great deal of merit to wlq.at the dk,tinguished Sen_ ator from Alalqama has said, that we should not permit a si agle State can-. didate to be in a position to qualify under the bill, although I believe lqis provision of 40 states would be rather burdensome, which would require a potential can.., didate to campaign quite broadly throughout the country. That certainly might be burdensome because of tlqe fact that many of the _,tates are rather sparsely populated, I have discussed this with the rank-, ing minority member, and if the Senator were to change his amendment from a ,10-State reqmrement t) perhaps 15 or 20 States, we would be inclined to ac-,sept it, because it does s_em to be rather 'burdensome to have tae 4:0-State re.quirement. Mr. ALLEN. In ch,',nging it to 20 States, say, ff I should be :agreeable i;o April 11, 1974 that suggestion, would the distinghished clq.airman and the distinguished ranking minority member agree that the $2,500 should be raised to $5,000, which would stfil require $100,000 equally divided among the 20 States? Mr. COOK. That -would be okay. Mr. ,CANNON. That would be reason.able. If we could reduce it, to 20 States, with $5,000, we would accept the amend.r[x9nt. iM[r.ALLEN. Mr. President, Iaskunanimous consent that I may modify my amendment in that fashion in order that it can receive the backing of the chairman and the ranking minority leader. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. I)OraEN_CZ). IS there objection to the request of the Senator from Alabama? The Chair hears none, and it is so ordered.. Will the Senator please send his modification to the desk? Mr. COOK. Mr. President, will the Senator from Alabama yield me some ti:me? Mr. ALLEN. I yield 2 minutes to the Senator from Kentucky. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky is recognized for 3 minutes. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, unless there is a prerequisite under the rules, I wonder whether the President of the Senate could request that the modification be made by the clerkin the amendment now at the desk, changing it from $2,500 to $5,000 and from 40 States to 20 States. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I have made the change and send the modification to bhe desk. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is so modified_ The clerk has already made the changes. The text of the amendment, as modifled, reads as follows: On page 8. line 7, strike the period, insert; in lieu thereof a comzna and add the renew:Lng: "with nothaving less than in matchable contributions been$5,000 rex.'eived from legal residents of each of at least twenty States.". , Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I yield back the remainder of my time. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield back the remainder of my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time on this amendment has now been yielded back. The question is on agreeing to the amendment as modified of the Senator from Alabama (Mr. ALLEN) (No. 1058). The amendment as modified (No. 1058), was agreed to. A1M[ENDME_qT 1'40. 10TS Mr. BAKER. Mr. Presid!ent, is it in order to call up my amendment No. 1078 atthL,_ time? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is in order. Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 1078 and ask that it be stated. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated. The, legislative clerk read as follows: On page 25, strike out lines 15, 16, and 17 and insert in lieu thereo_ the following: (b) (1) Section 315(b) of such Act (47 _r.s.c. 315 (b)) is repealed. (2j Subsections (c), (d), (e), (f), and (g) of such section are redesignated as st_b- April 11, 1974 cONGRESSIONAL sections (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f), respectlvely, Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, this amendment is offered on behalf of myself and the Senator from Oregon (Mr. PACKWOOD) and the Senator from Colorado (Mr. Do_xcx). Mr, President, I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeasandnayswereordered, Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, this amendment would repeal the lowest unit cost provisions of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. It is entirely consistent with the pending legislation which repeals broadcast advertising spending limits in favor of overall expendithre limitations, Three years ago when the Senate-considered the question of lowering the cost of broadcast advertising, there was little expectation that we would later consider such comprehensive public financing of both Pre,dent[al and congressional campaigns. In fact, we probably would not have considered such an unprecedented approach to campaign financing had it not been for the events of the past 2 years. Nevertheless, as we debate this measure, it is important, to remember the circumstances surrounding the enactment of the lowest unit cost requirement 3 years ago. At that time, we were trying to trappie with the problem of limiting expend[tures on broadcast advertising while making the cost for that advertising reasonable from the vantage of the least known challenger. However, we were not considering that question in the context of providing Government subsidies for qp to 80 percent of the candidate's total campaign expenses.to reconsider Thus, it would now seem reasonable the question of whether the lowest unit cost provisions of the Communications Act are necessary. I firmly believe they are not. Under th_ pending legislation, there is no limit on the amount of money that can be spent on broadcast advertising, There is, of course, the overall expend[ture limitati on, but there is no specific limit within that ceiling which affects that aspect of a particular campaign, That is consistent with the committee's objective of allowing the candidate the maximum degree of flexibility with regaxd to how his or her campaign funds are spent. At the same time, however, we are encouraging the excessive use of broadcast advertising by not only subski[zing a substantial portion of the candidate's campaign, but also by requiring that radio and TV time be offered at as much as 50 'percent below the prevailing advertising rates. Moreover, we are perpetuating what I consider to be an essehtially unfair practice as it relates to both the individual broadcaster and 5he commercial advertiser. That .practice consists of affording political candidates a commercial discount which it takes other advertisers 13 weeks to earn. Obviously, candidate's for public office are different from other advertisers in a number of ways, including their purpose for advertising and their ability to pay. However, substantial public financing of campaigns would clearly diminish RECORD--SENATE the latter consideration and :make qualifled candidates more than able to afford the required amount of radio and TV advertising time. Thus, why require the stations to offer the time at a substantially reduced rate? We do not require it of newspapers, so why should we continue to require it of broa_icasters? Studies of 197'1campaigns for Federal office indicate that many radio and TV Stations chose to refuse to sell political advertising time to any eaudidato rather than be forced to sell time to all candidates at the lowest unit cost. They did so because they still had the right to refuse a particular type of advertising as long as they refused it across the board. That does not necessarily mean that they neglected their responsibility to cover campaigns for public ofrice, but rather that they would rather not accept any payment for political advertisements than to have to accept the lowest unit cost and the concomitant dislocation among their regular adverrisers, Granted there is ample precedent for the Federal Gow,_rrmlent regulating radio and TV broadcasters, but we do not tmpose similar limitations on the printed media for very good reasons; and I submit that -there is no longer any reason to impose the lowest unit cost requiremeat on the broadcast media, Title 47, section 312, subsection (a) (7) states that the Federal Communications Commission may revoke any station license or construction pernfib-. . . for willfu/ or repeated failure to allow reasonable access to or to permit purchase of reasonable amounts of time for the use of a broadcasting station by a legally qualified cane,[date for Federal elective office on behalf of his candid_my, What that means is that every station has a statutory obligation to give reasonable coverage, either through advertising, or by other mea:ns to each legally quallfled candidate for Federal office. However, ff we continue to require stations to charge the lowest unit cost, an increasing number will decide against permitring political advertising in favor of providing a reasonable amount of another form of coverage, thereby reducing the flexibility of the candidate to choose how to run his own campaign, This is not the intent of S. 3044, as I understand it, and I would urge that as long as candidates are fmancially able to afford broadcast advertising at the prevailing rates, that we no longer discriminate against stations by requiring them to charge the lowest unit cost. Now, Mr. President, the distinguished Senator from Oregon (Mr. PACKWOOD) has a statement he wishes to make at this time, and I now yield to him such time as he may _uire. Mr. PACKWOOD. Mr. President, in 1971 when this body considered the lowest unit rate provision of the Federal Election Campaign Act of :[971, I. was highly skeptical that enactment of this provision would indeed end in an equitable situation for all parties concerned-the candidate, the broadcaster, and the voter. If anything, inequities have been underscored in the intervening period. A S 5841 bad situation has developed which under-. cuts more than one-half of our candidates for Federal elective office, it has created a serious financial dilemma for broadcasters, and the resultant confusion has ill-served the voters of our Nation. I supported in 1971 an amendment which would have struck the lowest unit rate provision from the measure we werE; debating. The amendment failed, and today, 3 years later, my past skepti-. cism has been more than substantiated. I am cosponsoring the senior Senator from Tennessee's (Mr. BAKES) amend-. ment which would repeal this unfaJx provision. Three years ago, arguments heard irt this Chamber professed that everyone would benefit from enactment of the lowest unit rate biffing, l_{ore time, because advertising would be at its cheapest, would be available to the candidates. More candidate thne on radio and tele-. vision could only bode well for an informed vote in the primary or general election. And the broaqcasters, well, their revenues would increase because of the new surge in political advertising during the designated period. However well-intentioned this amend-. ment might haw. _been, it has not created a fair and equal access to the public for all candidates. Some broadcasters haw; taken the option of refusing broadcast time to political candidates altogether. I do not blame them, Mr. President, when they, in order to respect business; contracts of ma_kv years, refuse political advertising. But the consequences or om' inane rule axe regrettable and I do place blame on our decision of 3 yeaxs ago that forced some bro'axlcasters into this poaition. The serious ramification we must face is that we, as incumbents, along with our public recognition, place non[ncmnbents at a terrific disadvantage without the availability of radio and television. time to publicize their positions and beliefs. Time and time again, it has been. proven the nonJncumbent's greatest weapon is an effective media campaign. Thus, and perhaps we do not recognize it, selfishly we are the winners of the continuance of the lowest unit rate. But we are a small minority, for the challenger loses however right or wrong, the broadcaster loses, and in the end the public loses. I believe we can do better. I believe the lowest unit rate should be repealed. Although it may increase advertising coats per unit, it will open up access to the public by all the candidates on an even basis. If one purlxxse of this bill, S. 3044, is to prevent campaign abuse, then surely we have a gTeat opportunity, now, to eliminate an unfair advantage of 'mcumbency by insuring access to all broadcast media. I urge my colleagues;' support for this amendment, and ask unanimous consent that a letter I re_:eived from Mr. Alan H. Davidson, sales raanager for KNND Radio in Cottage Grove, Oreg., illustratlng many of these very concerns, be printed in the RECORD. There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: 517 S 5842 CONGRESSIONAL KNND R_0xo, Cottage Grove, Oreg., April 5, 1974. Senator BOBPACKWO0_, u.s. Senate, D.C. Wasl_ington,. DEAR SENATORPACI_WOOD:Today we recelved your press release concerning your call for repeal of the lowest unit r_te re quirements for political advertising on broadcast media. We as KNND wholeheartedly support this effort, not only from tho monetary viewpoint, but generally for the reasons you listed. As you are obviously aware, each election year radio and telex/lsion stations are deluged with candidates who are interested in buying breadcast time. Selling this time at our lowest published rate imposes an undue burden upon the station since we a:re regulated by the Federal Governmen_t. as to how much time wethat are allowed to sell. We beliew., a broadcast station should not be required to sell out its time at less than its worth, when this happens it also poses a hardship on the local advertiser who may want to advertise and pay the earned rate, but can not because of the lack of availabilities, This is the reason of course that many stationsare now limiting political availabilities or refusing political advertising, which in turn denies the candidate an opportunity to reach the people, I sincerely' hope that all of the broadcasters in the sta9e of Oregon will support your efforts in this dtrecblen, Respectfully, ALANH. DAWnSO_, Sales Manager, KNND ._adto. Mr. PACKWOOD. Mr. President, let me explain what our experience has been in Oregon. It has not been a problem to me personally, but it has been to a humber of other candidates seeking nomination for Federal office. Two Congressmen--one of them a Congresswoman, retired this year, and there are numerous candidates in each district seeking the l_publican nomination and the Democratic nomination. There are also humerous candidates seeking the Democratic nomination for the Senate. The problem they find is that they are having a very difficult time buying any ,time on television or radio. It is almost impossible to buy any prime time at all. It is perfectly understandable why they are not. We are asking radio and television stations to bear the burdensome cost of the campaign by selling time at the lowest unit rate, instead of selling it at the highest unit rate. XT_is means the rate they charge their most frequent advertisers, those who advertise 25 or 100 times a month, Bear in mfi_d that if they sell to one candidate, they have to offer to every other candidate in that race at the: same time spot that they are selling to all. That is fine for the incumbents. Nothing could be better for ns than if :neither we nor the challenger, who might; be unknown, could buy any television or radio time on prime time. It is very unfair, I believe that we made a mistake when we passed this lowest unit rate bill 3 years ago. I voted against it at the time. It has worked out as I feared that it would. It is not giving the candidates more access to the public but is denying the candidates any access to the public, Therefore, I believe that we would be wise to repeal the amendment so that 518 RECORD -- SENATE April 11, 19 74 aS1 ce:udidates 'will have equal access l_ the public through the broa_icast media, Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, will the iSenator from Oregon yi.qd, on my time? Mr. PACKVTOOD. I Field. Mr. CLARE'.. I shoul([ like to ask the Senator a question about his amendment, Is there anything to p rewmt TV and :radio stations from cha_'ging the highe:_t unit rate? It seems to' me, in the past, that was the practice. At least it was in whether it be for Representative, whether ii; be for dogcatcher, one penny more tZhan you charged the lowest rate." What is wrong about that? This is limited to a specific period of time. The argument is made 9hat the reason why these preferential rates are given is that some advertising concern has a regular program every week or every month. A candidate cannot have a program every week or every month. If you the campaign in which I was involved, I did not pay the aver:_ge rate but the very, very high rate. D. there anything to prevent that from happening in the Senator's amendment? Mr. PACKWOOD. There is nothing to _revent that ' from hs.ppening in the amendment. It would simply repeal the lowest unit rate. Mr. CLARK. In view of tlae fact tha_. in existing law there i,,. a limitation as to how much a candi(late must spend in the electronic media, would this amendment, if passed, I rove any real eib.fect in lowering that limitation? Ial other words, if the costs go u _, the Senator is not providing in his an_endment for an additional limitation, as I read the amendment? Mr. PACKWOOD. If you cannot puschase advertising at the lowest unit rate, or limit it to $50,000 in advertising, you cannot buy as much, so you have to pay more. To that; extent, i_ would lower il:.. Mr. CLARK. I thank the Senator very much. Mr. PASTC,RE. Mr. President, if the Senator will y:ield_ on mv time, in opposi.tion.---Mr. BAKER. Mr. PIesident, I asked :that the Senator from Rhode Island be _otified that this amendment was pend.lng. The manager of the bill, the Senator from Nevada (Mr. CAN:_N), is not now in the Chamber. I wonder whether it might not be in order to give the Senator from Rhode Islan_ the manager's time? Mr. COOK. I have _ minutes, and I yield 2 minutes to tl_e Senator from Rhode Island. Mr. PASTORE. Mr. [?resident, at the proper time, when the time has expired, I will move to table the amendment. I think the amendment comes up at a very unfortunate t:ime. This matter was disc _ssed thoroughly before the Ce.mmunica;ions Committee;, and we took a position ';hat is absolutely contrary to the spirit _nd letter of this amendment. Why do we give this rs te to candidates? No. 1, a license is gran _ed to perform a public service. All of us _now that in this day and age, the most expensive item a candidate has 'to meet is the charges for radio and television, so much so that these charges have skyrocketed to ,the point where you have to go out and hold hundred-dollar dinners just to get radio time, especially if you ran in a statewide election, Mr. President, all we are trying to do is to say to '_he licensee, "If you have given a preferential rate to anybody--to anybody--at stay time, _ ou cannot charge during a campaign period, whether it ]be for President, whether it be for Senator, run for the Senate, you run every 6 years. If you run for the House_ you run every 2 years. If you run for the Presidency: you run every 4 years. So how could you ever come under the terms and the standards of this preferential rate? That is precisely what the story is. A suggestion was made not too long ago b:yAdlai Stevenson, Sr., and I think it has tremendous merit today, that within a certain period of time before the election; namely, about 8 weeks before the election_the national networks give free time to the prominent candidates running for the Presidency; and that is about the best public service they could afford to the people of this country. Unfortunately, the networks came in and opposed it. They said, "Don't make it mandatory. Just relieve us from section 315 a:nd we'll give the proper time to the candidates." I took their word for that, and they lived up to it. I submitted a resolution, and as a result, in 1960, we had the Kennedy-Nixon debates. That is how that all came about. What this is intended to do is to take away from the candidates the same privilege of the lowest rate---instituted by whom? By the licensee, himself. He does not have to give anybody a preferentiaI rate; but once he does, he cannot take it away from the candidate. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired. Mr.. PASTORE. Can I take time out of myown time? . The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen_Ltor can do so by unanimous consent. Mr_ PASTORE. I ask unanimous consent. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senator have such time as he may need out of his hour. Mr. PASTORE. Out of my hour, because I am hitting high gear. [Laughter.] The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr., STEVENS. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr, PASTORE. I yield. Mr, STEVENS. I worked with the Senator from Rhode Island on this matter, lie will recall. It is the lowest unit charge for the same class and for the amount of time, /or the same period. With those protections, the same class and the amount of time for the same period, we are not getting any benefit from any other rate. My little station survived under one of theheaviest onslaughts they ever had from candidates, in the last election. This is a fair provision as it stands, and if we took it off, the rates for te]e_rlsion and radio time would go sky high. April 11, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--SENATE I am grateful to the Senator from Rhode Island for having accepted the limitation, but I cannot understand the comments of the Senator from Oregon in view of the limitations of section 315 (b) with regard to the same class of time, the same time frame--that is, whether or not it is prime time--and for the same period of time, which is for the 45 days preceding the election, Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I reserve the right to object. There has not yet been a ruling on the unanimous-consent request of the Senator from Rhode Island. If we are going to extend the time for debate into the Senator's hour under rule XXII, it seems only fair that in the same unanimous request we extend the time on the other side. I now ask unanimous consent that I be given the same time out of my hour that he has out of his hour. Mr. PASTORE. That is all right. I will take only 2 minutes, Mr. BAKER. So long as we have equal time. Mr. PASTORE. I make this point very strongly The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair' has ruled that the unanimousconsent request of the Senator from Tennessee and the Senator from Rhode Island is granted. It is granted for 2 minutes. The Senator from Rhode Island. Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, a parliamentary inquiry, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will state it. Mr. BAKER. Do I correctly understand that I have similar treatment on this side? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct. Mr. BAKER. I thank the Chair. Mr. PASTORE. The point I am maklng, and I hope I can make it as emphatically as possible, is that this is not the time, this is not the place, this is not the bill in which to repeal something _that has been thoroughly investigated, thoroughly studied, and passed almost unanimously by committee of Congress. I hope that at this junctive we will not disturb something that is as fundamental as the principle that is involved in the discussion we are having today. When the time has expired, I am going to move to table the amendment, Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I have the distinction of serving as the senior Republican on the Subcommittee on Cornmunications, on which the distinguished Senator from Rhode Island is the chairman. He and I jost a good bit and this and ! am trying to repeal it. I think it is wrong, because by this section, we politicians have legislated to ourselves a subsidy out of the hides of everybody else who advertises on radio and television. We say that, because Procter & Gamble or General Motors, or whoever it is, earns a unit rate that is lower than a one-time or a five-time rate, we have to get the same unit rate. We do not do that to newspapers. We do not do it to magazines. We do it, because we have the authority to regulate radio and television stations and we have the right to lift their licenses. We pass a law that says, "Give us the lowest cost you give to everybody else at the'same time on the networks, with the same quality of service, because we regulate you and we have the life-and-death power to give you a license or take it away." That is not fair play, in my book. If we are going to do it for radio and television stations, we ought to do it for newspapers, magazines, billboards, the people who manufacture bumper stickers and fingernail files with campaign slogans on them, and for whatever other paraphernalia we use. We say, "Give us the low rate you charge your regular customers despite the fact that we order one-hundredth the amount; of time that they order." It seems to me that we single out the industry that we regulate and make them give us a rate we have not earned, when they would normally charge according to the quality and frequency of service acquired, I reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. PACKWOOD. Mr. President, let me elaborate further on the situation, Take the city of Portland, Oreg., with a number of television stations. Six Democratic candidates, as I recall, vied for the nomination for Congress. Each of them is entitled, if they can get the time, to buy time on television at the lowest rate, at the same price paid by the Chevrolet dealer who advertises night after night. There are many other advertisements during prime time that are not at the lowest unit rate. If a broadcaster sells an ad to one candidate at 6:30, he must make time available during prime time for every other candidate at the lowest unit rate. We are asking them to bump off other ads from which they can collect more money in order to put us on. The upshot, at least in Oregon, is that many of them are saying, "To heck with it; we are not going to take any political ads; nobody is going to get on television." That is fine for incumbents, but in- a few are familiar other issues with each from other's time to arguments, time. We cumbents rage and astart newsout advantage. with a name There issues is no point my trying those with inhim, becauseto belabor he has heard them before. He heard my opposition to this provision when it was considered by the subcommittee, when it was considered by the full committee, and when it was considered by the Senate, Now, are justifiably going "We are they not going to bump off any to of say, our advertisers who pay a higher rate in order to put on candidates for Federal office." That has been the effect of the amendment. If that is what the Senator from Rhode Island wants to protect in- and he hasat heard my opposition to provision every opportunity I have to express it for the last 3 years. I was opposed to it at the time we took it up, I am still opposed to it, cumbents, that is what OFFICER he is getting.(Mr. The PRESIDING BROCK). All time of the proponents has expired. The opponents have 2 minutes remaining, this had first and advan- S5843 Mr. COOK. Mr. President, I yield 1 minute to my colleague from Kentucky. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky is recognized. Mr. HUDDLESTON. Mr. President, I have a brief comment from the perspective of one who has operated under tiffs law as a broadcaster and one who has operated under this law as a candidate. The bill as written is essential and we can talk about the problems it presents for broadcasters and certainly they would like the full rate. We can mention all of the other media that are not covered, but they do not utilize a public facility mad they do not operate in the public interest as broadcasting stations. This is little enough to require o_ an industry that gets to enjoy free the airways of this country. One big danger we have when we talk about election reform and the limitation on candidates and the money they spend and who can support them is that we deny the citizens of this country the opportunity to hear the candidates and to know their views. This is one way we can help facilitate that opportunity so that candidates can get on the air and lei, citizens know what they stand for. Mr. COOK. Mr. President, I take .the last minute to congratulate my colleague from Kentucky and to say if, in effect, stations are saying, "We are not going to take any of them, because we cannot get the higher rate in that time frame," if they want to help incumbents and as a matter of fact they are saying they want to help incumbents and are bumping everyone off of television, we better take a close look at it in committee, because the fact is that the law now provides that we pay them for the time we are using at the lowest cost at that time and not on the overall lowest cost of the station. As bad as politic al speeches may be some nights, they cannot be any worse than some of the things we have to watch on television during the course of the week in prime time. Mr. President, I shall support the Senator from Rhode Island in his moticm to table the amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired on the amendment. Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, I move to lay on the table the amendment of the Senator from Tennessee. Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I ask for yeas and nays. The PRESIDING OFFICERi Is there a sufficient second? There is a sufficient second. The yeas and nays are ordered. ORDE_ _-BUSIN_ _F'-----------E Mr. MANSFII the Senator yi_ Mr. CANNON _- SS LD. Mr. President, d to me briefly? I yield. ------------- will ADJOURNMEN' ' OF THE TWO HOUSES OF [;ONGRESS FOR THE EASTER HO ffDAY Mx-. MANSFI_ LD. ]VIr. President, I ask the Chair to la., be[ore the Senate the message from tr House of Representa- 519 S 5844 CONGRESSIONAL tires on 475. The BROCK). ThE; Concurrent lays ate House which will The follows: I_esolveg by (the Senate House it stand Monday, April noon on the notified to section 2 of legislative Resolution OFFICER before thc (Mr. Sen- Resolutior. L 475, clerk read as CoN. RES. 475 House o/ _ep_'esenl_atives That when the on Thursday, April 11, 1974, until 12 o'clock noon on 2, 1974, or until :12 ()'clock day after its Members are in accordance with resolution, whichever event f_st occurs, SEC. 2. The sentatlves shallS House to reasem the public ever the ms the minority Jointly, file of the House the unanimous ceed to the The '_he objection? There being , objection, the Senate proceeded to cc xsider the concurrent resolution, Mr. Mr. President, I send to the desk amendment and ask that it be stated, The OFFICER. The amendment will _ _ stated. The legislative read as follows: Strike out line 2 insert in lieu thereof the following: Lthe two Houses adjourn on Thursday, April 11, 1974, they stand" On line 4, strike t "its Members" and insert in lieu ther( the following: "their respective Members' Strike out 2 and insert l:a lieu thereof the "SEC. 2. The [ of the House of Representatives and pro tempore of the Senate shall the Members of the House and _ to reassemble whenever, in their the public interest shall warrant or whenever the maJority leader of the and the majority leader of the acting Jointly, or the minority leader of _he Senate and the minority leader of House, acting jointly, file a written with the Secretary of the Senate and the of the House that the Congress for the consideration of legislation." Amend title by ling after the word "House," "and Senate. The tioriis The PRESIDING on agreeing amendment The Res. 475), a,; follows: ,FFICER. The questhe amendment. (II. Con. was agreed to, as H. CON. 475 I_esolvec_ by the _ of l_epresentatives ' (the Senate concurring[ That when the two Housesstand adjourn an 11, noon 1974, they adjourned 12April o'clock on the second day their respective Members are notified t reassemble in accordance wit:h section : of' this resolution, whichever event first SEC. 2. The Speaker House of Ftepresentatlves and the pro tempore of the Senate shall notify Members of the House and Senate, tempe( y, to reassemble 520 w:henever, in their o_ inions, the public inter_ _st shall warrant ii;, _ · when,;ver the majority leader of the Senate md th,; majorif, y leader ot the House, acting Jointly or t:he minority leader of tl_e Senate md th_ minority leader of the House, actinl Jointly, fil,_ a written request with the Sec etary cf theSenate and the Clerk of the 19[ou: _ that the Congress re:_ssemb!e for the _n.' derati )n oi legislation, Amend the titl._ so _s to lead ,Concurrent resolution provLdin for a conditional aclJourn:ment of the Iouse _nd Senate from April 11 until April 22 1974.' Mr. MANSFI_. Mr. President, tile &{ekson ,lavits Johnsto]x Kennedy Magnuson Mansfield Mathias McClellan IV.[cGoverr_ l_cIntyr,_ I_iondale i_[ontoya Moss Muskie Nelson _ Nunn Pastore Pearson Pell Percy Proxmire Ribicoff Schweiker Scott, Hugh Sparkman Stafford Stennis Stevens Stevenson Symington Talmadge Thurmond Tunney Weicker Williams Allen Baker Brock NAYS--19 Eagletolx Fannin Griffin McClure Packwood l_th resolution will sta at tt_e desk until ii, iS certain we will fin sh tl Js bill. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without Buckley curtis Dole Dominic_ Gurney Helms Hansen Hruska ol)jection, the Membersof ]_epre,of the whenever in his opinion shall warrant it or whenleader of the House and of the House, acting request with the Clerk the House reassemble for of legislation. Mr. Presi_ient, I ask that the Senate proof con1. OFFICER. Is there April 11, 19 74 REODRD -- SF.NA'I] _. it is so'o_ _--- ed. --_ FEDEP_AL ELECTION ACT AMENDMENTS ANSWERED Taft CAMPAIGN OF 1974 The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill (S. :1044) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for public financing of prima_-y and general election campaigns for Federal elective office and to amend certain other provisions _f law relating to the financing and conduct of such campaigns. SEVERAL SENATORS. Vote [ Vote! The PRESIDING OFFI2ER The ques- Tower Young "PRESENT"--i NOT VOTING---13 Be:anett Holllngs Metzenbaum Church Inouye Randolph Fong Long Scott, Fulbright McGee William L. Goldwater Metcalf So thc motion to lay on the table Mr. :BAKER'S amendmen, t (No. 1078) was agreed t0. __ :MESSAGE Ftt_ _,_ [ THE HOUSE-t!INROLLED A message from _ILL SIGNED he House of Repre-. tion is on agreeing to th,_ motion to lay on the table the amendmcnt of the Senator from Tennessee. The yeas and nays haw been ordered, mad the clerk will call the roil The legislative clerk c_ lled the roll. _entatives by Mr. ]_ lng clerks, announc Inad affixed his sign bfil (H.R. 12109) t( of Columbia Self-G m'mnental ReorganJ Mr. I vote Mr. that the prevision relati_ ,, to the referendum. on the issue of the advisory neighbor]hood councils. The enrolled bil was subsequently TAFT. Mr. Preside at, on this vote ":present." ]ROBERT C. BYRD. I renounce the Senator · fronl Idaho (Mr. CHURCh0, the Senator :_rom Arkansas (M.r. FULBRIGHT), the Senator from Hawait (Mr. INOUYE), the Senator from Louisiana (MI'. LONG), the Senator from signed Dy the rry, one of its read_d that; the Speaker ,ture to the enrolled amend the District _vernment and Govation Act to clarify Pres_ _t pro FEDERAL ELECTION ACT AMENDMENTS tempore. CAMPAIGN OF 1974 _ryoming (Mr. MCGEE), the Senator from Ohio (Mr METZENB&LqVI), the Senator from West Virginia (:_r. RANDOLPH), tile Senator from Montana (Mr. METCALF), and the Senator from South Carolina (I_..r. HOLLINGS), _re necessarily absent, T:he Senate continued with the con-. s:[deration of the bill (S. 3044) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of :1971 to provide for public financing of primary and general election campaigns for Federal elective office, and to amend I further announce thw;,if present and voting, the Senator from West Virginia (1Vfr. i_ANDOLPH) would wte ':yea." Mr. GRIFFE_. I announce that the Senator from Utah (Mr. BENNETT) the certain other provisions of law relating to the .financing and conduct of such campaigns. AMENDMENTNO. 1186 Mr. ,[AVITS. Mr. President, I call up Senator from Hawaii (l_[r. FONt), and tile Senator from Arizo:xa (Mr. GonnV_'ATER) are necessarily absent;. my am,_ndment No. 1186 and ask that ii; be read. 'The PRESIDING OFFICER. The I als() armour.ce that tk e Senator Virginia (Mr. _VxLLIA_ L. SCOTT) sent on official business. The Senator from O1.io (Mi'. w3ted "present." :amendment will be stated. The legislative clerk read as follows: On page 35, line 15, after the word "elee.t:[on" insert the following: "on the tenth day of I3ecember in the year of an election,". from iS abTAFT) The result was announced--yeas nays 19, as follows: [l_ro. 144 Le_.] Abourezk Aiken Bartlet,_ Bayh BeaI1 Bsllmon Bentsen Bible Biden Brooke I_urdick YEAS---67 Byrd, Ea_tland :PIarryF.,Jr Er¥in Byrd, Robert C. Gravel Cannon Hart Case Hartke Chiles Haskell Clark Hatfield Cook IIabhaway Cotton Huddleslx)n Cranston Hughes Doraenici Hllmphrey 67, :Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, the only purpose of the amendment; is to provide E_at in any election, instead of filing the :final contributions to a campaign which come in after the 28th of the following' January, or have been paid in the follow-. i]2g January, that the filing be on the 10th Of December immediately follow-. ing the election. The action reason is that any disciplinary to be taken by anybody with re-. s[pect to contributions ;seasorl_tbly before the ought to be Representative taken or April 11, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL Senator is sworn' in. Thereafter, it is a very hard row to hoe. That is the reason for the amendment. I understand that the manager of the bill may be interested in accepting it. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield myself 30 seconds, The Senator from New York has correctly described the amendment. It does create some added burdens, but it does, I think, provide a better, more timely disclosure date after a general election, when it is too late to do anything about the election. The amendment provides a more timely reporting provision than we have in the bill. I am willing to accept the amendment, Mr. JAVITS. I thank the Senator from Nevada. Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I com, mend the Senator from New York. I think he has submitted a worthwhile, important amendment. I am delighted that ti, manager of thebillhas accepted it. Senators may remember that I offered an amend,_ent which required reporting before an election, but that amendment was defeated. I think this is a material improvement over the provision that requires reporting in January. I wish to congratulate the Senator from New York. Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, may the record chow that the idea of the amendment is that of Charles Warren, my legislative aide. He is typical of the brilliant young men who work in all our offices. I am delighted to make this statement. Mr. BAKER. Mr. Presidert, for the record, my amendment met with the very violent objection of mystaff, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment Of the Seriator from New York. The amendment was agreed to. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I yield myself 2 minutes on the bill. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the r011. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. BAYH. Mr. President, I ask unaniincus callconsent that the order for the quorum be rescinded, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered, RECORD -- SENATE he agrees that tile amendment is acceptable, On reflection, after having stopped the clerk from a further reading of it, I think, with advance warning to the Senate, that if I read it and then sit down, there would be adequate explanation. So I shallread it. At the appropriate place insert the followlng new section: SEC. . Whoever, being a candidate for Federal office, as defined herein, or an employee fraudulently or agent of misrepresents such a candidate-himself or an(a)committee or organization under his control as speaking or writing or otherwise acting for or on behalf of ally other candidate or political party or employee or agent thereof on a matter which is damaging to such other candidate or political party or employee or agent thereof; or (b) wilIfully and knowingly participates in or conspires.to participate in any plan, scheme, or design to violate paragraph (a) hereof, shall, for each such offense, be fined not more than $50,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both. Mr. BAYH. The purpose of the amendment, Mr. President, is to direct the Senate's attention in the context of the pending bill, v'hich is to be our principal legislative response to the past 18 months of Watergate revelations, to a particular and specific problem which would appear to require a statutory remedy, This is the problem of "dirty tricks." My amendment is intended to :make the ex- documents bearing the letterhead of Senator MUSKIE'S campaign which falsely accused Senators HUMPHREY and JACKSON of the most bizarre type of personal conduct. It is this type of activity with which my amendment is designed to deal. Under current law, as found in section 612 of title misdemeanor 18, United States Code, is a offense for anyone who is A_ND_ENT NO. XXXS Mr. BAYH. Mr. President, I send to the desk a printed amendment, No. 1113. It has been slightly modified, The PRESIDING OFFICER. guilty for his activities in the primary to which I have referred, Florida objection to the modification? The Chair hears none, and the amendment is so modified. The amendment will be stated, The legislative clerk proceeded to read the amendment, My amendment would modify section 612 in two respects. First, it would remove the jurisdictional restrictions of the old statute which limited its application to use of the U.S. mails or trans- Mr. BAYH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the further reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. WithOut objection, it is so ordered, Mr. BAYH. Mr. President, I yield myself 3 minutes, portation in interstate commerce. of our older statutes have such tions v_hich were thought at the be constitutionally required, but are clearly not necessary today as to candidates for office on the level, This is an amendment that discussed with the distinguished manager of the bill, I understand Second, my amendment would make such campaign offenses felonies rather than misdemeanors in those few cases I have floor that where not only does the candidate or his agent know that statements about another candidate are false but that they are, in fact, damaging to him. In short, Mr. President, I believe that the amendment will effectively deal with the specific campaign abuses which have been brought to our attention because of the 1972 campaign, without posing the difficult problems that a broader criminal libel statute presents in terms of first amendment guarantees. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I have discussed the amendment with the distinguished Senator from Indiana, the sponsor, and also with the minority rep.resentative. We are willing to accept the amendment. I yield back the remainder of my time. Mr. BAYH. I yield back the remainder of my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has been yielded back. The question is on agreeing to the amendment of the Senator from Indiana. The amendment was agreed to. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I send to the desk an amendment and ask for its immediate consideration. I ask unani.mous consent to dispense with the read-ing of the amendment. It is the usual technical, perfecting amendment to cor.rect minor defects in conformity with inthe various usual provisions, practice. I ask for the approval of the amendment. Th_ PRESIDING OFFICER. The isting law somewhat more precise in this area and to increase the penalties for its amendment will be stated. violation. The legislative clerk read as follows: It has come to the Senate's attention on page 2, beginning with "TABLE OF through the hearings conducted by the CONTENTS", strike 502 out through the item relating to section on page 3. distinguished Senator from North CaroOn page 3, line 11, immediately before lina (Mi'. ERVIN) and his select commit .... political committee' ", insert the follow.. tee that during the 1972 campaign there lng: "'national committee',". occurred at least two incidents in which on page 6, line 16. strike out "campaign." an employee or agent of the Committee On page 6, line 27, :strike ont "campaign TO Re-Elect the President distributed expenses" and insert in lieu thereof "ex.. a candidate or agent thereof to distribute, through the mails or in interstate commerce, materials which fail to identify the candidate involved or a committee acting on his behalf. This is the statute to which Donald Segretti pleaded Is there S 5845 Many limitatime to which applied Federal penditures". On page 7, between lines 17 and 18, insert the following: "(c) he is seeking nomination by a po.. litical party for election to the office of Presi-. dent and he and his authorized committees have received contributions for his campaign throughout the United States in a total of more than $250,000. On page 8, beginning with line 3, strike out through line 7. on page 8, line 71, strike out "to". On page 10, line 2, strike out "accepts" and insert in lieu thereof "and his authorized committees receive". On page 16, line 1, immediately after "state", insert "under subsection (a) (2) (A) of this section". On page 16, line 17, _trike out the comma and "or" and insert in lieu thereof a semicolon. On page 26, line 20, strike out the period and insert in lieu thereof a semicolon and "or". On page 16, between lines 20 and 21, insert the following: "(C) a national or State committee of a political party in connection with a primary or general election campaign of that candidate, if such expenditure is in excess of the limitations of section 614(b) of tltle 18, United States Code. On page 18, line 10, strike out "(h)" and insert in lieu thereof ? (i) ". On page 29, line 13, .'_trike out "(3)" and insert in lleu thereof "(2),,. on page 31, line 3, strike out "(7)" and insert in lieu thereof "(8)". 521 S 5846 CONGRESSIONAL On page 31, line 4, strike out "(8)" and insert in lieu thereof "(9) % On page 36, line 12, strike out "Presiden%ial" and insert in lieu thereof "presidential". On page 37, line 5, immediately after "inserting", insert "immediately". On page 37, line 5, immediately after "semicolon", insert "a comma and". On page 37, line 5, strike out the comma. On page 39, line 17, strike out "Any" and insert in lieu thereof "Each". On page 39, line 21, strike out "Any" and insert in lieu thereof "A". On page 40, strike out beginning with line S through line 10and insert in lieu thereof the following: "(d) No person who sells space in a newspaper or magazine to a candidate, or to the agent of a candidate, for use in connection with thai candidate's campaign, may change any amount, for such space which exceeds the amount charged for comparable use of such space for other purposes. on page 41, line 11, strike out "published regulation" and insert in lieu thereof "a rule", On page 41, line 12, immediately before the comma,, insert "which is published in the Federal Register not less than 30 days before its effective date", On page 41, line 16, strike out "will not have any adverse affect on" and insert in lieu thereof "is inconsistent with", on page 41, line 17, strike out "title" and insert in lieu thereof "Act". On page 45, line 25, strike out "regulations" and insert in lieu thereof "rule.';". On page 46, line 2, strike out "regulations" and insert in lieu thereof "rules". On page 47, line 9, immediately before "testimony", strike out "or". On page 47, line 19, immediately before "reasonable", insert "a" and, inlmediately after "period", insert "of time". On page 53, line 1, strike out ":held and". On page 53, line 4, strike out "regulation" and insert in. lieu thereof "rule". On page 53, line 15, immediately before "all", insert a comma and "consolidate, and furnish", On page 53, line 16, strike out the comma "and consolidate and furnish the reports". on page 54, line 1, strike out "so". On page 55, line 4, strike out "such". On page 55, line 9, strike out "single". On page 56, line 25, immediately after "inserting", insert "in lieu thereof", On page 57, line 6, immediately after "inserting", insert "in lieu thereof", On page 57', line 10, immediately after "insetting", insert "in lieu thereof", On page 57, line 16, immediately after "inserting", insert "in lieu thereof", On page 57, line 24, immediately after "inserting", insert "in lieu thereof", On page 58, line 3, immediately after "inserting'', insert "in lieu thereof". On page 58, line 8, immediately' after "inserting", insert "in lieu thereof". On page 58, line 11, immediately after "inserting", insert "in lieu thereof". On page 58, line 16, immediately after "inserting", insert "in lieu thereof", On page 58, line 18, immediately afl_r "inserting", insert "in lieu thereof", On page 58, line 20, immediately after "inserting", insert "in lieu thereof". On page 58, line 23, immediately after "inserting", insert "in lieu thereof". on page 59, line 2, immediately after "inserting", insert "in lieu thereof". On page 59, line 3, strike out the comma, On page 59, line 4, immediately after "inserting", insert "in lieu thereof", On page 59, line 9, immediately after "inserting" insert "in lieu thereof". On page 59, line 25. strike out the comma. On page 60, line 18, strike out "Any" and insert in lieu thereof "An". 522 April 11, 19 74 REC, DR]) -- SENATE On page 60, line 22, strike out "any" and insert "an". On page 60, line 22, strik_ out "Any" and in_ert "A". On page 62, lixte 21, strik_ out; "any" and insert "a". On page 63, lirLe 14, strik_ out "campaign expenses" and insert in iien thereof "expenditnres". On page 64, line 2, strike out "r_egulations '' and insert in liert thereof "lules". On page 64, line 3, strike out "regulations" and insert in lieu thereof "roles". On page 64, line 8, strike out the comma, On page 64, line 20, strike out "$10,000," and insert in lieu thereof ' $100,000,". On page 65, line 2, strike out "regulations" and insert in lieu thereof "r_ les". On page 65, line i3, strik; out "out 'and" and insert in lieu thereof "out ', and". On page 66, lines 1 and 2, strike out "ceatral", On page 66, line 19, strLkE out "and". On page 66, line 25, after the second semicolon, insert "and.". On page 67, line 3, strike (ut the semicolon and insert in lieu thereof a period. On page 68, line 9, immediately after "out", strikeout "the". On page 71. line 6, strike out "shall not constitute" and insert in lieu thereof "is not". On page 71, line 12, strit:e out "shall not constitute" and insert in leu thereof "are not". On page 74, line 5, strike out "Presidential' and insert in lieu thereof "presi_ dential", On page 74, line 22, stri_e ou'_ "National" and insert in lieu thereof "_ational". On page 75, line 2, strik_ out "of title 18,. United States Code,". On page 76, line 17, strik,. _ out "a" and in-. sert in lieu thereof "the". On page 77, lines 3 and _., strike out "this section" and ixr_ert in lies thereof "para... graph (1)". On page 79, line 6, strike ,)ut "of a political party". On page 81, ]ir.e 10, strik_ out "In the case o:C any" and in_rt in lieu thereof "A". On page 82, line 3, immec[lately after "fined" insert "not more then", On page 82, line 7, strike aut "regulations'" and imsert in lieu thereof "r'_les'. On page 82, line 10, str!ke out "shall be o3nsidcred to have been" _nd insert in lieu thereof "is considered to be'. On page 82, line 13, st]ike out "served" and insert in lieu thereof "s_rves". On page 82, line 19, strike out the comma and "as amendeS", On page 82, lines 22 and 23, strike out thc comma and "as amended". On page 83, li:ae 21, stri_e out "case" and insert in lieu thereof "adjulication". On page 76 between lines q and 3, insert {;he follc,wing: "(A) in the case of a candidate for the ofi%e of President or Vice President, $2,000; and "(B) in the case of any other candidate, $1,500.". Mr. President, I yield my3 minutes. '_hroughout the debate on the bill, ihas been the effort of the Senator from _Mr. ALLEN. self it Alabama the not only to bill having kill all portions to do with the of public subsidy of candidates for Federal eleebut also to reduce, the overall anlount that candidates for Federal offlees may spend in elections--that is, candidates for the House and for the Senate in primaries and in general elections, and candidates for the Presidency _ion, primaries before the conventions and il_lthe s:eneral election. Already there have been turned back 'by the Senate amendments that would cut the amounts individual contributions to $250 in Presidential races and $100 in House and Senate races; and another amendment that would have limited ill contributions races and ate races. turned tor from those to $2,000 irt Presidential to $1,000 in House and Sen.Those amendments have been back. That has caused the Sena.Alabama who advocate elections want to feel that Federal the best many of in subsidies of two words. want, in the primary elections ev.erything that they can get from provid.ing contributions at the $3,000 level, They wilich is a very high level in the view of the Senator from Alabama, and at the same time having Federal matching. SO I would hope that the Senate would ge, along with a reduction in the amount of the overall contributions in Presidential races to $2,000 and for the House arid Senate to $1,500. I call attention to the fact that the Senate has voted--voted twice, as a matter of fact--to cut the amount of overall expenses of candidates by 20 percent, by cutting the aH1OUIIt that could be spent in general elections from /'rom 10 cents lions. There 15 cents to 12 cents, and to 8 cents in primary elecshould be no reason why we couJd not reduce the amount of individual contributions. SO I am hopeful that the Senate in it,'; desire to have campaign reform, and The PRESIDING OFt _CEP_. Without objection, the amendmelLt is agreed to. AMEY[DMENT NO _eo Mr. ALLEN. ].Vir. Pres.dent, I call up notshibbolethSimply toUSecoverCampaignraidingref°rmthe Federalas a Treasury and turn the bill over to the taxpayers, will be in favor of cutting the amoun, t of individual contributions as ]371y amendment; No. 1180 and ask be stated. The PI%ESIDING OFFICER. amendment will be read. suggested in the amendment to $2,000 in Presidential races in prirrlary and gencral elections, and to $1,500 for House and Senate races in primary and general elections. that ii; The The legislative clerk read as follows: On page 75, line 23, stzike out "exceeds $3,000." and insert 1fL lieu thereof "exceeds--.". On page 75, between line,' 23 and 24, insert tlhe following: "(1) in the case of acand date for the office of President or Vice President, $:L000; and "(2) in the case of any other candidate, $1,500.". On page 76, line 2, strike ()ut "exceeds $3,000." and insert tit lieu thereol "exceeds--". Mr. President, Oi my Mr. myself I reserve _ime. CANNON. Mr. the remainder President, I yield 2 minutes. T wish only to say that the distin- Senator from Alabama really like to have it both ways. He opposes _he provision on public financing guished would because financing. tO cut does not want to see public On the other hand, he wants private financing down to the he April 11, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL point where it would drive the individual to public financing, I suggest, Mr. President, that we have been up the hill and do wn the hill on this. We have considered limitations in almost every conceivable amount except this particular one, and I would hope that the Senator would be willing to abide by the votes we have already had on this matter, and let us dispose of the amendment by voice vote. Mr. President, I am prepared to yield back the remainder of my time. Mr. ALLEN. I yield back the remainder of my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. BSOCK). All remaining time having been yielded back, the question is on agreeing to the amendment of the Senator from Alabama (Mr. ALLEN). In the opinion of the Chair, the nays have it. The amendment is rejected, Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, if I may have the attention of the Senate, I believe the senior Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. KENNEDY) has one or maybe two amendments. As far as I know, those will be the final amendments. So I ask at this time if the distinguished Senator would consider a reduction of the half-hour limitation. Mr. KENNEDY. Five minutes will be sufficient, Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President,.I ask unanimous consent that there be a time limitation of 10 minutes on each of the two amendments, the time to be equally divided between the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. KENNEDY) and the managed of the bill The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered, Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, will the distinguished Senator from Massachusetts 'indicate whether he plans to have rolleall votes? Mr. KENNEDY. I do not. Mr. BAKER. Good. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on passage. The yeas and nays were ordered, AM]glgDMEI_T NO. 1092 Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 1092, in behalf of myself and the Senator from Pennsylvanil (Mr. HUGH SCOTT), and ask for its immediate consideration. The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The amendment will be stated. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to read the amendment. Mr. KENNEDY'. I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be chspensedwith. The PRESIDING OFFICER. objection, it is so ordered, Mr. KENNEDY'S amendment is as follows: On page 58, line 16, strike out Without (No. 1092) "and". On page 68, between lines 16 and 17, insert the following: "(J) 'State committee' means the organization which, by virtue of the bylaws of a political party, is responsible for the day-today operation of that political party at the State level, as determined by the Federal Election Commission; and". On page 68, line 17, strike out "(J)" _' in.serf in lieu therecxf "(k) ". RECORD -- SENATE Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I have had an opportunity to talk with the floor manager of the bill, and also the minority manager of the bill, and I believe that the amendment may be acceptable to them. The purpose of the amendment is to add a definition of "State committee" parallel to the definition of "national committee" already contained in the bill. The amendment is useful because it identifies the State committe(_ that will be entitled to take advantage of the specia1 "2 cents a voter" spending authority in the bill. Under this authority, a State committee of a political party is entitled to receive private contributions and make expenditures in a general election, above and beyond the expenditure ceiling of the party's candidate himself. In this way, S. 3044 provides a substantial additional role for the political parties at both the State and National level, Mr. President, the amendment is a minor addition to the bill, and I hope that it may b_accepted, Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield myself 30 seconds, I have discussed this proposal with the Senator and with the ranking minority Member. The definition is acceptable. It parallels the definition of a State cornmittee with that of the national cornmittee. I am prepared to yield back the remainder of my time. Mr. KENNEDY. I yield back the remainder of my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. BROCK). All remaining time having been yielded back, the question is on agreelng to the amendment (No. 1092) of the Senator from Massachusett,,; (Mr. KENNEDY). The amendment was agreed to. A_aEtqD_ENT NO. ZO'.)3 Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 1093 and ask for its immediate'consideration, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated, The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to read the amendment, Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered, Mr. KENNEDY'S amendment (No. 1093) is as follows: On page I0, strike out line 24: and insert in lieu thereof the following: "election campaign in an amount equal to the greater of-"IA) an amount which bears the same ratio". on page 11, line 6, strike out "election." and insert in lieu thereof "election; or". on page 11, between lines 6 and 7, insert the following: "(B) an amount which bears the same ratio to theof amount payments which candidate a major of party for the to same officea is entitled under this subsection as the total number of popular votes received by that eligible candidate as a candidate for that office (other than votes he received as the candidate of a major party for th_t office) in the preceding general election bears to the average number of popular votes received by the candidates of major parties for that ofrice in the preceding general election.". S 5847 Mr. KF_NEDY. This amendment is introduced in behalf of myself and the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. HUGH SCOTT). I have had a chance, again, to discuss it with the floor manager of the bill and also the minority manager, and I understand that it is acceptable to them. The purpose of the ammendment is to allow a minor party candidate to qualify for public funds on the basis of the t_tal number of votes he received in the proceeding election, whether as the candidate of a single minor party or as the candidate of more than one minor party. Under the present bfil, a minor party candidate's proportion of public funds is based only on the showing in the precedlng election of the minor party that nominated him. In certain cases, this provision might work unfairly to the disadvantage of a minor party candidate who was on the ballot in the previous election under more than one party label. For example, in the 1968 Presidential eleetion, George Wallace ran under nine separate minor party labels. Although he won a total of 13.5 percent of the votes cast in the election, thc most he won under a single party label[ was 5.08 percent, as the candidate of the American Party. Under the !0ending bill, if its provisions had been in effect for the 1972 election, Governor Wallace would have qualified for proportional public funds based on his 1968 track record as a minor party can-didate based on his 5.08 percent showing as the candidate of the American party, rather than his 13.5 percent overall show-lng. Clearly, he should, be entitled to use the higher figure, and the pending amendment would accomplish that goal. Mr. President, I ask unanimous co_sent that two tables prepared by the Library of Congress, ilhlstrating the votes received by Governor Wallace in 1968, may be printed in the RECORD. Mr. President, I would note that the effect of the pending amendment is to restore the operation of the formula in the existing dollar checkoff law, enacted in 1971, which now allows minor party candidates to accumulate their votes in the preceding election. I believe that this is the intent of the formula in S. 3044, and I hope the Senate will accept the amendment Senator HUCH SCOTT and I are offering. ANALYSISOF VOTESCAST F0R GEORGEC. WALLACE IN TUE PRESmENT_AL ELECTroN0F 196SUNDERVAm0US PARTYLABELS Party Number of States DemocraticParty..... IndependentParty.... AmericanIndependent Party.......... AmericanParty....... C._eorge Waltace Party_. Conservative Party.... Independent Ameri- : canParty......... CourageParty........ George Wallacelndependent Party..... , Total.......... 1 9 13 16 7 I I Percent Percent Number total of votes Wallace vote vote 691,425 1,320,872 2,459,735 3,721,747 1,228,799 88,921 6. 97 13.33 24.82 37.56 12.40 .89 0.94 1.80 3.35 5.08 1.67 .12 20,432 358,864 .20 3.62 .02 .49 .15 100.O0 .02 13.49 1 15,678 _50 9, 906,473 1Wallacewasnotontheballotinthe District_ Col_mbia. Note:Itemsmaynotaddto tolalsbecauseof rounding, 523 S 5848 CONGRESSIONAL NUMBrR O:? VOTES RECr,XVEn B.Y G,EOaCE C, WALLACE IN THE PRESIDENTIALELECTION OW' 1968 UNDER VARIOUSPARTYLABELS, BY STATE Democratic Party (one State) Alabama ....................... 691,425 Inclepende_t Party (9 State_) Alaska ......................... 10,024 Illinois ......................... 390,968 Massachusetts .................. 87, oas Mississippi ....................... 415,249 Oregon .... ; ..................... 49, 683 South Carolina ................... 215,430 South Dakota .................... 13, 40O wisconsin ........................ 127,835 Wyoming ......................... 11,105 Total vote for Wallace under Independent Party label_ 1,320, 872 Ameriea_, Independe?_t Party (13 States) Arizona .......................... 46,573 California ......................... 487,270 Colorado ......................... 60, 813 I-Iawai[ .......................... 3,469 Idaho ............................ 36,541 Iowa ............................ 66,422 Michigan ....................... 331,968 Missouri ......................... 206, 126 New Mexico. _.................... 25,737 Ohio ............................. 467,495 Pennsylvania ................... 378,582 Utah ........................... 26, 906 Virginia ....................... 321,833 Total vote for Wallace under American Independent ParW label ............. 2,459,735 American Party (16 States) Arkansas Delaware ........................ ........................ Georgia ........................ Kentucky ................. Louisiana ........................ Maryland ....................... Minnesota ....................... Montana ........................... Nebraska ........................ North Carolina .................. North Dakol;a ................... Oklahoma ....................... Tenlxessee ....................... Texas ............................ Washington ..................... West Virginl_ ..................... - ..... 240, 28, 982 459 535, 55O 193, O98 530, 3OO 178,734 68, 931 20,015 44, 9O4 496,188 14, 244 191,731 424,792 584,269 96,990 72, 560 RI;CORD---SENATE 11, 1974 I yield back the rem_,inder of my time MI'. KENNF, DY. I yield back the re_ mainder of my time. The PRE,SIDING OFFICER (Mr, BROCK,) All remaining time having be_m yielded back, the quest on is on agreeing to the amend_nent (No. 1093) of the Senatop from Massachusetts (Mr. KENNEDI'). The amendment was agreed to. Mr. DOM_E[CK. Mr. President, I have often expressed my deep concern about tain in their political leadership and institutions. Taking away from the individual the decision as to whom their money will go excludes the individual from a vital part of the political process and reduces the voters' involvement, participation and commitment to candidates and parties. Reducing the dependence of candidates and elected officials upon the :rank and file of their party and upon the individual citizen voter will insulate the crisis of confidence in our leadership and the deep sense oJ frustration a_ad distrust toward our entire Government which has pervaded th _ mail I have received from ColomdaLs over the pa.'_;t year. No government can st rvive without the confidence and support of the people, Ours has survived because each American has believed electi, ms presented an opportunity for all citzens, candidates and parties to present _heir ideas fairly representatives further :from individual taxpayers who will be, nonetheless, pay:lng their campaign bills. Federal subsidies would not only limit an individual's right to spend money to express his preferences and views, but they would also require that the individual's tax money go to someone whose views he opposes, as well as restricting the freedom of those who wouldn't want to support any candidate. With one Senator elected as an inde- and honestly, and to i_ave their views udged by the public, Recent events hav( raised serious doubts in the minds of many Americans that this principle is bei:_g respected. The resulting crisis of confidence, therefore, goes to the core--the ,,ery survival--4ff our system oi government. Out of this pendent and another as a third-party candidate currently sitting with us in the Senate, and a growing bloc of voters who regard themselves as "independents," legislation must treat independent candidates and minor or third parties fairly. Yet assuring independent voices and movements a fair hearing runs the concern that we must take whatever ac,tion is necessary to restore the confidence of the American people in il_ leadership and government, last luly the Senate _oassed--and '.[ voted i or--the Federal [Election Carol)sign Act of 1973, which provided for numerous needed reforrn, s Of election campaigns, This act of 1973 rep,_esented a cornprehensive campaign reform bill which required full identifieat on of contributions, annual financial disclosure reports risk of subsidizing frivolous and publicity.-seeking campaigns. There would be no quicker way to discredit subsidizatiort smd the whole political process. Any legislation setting standards would inevi- by Members ol Congress and candidates., It also limits total expenditures in primary and general elect:one for Federal offices_ individual contr butlons to can.., didates, and cash contributions and ex... penditures, During consideration of the Federal F,lection Campaign Act of 1973, propo-, nents of Fede::al subsidMation of campaigns--so-called public financing--., failed in their efforts t_} insert Federal subsidization provisions in the act. In important than general elections. Tile bill before us does not even attempt to wrestle with other than Presidential primaries. In legislating how money will be distributed, the law can either strengthen a party organization's hold over eandidates by channeling money through the parties, or increase the independence of candidates from parties. This is an inappro:oriate area to legislate, especially given the traditional flexibility and variety of this relationship arid the growing Total vote for Wallace under American Party label ..... 3,721,747 GeOrge Wallace Party (7 States) Connecticut ....................... 76, 65o Florida .......................... 624, 207 I_diana ..........................243,108 Maine ........................... 6, 370 December they failed to attach such proNew Hampshire ................... 11, 173 visions to the bill raisinl; the debt limit_ New Jersey ....................... 262, 187 but did extract a promis _ from the Sen_ Vermont ......................... 5. 104 ate Rules Committee that it would report a bill on Federal subsidi_.ation. Thisbill Total vote for Wallace unis before us now: Title I contains provi-, der George Wallace Party sions /or Federal campaign .'mbsidies in label ..................... 1,228, 799 primary and general election campaigns Conszrvative Party (1 State) for Federal offices. The ether sections of Kansas ......................... 88, 921 this bill are similar to t ac provisions of Independent American Party (I State) tlhe Federal Election C_,mpaign Act o:t' Nevada ......................... 20, 432 1973 as it passed the Senate. Courage Party (1 State) I support reform and have consistently New York ....................... 358,864 voted :for it. I am against---irrevocably George Wallawe Independent Party (1 State) against---efforts to establish a Federal financing system as pro_osed in title I Rhode Island .................... 15.678 of this bill. Mr. CANq._ON. Mr. President, I yield I believe Federal subsidization repromyself 30 seconds, serifs a step backward i:_ our efforts to I have discussed the amendment with restore the confidence o_ the American the sponsor of the amendment and the people in their _ystem. taxpayers to politicians ranking minority member of the CornGiving ' mon.y mittee, and we are prepared to accept t_) run for elect;ion can cnly reduce fur-, the amendment, ther wlhatever ,_onfidenc_; Americans re.,' 524 April tably discriminate against some individuals and movements and abridge the freedom of individuals to speak out and run for office. It is equally difficult, if not impossible, t_ design regulations which apply to ppimaples, which in many States are m(_re :numbers of independent voters. The role of volunteer workers and of nonpartisan groups who work in the political arena is a Pandora's box of legal and c4)nstitutional issues whose lid has already been tilted ajar by existing legislatio:a and which would be thrown wide open by Federal subsidization. We are not going to encourage public participation and confidence in politics by reaching into taxpayers pockets to finance election campaigns. The expertonce of the past decade should have taught that the solution of pouring Federal money--the tax money of the individual---on a problem and adding cornplex Federal regulations and a government bureaucracy, has never resolved any problem and in alleviating some symptoms has usually create'd more ills. At a minimum we should give the 1971 and 1973 reforms a full trial. We should not be swept up by the hysteria of the current Watergate environment that we Apr'i{ 1I, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE S 5849 enact unnecessary and dangerous legistationonsocalled"puhlicfinancing."The resultant loss of individual freedom and rights, and the extension of the dead hand of Federal bureaucracy and regulation would serve only to throttle further confidence of American citizens in the responsiveness and integrity of our systern of government. To adopt "public financing" would be the ultimate evil legacy of the Watergate era. The PRESIDING OFFICER, The bill is open to.further amendment, If there be no further amendment to be proposed, the question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, apparently there are no further amendments to be offered. That is correct/is it not? Mr. MANSFIELD. As far as we know. Until third reading is achieved, we do not know. Mr. ALLEN. Since all the amendments have been offered that Senators plan to offer, and since this matter has been under serious discussion under efforts to amend the bill--some of which havebeen very helpful, some not so helpful; since there is considerable confusion about just what the bill does provide; since there is a body of opinion in the Senate that a big mistake is being made, though I do .not subscribe to that view, in not opening the general elections up to matching as well--there was an amendment offered by the distinguished Senator from Illinois (Mr. STEVENSON), the distinguished Senator from Minnesota (Mr. HUMPHREY), the distinguished Senator from New Mexico (Mr. DOMEN_er), the distinguished Senator from Ohio been adopted, then, of course, the bill as it now is about to be voted on prorides for full Federal taxpayer financing in the general election; is that the Senator's understanding? Mr. AI.r.EN. Yes, that is true, except that there is available the option to participate in the Federal subsidy or not. If the candidate wants 100 percent Federal subsidy, he can get it. If he wants to get a little bit from the private sector, that comes off his public subsidy and, obviously, would not be resorted l_o. Mr. GRIFFIN. In view of the rejection of that effort by Senator STEVENSON and others, and in view of the rejection of the amen _d_nent offered by Senator DOLE the other day, I wonder whether the Senator would agree with me that it is going to be a rather strange situation, if this bill should become law, because the requirements we now have under present law say that when a TV advertisement goes on the air promoting the candiddcy of a particular campaign, there must be, in prominent letters and sound, what they call a disclaimer, "Paid for by the Committee on So-and-So.' Would it not be false and fraudulent advertising if ail of that money was aclually coming out of the U.S. Treasury? Would there be some kind of action that citizen consumer groups, and so forth, or som. eone else could take to the FCC, because here, on the one hand, they would be saying the cost was paid for by the committee of candidate Jones, but really it is all being paid for by the taxpayers. Is that the situation we would have? Mr. ALLEN. I see the point of the The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I yield back whatever time I have. Mr. Ar.r,w._. Mr. President, I yield back the remainder of my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. BROCK). All time has now been yielded back. The question is on agreeing to the molion of the Senator from Alabama (Mr. ALLEN) to recommit the bill, S. 3044, to the Committee on Rules and Admlnistration. On this question the yeas and nays have been ordered., and the clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I announce that the Senator from Idaho (Mr. CHURCH), the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. FULBRIGHT), tile Senator from South Carolina (Mr. HOLLXNCS), the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. INOUYE), the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. LONe), the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. MCGEE), the Senntor from Ohio (Mr. METZENBAUM), and the Senator from West Virginia (Mr, (Mr. TAFT), the distinguished Senator from California (Mr. CRANSTON), the distingnished Senator from Minnesota (Mr. MONDALE), and the distinguished Senator from Maryland (Mr. BEALL) that would have set up a formula that. would have permitted and, in fact, to get the full amount available could very well have required matching in general elections; I believe they had a formula of 25~percent advance Federal matching in House distinguished Senator from Michigan and I agree with it. I would assume, however, that the public subsidy would go to the candidate or his committee and, in a sense, would be laundered by the committee. Mr. GRIFFIN. Laundered'? Mr. ALLEN. So it probably would be The result was nays 53, as follows: and'Senateraces, and then S0-50 the rest of the way, and in Presidential elections a 40-percent advance Federal subsidy, and then 50-50 the rest of the way--and since there are a number of other items in the bill that can be improved upon if this bill were to have further consideration by the Rules Committee; and in view of the fact that there are already bills over in the House that they have not yet digested, I am just wondering if we would serve the part Of wisdom to send them another bill which, by the way, is 180 degrees different from the bill we sent them in July, that being S. 372, which does not provide for any Federal subsidies whatsoever. So I wonder if it might not be well to send this bill back to c_mmittee for a little more of the baking process, Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield to me for an inquiry? Mr. z_T,T3_.N. I yield, Mr. GRIFFIN. In the light of the exI)lanation made by the distinguished Senator from Alabama that one of these amendments that would have required matching in the general election has a correct statement that the money, which is public money, having been laundered by the committee and used by the committee, it might be, [hen, that it would be an accurate siatement to say it was paid for by the committee, Mr. GRIFFIN. Does the Senator suppose that the laundering will then be described in some segment of the media as being campaign reform? Mr. ALLEN. This is campaign reform. Mr. GRIFFIN. I thank the Senator. I will certainly join him in supporting his motion to recommit the bill. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, it is the intention of the Senator from Alabama to make a motion to recommit. Since that motion is debatable, the Senator from Alabama will, at this time, move that the bill be now recommitted to the Cornmittee on Rules and Administration for further study. Mr. AIKEN. Mr. President, may I just ask a question. In the laundering of this money by the committee, does the Senator from Alabama believe that a lot of soap wouldbe used? Mr. ALLEN. Yes, soft soap. [Laughter.] Mr. AI,LEN. Mr. President, I :ask for the yeas and nays. RANDOLPH) are necessarily absent. I further announce that the Senator from Alabama (Mr. SPARKMAN) is absent on official business. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from West Vir.. ginia (Mr. RANDOLPH) WOuld vote "nay." Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the Senator from 'Hawaii (Mr. FO,NC) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. GOLO.WATEr) are necessarily absent. I also announce than the Senator froal Virginia (Mr. WXLL]AM L. SCOTT) iS absent on official business. Aiken Allen Baker Bartlett announced---yeas [No. 145 Leg.[ YEAS--35 Curtis Dole Dominick Eastland 35, McClellar_ McClure Metealf Nunn Bellmen Beall Bennett Brock Buckley Byrd. Harry F., Jr. cotton Fannin Stennls Ervin Roth Griffin Stevenson Gurney Taft Hansen Talmadge Helms Thurmond Hruska Tower Johnston Weicker NAYS---53 Abourezk Hartke Muskie Bayh Haskell Nelson Bentsen Hatfield Packwood Bible Hathaway Pastore Biden Huddlestoa Pearson Brooke Hughes Pell Burdick Humphrey Percy .Byrd, Robert C. Jackson Proxmire cannon Javits Ribtcoff case Kennedy Schweiker Chiles Magnuson Scott, Hugh Clark Mansfielcl Stafford Cook Mathias Stevens cranston McGovern _ymington Domenicl Mcnltyre Tunney Eagleton M:ondale WHliams Gravel M0ntoya. Young Hart Mos_ NOT VOTING--12 Church Inouye Scott. Fong Long W_IliamL. Fulbrtgh% McGee Sparkman Goldwater Metzenbaum Holllngs RandolD]_ So the motion of the Sen,'_tor from Alabama (Mr. ALLEN) to recommit tire bill (S. 3044) to the Committee on Rules and Administration was rejected. 525 S 5850 CONGRESSION'AL Mr. RO:BEI_T C. BYRD. Mr. President, I think it would be outrageous to saddle the taxpayers of this country with the price tag of financing the campaigns of Members of Congress. The public campaign financing bill now before the Senate would provide up to $90,000 out of the public treasury for any candidate for the House of Representatives in the general election and as high as $2 million for some candidates for the U.S. Senate in the general election, At a time when so much irtoney is needed to wage the war on cancer, at a time when many persons in this country cannot afford the high cost of medical care, and when I 'think of people who are dying in this country because they cannot get a kidney dialysis, it is obvious to me that we should not dig into the taxpayers' money to finance the elecfinns of those of us who run for the House and Senate. I do not think the taxpayers ought to have to pay this price tag, and I shall vote against the bill. Mr. PELgL. Mr. President, as chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Privileges and Elections and as the sponsor of the bill which formed the basis of our deliberations on public financing; I am delighted with its passage by the Senate. The bill's basic and significant provisions have survived over strong ODposition. We have expressed 'the will of our people weary at election abuses and frustrated by the scandalous i:fiuence of special interests. We have given back to the individual voter his rightful authority, and we have strengthened our democracy., Mr. STE',VENSON. Mr. President, fo:' more than a decade, in and out of public office, I have ,worked for campaign finance reform, It is, therefore, with reluctance that I express my reasons for voting against this bill. Most of the provisions in the bill have already been approved by the Senate and sent, in one form or another, to the House. They include limits on individual and committee contributions to campaigns for Federal office, a $25,000-1imit on contributions of an individual to all Federal campaigns, ceilings on amounts which can be expended in Federal campaigns, a limit on cash contributions and independent enforcement of carnpaign finance laws. Among the provisions of the bill as passed by the Senate were many that I either coauthored in bills or brought up on the Senate floor as amendmerits, The bill before us adds little, except provisions for public financing of Federal campaigns, I believe in partial public financing of general election campaigns, and in fact introduced a bill for public financing. The bill before us provides for public financlng of primaries, as well as general elections, and upon the easiest and most gerterous terms, The result of public iqnanclng in primaries will be to encourage the favorite son, regional and dark horse candidates, the insincere and tile adventuners in our politics, too. What we must do is drive from our politics the large contributions, but not fragment our parties any further. The moneysmade avail- 526 Rt CORD -- SENATE April 11, 19 74 able from the public tr _asury by this bill .nanced candidate. Making private fifor the financing of pr: maries will lnv.il:e nancing optional thus weakens this bill. a proliferaticn of candidacies and with At best, it invites private money back in. little regard to the legit imacy of the can.At worst, it invites private money back in didates' claim upon thc public attention, for demagogicpurposes. It will invite high pres3ured advertising, Most candidates, given a chance to voter confusion, and will make it even collect $16 million from the Treasury as more difficult for a serious candidate of a Presidential candidate,, or $800,000 as the majority to win tht_ noraination of a a Senate candidate in Illinois, would opt major party. J:or public financing. Our debate has It would be, wiser to act with less zeal overlooked the enormous savings in and more prudence an 1 de:er this dml.- :?undraising expenses made possible by gerous experiment un;il such time _ public financing. A $1 million grant from public financing has enjoyed some expothe :Freasury may save the candidate rience in general electicn campaigns. We annie,er $100,000 or more in fundraising could, in an excess of r_cent enthusiasm, expense. And that is all to the good--but "reform" our two-pariy system out of it means that few legitimate candidates existence by financing t he candidacies of would opt on these ter:ms for private virtually all comers i:x primary camfinancing, especially withindividual conpaigns for Presidency end the Congress. tributions limited to $1,500. Once a canFrom the beginning [ have supported didate opts fo:' 'public financing, no one partial public flnancin_ of general ele_::- can give so much as a nickel to his supti0ns campaigns, port. When 100-.percent _ublic financing And that, Mr. President, is what causes was proposed last fall in the Kennedyme--reluctantly--to vot_._ against this Scott amendment to t_e debt limit bill, bill. I_o member of the Senate is more I testified in the Finance Committee Jn determined to rid our politics of the corsupport of partialpublic financing. When rupting influence of large contributions. the Kennedy-Scott ameadmentwas conThe :tmendment I offered would have sidered on the floor in late November, I done so and at the same time permitted offered an amendment r_ducing the luml) small contributions by individuals to the sum subsidy from 100 percent to 50 percacqdidates of their choice. It provided cent. My amendment v'as rLarrowly defor partial public financing of presidenfeared. Tuesday, with Senators TAr'r, rial and congressional general election DeMoN:eL CI_;ANSTON,HUMPHREY, and campaigns and partial private financing MONDALr, I offered another partial put:,.- from contributions of $3,000 or less in lic financing amendment. That amend., the case of individuals and $6,000 m- l_;s merit provided for a ma_immn of 70-per-in the case of committees. The purpose cent public :financing in Presidential of l__.blic financing is to eliminate the elections and 62.5-perce_t public financ-., large, potential corrupting contributions, lng in congressional elections. Senator not tlcte innocent small contributions. :KEN_EDYoffered an am, mdment to mine Because most, if not all, candidates which restored 100-pe:'cent public Ii-. will be unable to resist the lure of 100 nancing in Presidential general election: percer:t public financing, this bill would campaigns. Hi,_ amendment was adopted effectively eliminate small Contributions. by a margin of 1 vote. Tien he offered a:_-k Il; will place a premium on the arts and amendment to increase public financing artifices of Madison Avenue. The electoin congressional campaigns to 75 per-. :cate could be misled by the high priced cent, and it ::ailed by a margin of 3 :hucksters as ne?er before. Minority canvotes. Obviously the Smate is closely didates will have a chance to succeed as divided on the issue o: partial versus never before. The fragmentation of the total public financing. But the Senate parties will follow. I fear for the convoted l:o table the remains of my amend._ tinued existence of our two-party system ment. The effect of th_Lt lopsided vote should this bill, in its present form, bewas to restore 100-percent public finance, come law. 'ing for both Presidential and congresI fear the consequences of such public sional gefieral ,election c'L.mpe,igns, largess;. Candidates ought to be cornIt has been said that my amendment pelled, day in and day nut, to listen t_) improved the bill too mu ch and that the their constituents and solicit their favor. vote then for total public financing fi'hey ought to be forced tx) go out ail(i sounded 'the death knee: for any public; seek--:i¥om housewives, teachers, bust._nancing. Whether or r ct that is true, nessmen and farmers--small contribu-the votes on t:he two Kennedy arnend-_, finns. _T_e Government is too far removed ments provide a good :neasure of the already from the people, the arts of the Senate's true :position cn the question advertisers are too seductive already. We of partial versus total public financing, ought _o sanitize our politf_cs--not, with The Senate has grave reservaMons about some belated enthusiasm for "reform," 100-percent pu:01ic financing. Those res_ sterilize it. ervations are not refiected in this bill. This bill implicitly distrusts the people This bill provides for 100-percent fi- and their good sense. I think most people nancing from +,he Treas any. It permits take their government seriously. They' the candidate to opt for private fmancwant to be a part of it, and with rising' lng, but few would do sc except for the :levels of education and dissatisfaction doubtful purpose of wagi:xg a demogogic with politics as usual, they will increasbattle against those who d ip into the pubingly d:emand a voice in the electoral 1lc through for their campaign funds. It process. They want to feel that they can would be tempting for sorae to wage that make a difference. They want, and rightkind of campal.gn and with the public Jy so, to contribute to the candidatea of distrust of politics runnit tg strong, some their choice. This bill would cut the might succeed against the r,ublicly fi- ::noney out--and that is to the good_ April 11, 197_ CONGRESSIONAL but it would also cut the people out--and that is terrible. Where is nothing inherently corrupting about a 3 cents, $3, $300, or, for that matter, a $3,000 contribution. This bill says the citizen can contribute nothing to the candidate of his choice--work for him, yes, spend up to $1,000 in advertising of his own buylng, yes--but to give him $5 or $1,000, no---because to do so, this bill implies, might corrupt a candidate for President of the United States or the Contress, On the face of it that makes no sense, It is downright wrong, This bill not only eliminates a meaningful form of participation by people in their government, it also drives uP the costs to the Treasury and the taxpayer, It is more than most people will tolerate. They are willing to pay the necessary price for the elimination of the big contributions---but no more. This bill will be perceived as yet another transgression by the politician. After all, what reason is there for 100-percent public financing when 60 or 70 percent would eliminate the large contributions by the rich and the powerful and preserve the innocent contributions of the small and the weak--those who only want to serve their party and their country and have a voice, Some "reform" groups opposed my amendment strenuously. And now they resent the obstinacy of myself, Senator HUMPHREY and others who stood by their convictions'and refused to knuckle under, If more of these well-intentioned individuals had ever sought election to public office, they might be more understandlng of the decencies of the people and the innocence of participation by small contributors. They might understand the revulsion I feel as a candidate at the prospect of waiting to receive a check from the U.S. Treasury for $900,000. I do not need anywhere near that much public money to wage a successful campaign if I can continue to accept small private contributions. The goal of reform, as I see it, is the removal of influences which cause public officials to lose their impartiality. The goal goes beyond that to seek the elimination of any appearance of impropriety, The appearance of impropriety can erode public confidence as effectively as its actuality, The most corrupting influence in our politics is a system of campaign financing which permits wealthy groups and individuals to acquire undue influence by making large campaign contributions. I think this Congress is quite prepared to eliminate that influence--and any appearanee of it--but not by itself appearing to wallow in the public trough, This bill could do more to undermine public confidence in the integrity of our political institutions than an unreconstructed system of private financing. The people will not take kindly to a law which effectively compels taxpayer financing of all the costs of political campaigns when for a lesser sun_ the evils of large contributions could be eliminated, The Congress will be a more perfect instrument of popular self-government if Members of Congress are free to rep- RECORD-- SENATE resent all their constituents, contributors and noncontributers alike, as best they can. There is only one institution which represents the people, and that is the Congress of the United States. It follows that the goal of reform will not be achieved unless we and only we do the legislating, I say this with sadness because I have sought for a long time to eliminate the evils, of money from politics. But I cannot be true to political reform and vote for the public financing provisions of this bill. In its other major particulars it has already been approved by the Senate and awaits action by the House. That being the case, there is no reason to vote for it. I must vote against it and urge my colleagues to do likewise. It would be wiser to start anew with anotl_er bill, one that can deserve and attract public support, win passage in the Congress and approval by the President and the courts, Mr. DOMENICL Mr. President, I am firmly committed to effective election reform. To be effective in reforming our election procedures, we must follow a comprehensive approach since it does no good to simply plug up some existing loopholes and leave or create others. In other words, we should not be satisfied with replacing an obviously deficient systern with one which may be as weak. 1VLy commitment to comprehensive improvement leads me to conclude that public financing is required to achieve the fundamental objectives of limited contributions and limited spending, both of which must be strictly enforced and completely disclosed. I therefore support the principle of helping to finance certain federal elections through the use of public funds and committed myself to support S. 3044 if it had that effect, After these long weeks of debate and seemingly endless manuvering, I have decided that I can support the bill on final passage despite what I view as glarlng deficiencies, There is no question that the bill contains many improvements over existing procedures. Spending and contribution limitations and full disclosure, although contained in other pending legislation, are significant improvements which must be supported, Feeling as I do that public financing is a means to an end--election reform-rather than an end in itself, I am afraid that we have put more emphasis on public financing than its actual contribution to election reform would justify, It appears to me that by this bill we have embraced public financing as a possible cure-all by providing that any candidate in congressional or Presidential general elections can receive 100 percent of the specified spending limit from public funds. To me there is nothing magic in money which has its source with the public rather than individuals or groups. Yet there is, Mr. President, something detrimental in discouraging people to put their financial support behind a candidate in the form of small contributions just as there is in relieving candidates of any inducement to present the merits of his candidacy to try to get those small contributions, S 5851 During the hours of debate I pointed these deficiencies as did many of my colleagues. Senators STEVENSON and TAFT and I introduced and brought to the floor amendments designed to put public financing in its true perspective as a tool of election reform. We were, unfortunately narrowly unsuccessful. The end result of these inflexible attitudes is 100 percent :public financing at the option of candidates in general elections which has the deficiencies I have previously mentioned, Regarding primaries, Mr. President, I am not yet convinced that the public interest is actually served by allowir_g public financing with such a lowthreshold requirement. In addition, abuse of public funding for both primary and general electiom; when neither has received public financing previously is not only possible but, in my opinion, highly probable. We should have been satisfied to test public financing in general elections before extending it to primary elections. Alternatively we could have limited our first venture into this complicated field to either congressional or Presidential elections instead of flylng headlong into large-scale public financing of all primaries and totalpublic financing of all general elections. So, Mr .President, I am convinced that we are attempting to fly before we have even learned to walk and I am afraid the results will be at best, disappointing, and as the worst, disastrous. In spite of these misgiving I have concluded we would be better off trying to fly than mired down with our present system which has come to be so distrusted by so many concerned Americans. I cannot in good conscience vote for the status quo. Consequently, Mr. President, I wilt vote in support of final passage of S. 3044 and hope the remainder of the legislative process will correct some of the deficiences ! have outlined. Mr. PERCY. Mr. President, earlier in the debate on S. 3044, title V was deleted from the bill as it dealt with amendments to the tax code which must come from the Finance Committee. One of the provisions thus deleted was to double the currently allowable tax credits and tax deductions for political contributions--from $12.50 to $25 in the case of tax credits and from $50 to $100 in the case of tax deductions. Mr. President, I tmderstand why these provisions had strongly to be deleted fromprovithe bill, but I feel that such sions should be Emacted into law. I have a bill pending before the Finance Committee to double 'tax credits and tax deductions for political contributions, and asI an hav_amendment the intentionto the to offer this bill next appropriate bill reported from the Finance Committee. I feel that we should take steps to ehcourage political contributions from a larger number of people, antl doubling tax credits and tax deductions for politica1 contributions should accomplish this end. Mr. TAFT. Mr. President, ,during the debate on S. 3044, there were several votes I missed upon which I would like 527 S 5852 CONGP&_SSIONALRE(_ORD--- SENATE my constituents position, I 'would have on Baker contributions within 10 days_f an election and require contribution rePorts 5 days before the election; yea on the Allen unprinted amendment of April 4 to lower the maximum permissible private con- If present and votirg, t:_e Senator from Idaho would vote "yea" arid the Senator from South Carolina would vot_: "nay." Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that thc Senator from Hawaii (Mr. FONG) and the Senator from Arizc na (Mr. GOLD_ WATER) are neeessarily absent, I also announce that ti_e Senator from tribution to $1,000 for congressional races and $2,000 for Presidential races; yea on the Humphrey amendment,No. 1150 to make election day a natitonal holiday; and nay on the Dole April 8 unprinted Virginia (Mr. 'WrLLXArX 1_. sent on official business I further announce thst, voting, the Senator frotn (]OLD\VATER) would vot{_ amendment to require identification of political advertisements partially or fully supported by public funds, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill The result was nays 32, as follows: amendment and others to voted know my yea No. 1075, to forbid is open to further Mr. CANNON. Mr. President I ask for third reading. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill ts open to further amendment. Il there be no furtller amendment to _ proPosed, the ,question is on the engrossmeat and third reading of the bill. The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading and was read the third time. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask' for the yeas and nays on. final passage. The yeas and nays were ordered, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Tile bill having been read tile third time, the question is, Shall it pass? On this quostion, the yeas any nays have been ordered, and the clerk will call the roll. The second assistant legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. STENNIS (after having voted in the negative). On this vote, I have a pair with tile Senator from West Virginia (Mr. RANDOLPH). If he were preseat and voting, he would vote "yea." If I were penrlitted to vote, I would vote "nay." Mr. that I therefore ROBERT C. withdraw BYRD. the Senator from CHURCH), (Mr. South tile Senator vote. Imy announce Idalho (Mr. from FULBRIGHT), the Carolina (Mr, Arkansas Senator HOLLINGS) from ' the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. INOUYE), the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. LON_), the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. MCGEE), the Senator from Ohio (Mr. METZEN- BAUM), the Senator from West Virginia Abourezk ]E;ayh _;eall ]Bentsen E,ible B;iden Brooke Burdicl_ caa_non case Chiles Clark cranston Domenlci Eagletcn (3.ravel G,urney n:art is ab.and (Mr, announced---yeas UNo. 146 Lej '_EAS--53 amendment. SCOTT) if present Arizona "nay." Hartke Haskell Hat field Hathaway Huddleston Hughes Humphrey Jaeksen Javits Kennedy Magnuson Mansfield Mathias McGovern McIntyre Metcalf Mondale Montoya 53 NOT ] Moss Muskie Nelsor_ Packwood P_tore Pearson Peri Percy Proxmlre I_ibicoff Sclaweiker Scott, Hugh Stafford Stevens Tunney Williams Young So the follows: bill (S. 3044) S. Scott, _0filliam Sparkman Syraington was passed, AS as 3044_ ness. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. LON_), the Senator from .Wyoming (Mr. MCGEE]/, and the Senator from Missouri (Mr. SYMINGTON) would each vote "yea." SEC. 101. The _Tederal Eltction,, Campaign Act of 1971 is amended by a, iding at the end thereof the following new litle: "'Im[TLE V--PUBLIC FINANCING OF FEDEP_AL ELECTION CA _IPAIGNS "m._mx_mm On (Mr. this vote, the METZENBAUM) Senator from Senator are Senator is Virginia paired (Mr. BYRD, JR.). If. present and voting, froln Ohio would vote "yea" ator from Virginia would On this vote, the Senator (Mr. C_URCH) is paired with frorn 528 South Carolina (Mr. from neces- from Ohio with the HARRY F. the and vote Senator the Sen"nay." from Idaho the Senator HOLLINGS). election received, as the candidate of that [party, ihs second greatest number of votes cast in that election for all candidates for tlhat off,ce (if such number is equal to 15 percent or more of the total number of votes _a:,'t in that election :[or all candidates for tlbat off,ce, and if, in a State which registers voters by party, that said party's registration :hi such State or district is equal to 15 per centum or more of the total voter registra.tion in :said State or district); "(9) 'minor party' means, with respect to an elect:ion for a Federal office, a political party _hose candidate for election to that office ill tho preceding general election for that office received, as the candidate of thai; L. sarily abent. I further :announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. HARRY lq'. BYRD, JR.) and the Senator from Alabama (Mr. SPARKMAN) are absent on official bust- and the SYMINGTON) held for the of a candi- candidate of that party, percent cf the total number of 25 votes east or in more that election for all candidates for that office, or "(B) if only one political party qualifies as a major party under the provisions of subloaragraph (A),thepolitlcalpart_whose candidate for election to that office in that Be it enacted by the Senate and House o/ Represe_tatives o/ the Hnitei States o/ America in Co,ag,ness assev,bled, That this .act may be cited as the "Federal Election Campaign Act A_nendments of 1974". TITLE I--FtB'ANCING ()F FEDERAL CAMPAIGN'_ ]PUBLIC FIi_ANCING P}OVISIONS (Mr. RAN_Onra), Missouri (Mr. tion, including a runoff elect[on, nomination by a political party who is eligible, under section 502, for payrn_nts title; means, "(8) under 'major this party' with respect to an elec,Aon for any Federal office-"(A) a political party who_._ candidate for el(_tion to that office in the preceding genen_l election for that office received, as the VOTING--14 Hollings Ino'uye Long Mc(lee Metzenbaum Randolph that c:mdidate to make or receive contributions c,r to make expenditures on his behalf; "(3) 'Federal office' meaJas the office of President, Senator, or Representative; "(4) 'Representative' means a Member of the House of Representatives, the Resident Commissioner from the C_mmonwealth of :Puerto Rico, and the Delegates from the Di:]trier of Columbia, Guam, and the Virgin Xslands; "(5) 'general election' means any regularly scheduled or special election held for the purpose of electing a candidate to Federal omc, e or for the purpose of electing presidential and vice presidential electors; "(6) 'primary election' means (A) an oleo- date for election to Federal office, (B) a convention or caucus of a political party held for the nomination candidate, convention, caucus, ofor such election held for(C)thea selection of delegates to a national nomin_ting convention of a political party, and 'D) an election held for the expressioh of a prefer'once for the nomination by a political ps,r_y c,fpersons for election to the officeof t_'eside at; "(7) 'eligible candidate' means a candidate NAYS--32 AlLen Curtis McClellan Allen Dole McClure Baker Dominick Nunn Bartlett E_stland Roth Bellmen Ervin Stevenson Bennett Fannin Taft Brock Griffin TaJmadge Buckley Hanson Thurmond Byrd, Robert C. Helms Tower Cook Hruska Weicker cotton Johnston PtZESENT AND GIVING A LIVZ_, PAIR, PREVIOUSLY RECC I_DED---1 Stennis, againsL Byrd, Harry F., Jr. Church Fong Fulbright Goldwater April 11, 19 7_ "SEC, 501. For purposes cf this title, the term-"(1) 'candidate', 'Commission', 'contribution'. 'expenditure', 'natio mi committee', 'political committee', 'poll;foal party', or 'state' has the meaning given it in section 301 of this Act; "(2) 'authorized committee' means; the central campaign committe( of a candidate (nnder section 310 of this ACt) or any polit[col committee authorize(! in writing by palmy, at least 5 percent but leas than 25 percent of the total number of votes cast in that el_ation for all candidates for that office: t_:nd "(10) 'fund' means the Federal Election Campaign Fund established under section 506(a). "ELIGIBILITY FORPAY]_ENTS ]?ayrnents "SEc. 502. under(a) ihis To title, be eligible a candidate to receive shah agree--"(1) to obtain and to furnish to the Com::niasion any evidence it may request about his ean,_paign expenditures and contributions; "(2) to anykeep records, and to books, furnislh andto the mission other Cominformation it inay request; "(3) to an audit and examination by the Commission under section 5{)7 and to pay _my amounts required under section 507; _rnd "(4) to furnish statements of expenditures _md proposed expenditures required under _;ectionS08. "(b) Every such candidate shall certify to !;he Connnlssion that,--"(1) ,;he candidate and l_is authorized ,:,,ornmitiees will not make campaign expenc[l:utes greater than the limitations in section 504; and April 11, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE "(2) no contributions will be accepted by the candidate or his authorized committees in violation of section 615(b) of title 18, United States Code. "(c) (1) To be eligible to receive any payments under section 506 for use in connection with his primary election campaign, a or for the benefit of that candidate in connection with his primary election campaign, "(fi Agreements and certifications under this section shall be filed with the Cornmission at the time required by the Cornmission, "ENTITLEMENT TO pAYMENTS candidate shall certify to the Commission that--"(A) he is seeking nomination by a political party for election as a Representative and he and his authorized committees have received contributions for that campaign "SEC. 503. (a) (1) Every eligible candidate is entitled to payments in connection with his primary election campaign in an amount which is equal to the amount of contrlbu- of "(Bi more he thanis $10,000; seeking nomination by a political party for election to the Senate and he and his authorized committees have received contributions for that campaign equal in amount to the lesser of-"(ii 20 percent of the maximum amount he may spend in connection with his primary election campaign under section 504 ttons by that except candidatethat thorized received committees, button received as a subscription, vance, products or deposit, or services,or as shalla or no his contri-auloan, ad- contribution be taken of into account, "(2) For purposes of paragraph (1)-"(A) in the case of a candidate for nomination for election to the office of, President, no contribution from any person shall be taken into account to the extent that it exceeds $250 when added to the amount of ali (a)"(il) (1); $125,000; or or "(C) he is Seeking nomination by a politother contributions made by that person to leal party for election to the office of Presior for the benefit of that candidate for his dent and he and his authorized committees primary' election campaign; and have received contributions for his campaign "(Bi in the case of any other candidate throughout the United States in a total for nomination for election to Federal office, amount of more than $250,000, with not less no contribution from any person shall be than $5,000 in matchable contributions haytaken into account to the extent that it exing been received from legal residents of each ceeds $100 when added to the amount of all .of at least twenty States. ,. other contributions made by that person to "(2) To be eligible to receive any payor for the benefit of that candidate for his merits under section 506 for use in conprimary election campaign, nection with a primary runoff election cam"(bi (1) Every eligible candidate who is paign, a candidate shall certify to the Cornnominated by a major party is entitled to mission that he is seeking nomination by payments for use in his general election cama political party for election as a Representapaign in an amount which is equal to the tive or as a Senator, and that he is a candiamount of expenditures the candidate may date for such nomination in a runoff primary make in connection with that campaign election. Such a candidate is not required under section 504. to receive any minimum amount of contri"(2) Every eligible candidate who is nombuttons before receiving payments under this inated by a minor party is entitled to paytitle, merits for use in his general election cam"(d) To be eligible to receive any paypaign in an amount equal to the greater of_ ments under section 506 in connection with "(A) an amount which bears the same his general election campaign, a candidate ratio to the amount of payments to which must certify to the CommisSion that-a candidate of a major party for the same "(1) he is the nominee of a major or office is entitled under this subsection as minor party for election _o Federal office; the total number of popular votes received or by the candidate of that minor party for that ''(2) in the case of any other candidate, office in the preceding general election bears he is seeking election to Federal office and 9o the average number of popular votes rehe and his authorized committees have reeeived by the candidates of major parties ceived contributions for that campaign in a for that office in the preceding general electotal amount of not less than the campaign tlon; or fund required under subsection. (c) of a "(Bi an amount which bears the same candidate for nomination for election to ratio to the amount of payments to which that office, determined in accordance with a candidate of a major party for the same the provisions of subSection (e) (disregardoffice is entitled under this subsection as lng the words 'for nomination' in paragraph the total number of popular votes received (2) of such subsection and substituting the by that eligible candidate as a candidate for words 'general election' for 'primary electhat office (other than votes he received as tion _in paragraphs (2) and (3) of such subthe candidate of a major party for that of.section), rice) in the preceding general election bears "(e) In determining the amount of conto the average number of popular votes retributions received by a candidate and his ceived by the candidates of major parties for authorized committees for purposes of subthat office in the preceding general election. section (c) and for purposes of subsection "(3) (A) A candidate who is eligible under (d) (2)-section 502(d) (2) to receive payments under "(1) no contribution received by the cansection 506 is entitled to payments for use didate or any of his authorized committees in his general election campaign in an as a subscription, loan, advance, or deposit, amount equal to the amount determined or as a contribution of products or services, under subparagraph (Bi. shall be taken into account; "(Bi If a candidate whose entitlement is "(2) in the case of a candidate for nomidetermined under this paragraph received, nation for election to the office of Presiin the preceding general election held for the dent, no contribution from any person shall office to which he seeks election, 5 percent be taken into account to the extent that or more of the total number of votes cast it exceeds $250 when added to the amount for ali candidates for that office, he is ehof all other contributions made by that pertitled to receive payments for use in his gertson to or for the benefit of that candidate eral election campaign in an amount (not in in connection with his primary election camexcess of the applicable limitation under secpaign; and · tion 504) equal to an amount which bears "(3) in the case of any other candidate, the same ratio to the amount of the payno contribution from any person shall be merit under section 506 to which the nontaken into account to the extent that it exinee of a major party is entitled for use in ceeds $100 when added to the amount of all his general election campaign for that office other contributions made by that person to as the number of votes received by that can- S 5853 didate in the preceding general election for that offÉce bears to the average number of votes cast in the preceding general election for all major party candidates for that office. The entitlement of a candidate for election to any Federal office who, in the preceding general election held for that office, was the candidate or a major or minor party shall not be determined under this paragraph. eligible party candidate who is the nominee"(4) of An a minor or whose entitlement is determined under section 502(d)(2) and who total numberreceives of votes5 percent cast in orthe more currentof the election, is entitled to payments under section 506 after for incurredthe inelection connection expenditures madeelec-or with his general tion campaign in an amount (not in excess of the applicable limitation under section 504) equal to-"(A) an amount which bears the same ratio to the amount of the payment under section 506 to which the nominee of a major party was or would have been entitled for use in his campaign for election to that office as the number of votes received by the candidate in that election bears to the average number of votes cast for all maJorJ_arty candidates for that office in that election, reduced by "(Bi any amount paid to the candidate under section 506 before the election. "(5) In applying the provisions of this section to a candidate for election to the office of President--"(A) votes cast for electors affiliated with a political party shall be considered to be cast for the Preside:trial candid,ate of that party, and "(Bi votes cast for' electors publicly pledged to cast their ei(ectoral votes for a candidate shall be considered to be cast for that candidate. "(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (a) and (bi, no candidate is eh-. titled section to the which, payr_ent whenof any this added amount to the under total amount of contributions received by him and his authorized committees and any other payments made to him under this title for his primary or general election campaign, ex.ceeds the amount of the expenditure limita.tlon applicable to him for that campaign under section 504. "EXPEIq[DITTJRE LIMITATIONS "SEC. 504, (a) (1) Except to the extent that such amounts are changed under subsection (fi (2) no candidate (other than a candidate for nomination for election to the office of · President) who receives payments under this title for use in his primary election campaign may make expenditures in connection with that campaign in excess of the greater of--"(A) 8 cents multiplied by the voting age population (as certified under subsection (g)) of the geographical area in which the election for such nomination is held, Or "(Bi (ii $125,000, if %he Federal office sought is that of Senator, or Representative from a State which is entitled to only one Representative, or "(ii) $90,000, if the Federal office sought is that of Representatiw_ from a State which is entitled to more than. one Representative. "(2) (A) No candidate for nomination for election to the office of President may make expenditures in any State in which he is a candidate in a primary election in excess of two times the amount which a candidate for nomination for election to the office of Senator from that State (or for nomination for election to the office of Delegate in the case of the District of Columbia, the Virgin Islands, or Guam, or to the office of _esident Commissioner in the case of Puerto Rico) may expend in that State in connection with his primary election campaign. "(Bi Notwithstanding the provisions of i 529 S 5854 CONGRESSIONAL subparagraph (A), no such candidate may make expenditures throughout the United States in connection with his campaign for that nomination in excess of an amount equal to ten cents multiplied by the voting age population of the Unted States. For purposes of this subparagraph, the term 'United States' means the several States of the United States, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands and any area from which a delegate to the national nominating eonvention of a political party is selected, "(b) Except to the extent that such amounts are changed under subsection (f) (2), no candidate who receives payments under this title for use in his general eleelion campaign may make expenditures in connection with that campaign in excess of the greater of-"(1) 12 cents multiplied by the voting age population (as 'certified under subsection (g)) of the geographical area in. which the election is lleld, or "(2) (A) $175,000, if the Federal office sought is that of Senator, or Representative from a State which is entitled to only one Representative, or "(B) $90,000, if the Federal office sought is that of Representative from a ,'3tale which is entitled to more than one Representative. "(e) No candidate Who is unopposed in a general election may make expenditures in connection with his general election campaign in excess of 10 percent of. the limitatlon in subsection (b). "ed) The Commissioner shale prescribe regulations under which any expenditure by a candidate for nomination for election to the office of President :[or use in two or more States shall be attributed to such eandidate's expenditure limitation in eax;h such State under subsection (a) (2) (A) of this section, based on the voting age population in such State which can reasonably be ex'pected to be influenced by such expenditure. "(e) (1) Expenditures i_ade on behalf of any candidate are, for the purposes of this section, considered to 'be made by such candidate, "(2) Expenditures made by or on behalf of any candidate ior the office of Vice President of the United States are, for the purposes of this, section, considered to be made by the candidate for f_he office of President of the United States with whom he is running. "(3) For purposes of this subsection, an expenditure is made on behalf of a candidate, including a Vice Presidential candidate, if it is made by--"(A) an authorized committee or any other agent Of the candidate for the purposes of making any expenditure; "(B) any person authorized or requested by thecandidate, an authorized committee of the candidate, or an agent of the candldate to make the expenditure; or ,"(C) a national or State committee of a political party in connection with a prlnlary or general election campaign of that candidate, if such expenditure is in excess of the limitations of section 614(b) of title 18, United States Code. "(4) For purposes of this section an expenditure made by the national conunittee of a political party, or by the State committee of a political party, in connection with the general election campaign of a candidate affiliated with that party which i's not. in excess of the limitations contained in section 614(b) of title 18, United States Code, is not considered to. be an expenditure made on behalf of that candidate. "(f) (1) For purposes of paragraph (2)_ "(A) 'price index' means the average over a calendar year of the Consumer Price Index (all items---United States city average) publhshed monthly by the Bureau of Labor Seatlstics, and 530 RE ZORD-- SENATE "(B) 'base period' mean_ the calendar year 1973. "(2) At the begininng of each calendar year (commencing in If 75), as necessary data become available fn)m tZae Bureau of Labor Statistics; of the De_)artment of Labor, the Secretary of Labor s]_all certify to the Commission an,1 publish ia the Federal Retister the percentage diffe'ence between the price index for the twelve months preceding the beginning of such eal_,ndar year and tbs price index for the base period. Each amom]t determined under subsec_;ions (a) and (b) shall be changed by such percentage differ_ ence. Each amount so ch_,nged shall be ttie amount in effect for such calendar year. "(g) During the first week of January, 1975, and every subsequeLt year, the Seeretary of Commerce shall certify to the Cent.mission and publish in the Federal Register an estimate of the voting age population of 'the United States, of each State, and of each congressional district as (,f the first day of ,July next preceding the dite of certification, 'The term 'voting age popu atlon' means rem..dent popnlator., eighteen years of age or older, "eh) Upon receiving the certification of the Secretary of Commerce and of t:he Sec.retary of Labor, the ComJ aission shall put:,lish in the Federal IRegis:er the applicable expenditure limitations in effect for the cal.endar year for the United States, and for each State and congressional district under this section. "(i) In the case of a eamiidate who is cam-paigning for election to the House of Re[:.resentatives from a distri(:t Which has been established, or the boundaries c.f which have iaeen altered, _q:nce the preceding general electiotl for such office, 'he determhlatio:r_ of the amount and the determination of whether the candidate is _ major party can.didate or a minor part_ candidate or :is otherwise entitled to paynents under this _;itle shall be made by the Dommission basec[ upon the number of vote:i casl; in the pre.. ceding general election f_r such oltice by voters residing within the area encompassed, in the :new or altered district, ':'CEaTIrIC_,TIONa BY 2OMi_:ISSION "SE(:. 505. (a) On the blt_ls of the evidence, hooks, records, and information furnished by each candidate ellgtbl. · to receive pay _, ments under section 506, and prior to ex:.. _mination and audit under section 50_, the Commission shall certify I rom time to time to thc Secretar[ of the _Jreasury for payment to each candidate th_ amount to whicmi that candidate is entitled. "(b) Initial certiflcation_ by 'the Commission under subsection (a), and all determination,_ made by it under ;his title, shall be, final and conclusive, except tx} the extent that they are subject to examination an,:i audit by 'the Commission lade:: section 507 and Judicial review under section 313. "PAYMENTS TO ELIGIBLE CABFDIDATFS "SEc. 506. (a) There Is established within the Treasury a fund to be known as the Federal Election Campaign Fund. There arc authorized to ba appropri:_ted to the fund amounts equal to the sunL of _;he amounts designated by taxpayers u_der section 5096 of the Internal F._evenue CSode of 1954 not previously taker, into account for purpose]] of this subsection, and such additional amounts as may be neces:;ary '_o carry out the provisions of this title without any l'e.. duction under subsection (e). The moneys in the fund shall remain ivailable without fiscal year limitation. The Secretary of the Tretsury may accept: and credit to tile fund rroney received in t/he form of a donation, gift, legacy, or bequest, or otherwise contrib ited to the fund. "(b) Upon receipt of a ,:ertification from. t'.ae Commission under seciion _05, the Sec.. retary of the Treasury shal: pay the amount April 11, 197'3 certified by the Commission to the candidate to whom the certification relates. "(c) (1) If the Secretary of the Treasury deterlnines that the monies in the fund are not, or may not be, sufficient to pay the full _Lmount of entitlement to all candidates eligible to receive payments, he shall reduce the amount to which each candidate is entitled under section 503 by a percentage equal to the percentage obtained by dividing (1) t:he anlonnt of money remaining in the fund at the time of such determination by -(2) t:he total amount which all candidates eligible to receive payments are entitled to receive u:nder section 503. If additional candidates become eligible under section 502 after the Secretary determines there are insufficient raonles in the fund, he shall make any further reductions in the amounts payable to all eligible candidates necessary to carry out the purposes of this subsection. The Seeretary shall notify the Comrnission and each eligible candidate by registered mail of the reduction in the amount to which that ca:ndidate is entitled under section 503. "(2) If, as a result of a reduction under this subsection in the axnount to which an eligible candidate is entitled under section 503, payments have been made under this section in excess of the amount to which such candidate is entitled, that candidate is liable for repayment to the fund of the excess under procedures the Commission shall prescribe By regulation. "ed) No payment shall be made under this title to any candidate for any campaign :in connection with any election occurring before January 1, 1976. "EXAMINATIONS AND A_I)ITS; REPAYMENTS "SEc. 507. (a) After each Federal election, the Commission shall conduct a thorough examhiation and audit of the campaign expenditures of all candidates for Federal ofrice who received payments under this title for use in campaigns relating to that election. ~(b) (1) If tho Commission determines that any portion of the payments made to an eligibh_ candidate under section 506 was in excess of the aggregate amount of the paymeats to which the candidate was entitled, it shall so notify that candidate, and he shall pay t(> the of'the amount. Treasury If the an amount equal Secretary to the excess Commission determines that; any portion of the payments made to a candidate under seetion 506 for use in his primary election campaign .or his general election campaign was not used to make expenditures in connection 'with that campaign, the Commission shall so notify the candidate and he shall pay an amount equal to the amount of the un.expended portion to the Secretary. In making its de_rmination under the preceding senfence, the Commission shall consider all amounts received as contributions to have been expended before any amounts recelved under this title are expended. If the of Commlasion that any"(2)amount any payment determines made to a candidate under section 506 was used for any purpose other than-"(A) to defray campaign expenditures, or "(B) to repay loans the proceeds of which were used, or otherwise to restore funds (other than contributil)ns to defray camp_dgn expenditures which were received and expended) which were used, to defray campaign expenditures, it shall notify the candidate of the amount so used., and the candidate shall pay to the Secretary of the Treasury an amount equal to such amount. "(3) No payment shall be required from a candids_te under this subsection in excess o:_ the total amount of all payments received by the candid,ate under section 500 In con.. nection with the camapign with respect to which 1he event oCcurred which caused the April 11, 197.$ CONGRESSIONAL candidate to have to make a payment under this subsection. "(c) No notification shall be made by the Commission under subsection (b) with respect to a campaign more than eighteen months after the day of the election to which the campaign related, "(d) Ail payments received by the Secretary under subsection (b) shall be deposited by him in the fund. "INFORMATION ON EXPENDITURESAND PROPOSED EXPEi_IDITURES "SEC. 508. ia) Every candidate shall, from time to time as the Commission requires, furnish to the Commission a detailed statement, In the form the Commission prescribes, of-''(1) the campaign expenditures incurred by him and his authorized committees prior to the date of the statement (whether or not evidence of campaign expenditures has been furnished for purposes of section 505), and "(2)the campaign expenditures which he and hisauthorized committees propose to incur on or after the date of the statement, "lb) The Commission shall, as soon as possible after It receives a statement under subsection (a), prepare and make available for public Inspection and copying a summary of the statement, together with any other data or information which it deems advisable, "REPORTS TO CONGRESS "Sic. 509. ia) The Commission shall, as soon as practicable after the close of each calendar year, submit a full report to the Senate and House of Representatives setting forth_ "(l) the expenditures incurred by each candidate, and his authbrized committees, who received any payment under section 505 in connection with an election; %1o"n(2) 505thefor amounts payment certified to that by candidate; It under secand _(3) the amount of payments, ff any, required from that candidate under section 507, and the reasons fc_ each paymen_ required, Each report submitted pursuant to this seetlon shall be printed as a Senate document, "(b) The Commissloll Is authorized to conduct examinations and audits (in addition to the examinations and audits under secttons 505 and 507), to conduct tnvestigations, and to require the keeping and submission of any books, records, or other in_ formation necessary to carry out the functions and duties lmposed on it by this title. 4*FARTICIPATIOI_? BY COMMISSION IN JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS "SEc. 510. The Commission may initiate civil proceedings in any district court of the United States to seek recovery of any amounts determined to be payable to the Secretary of the Treasury 10y a candidate under this title, "PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS "SEC. 511. Violation of any provision of this title ls punishable by a fine of not more than $50,000, or imprisonment for not more than five years, or both. "RELATIONSHIP TO OTHERFEDERALELECTION LAWS "SEC. 512. The Commission shall consult from time to time with the Secretary of the Senate, the Clerk of the House of Representatives, the Federal Communications Commission, and with other Federal officers charged with the administration of laws relating to Federal elections, in order to develop as much consistency and'coordination with the administration of those other laws as the provisions of this title Permit. The Commission shall use the same or comparabls data as that used in the administration of such other election laws whenever possible.", RECORD--SENATE TITLE II CHANGES IN CAMPAIGN COMMUNICATIONS LAW AND IN REPORTING AND DISCLOSURE PROVISIONS O1' FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT OP 1971 CAMPAIGN COMMUNICATIONS SEC. 201. ia) Section 315(R) of the C°m munications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 315(a) ) is amended-(A) by inserting "(1)" immediately after "(a) "; (B) by redestgrmting paragraphs (1), (2), (3)_ and (4) as subparagraphs (A), (B), (C), and (D), respectively; and lC) by adding at the end thereof the following new paragraphs: "i2) The obligation imposed by the first sentence of paragraph (1) upon a licensee with respect to a legally qualified candidate for any elective office (other than the offices of President and Vice President) shall be met by such licensee with respect to such candidate if--"iA) the licensee makes available to such candidate not less than five minutes of broadcast time without charge; "(B) the licensee notifies such candidate by certified mall at least fifteen days prior to the election of the availability of such time; and "lC) such broadcast will cover, in whole or in part, the geographical area In Which such election is held. _'(3) No candidate shall be entitled to the use of broadcast facilities pursuant to an offer by a licensee under paragraph (2) Bnless such candidate notifies the licensee in writing of his acceptance of the offer within forty-eight hours after receipt of the offer." lb) Section 315(b) of such Act (47 U.S.C. 315(b)) is amended by striking out "by any person" and Inserting "by or on behalf of any person". (c) (I) Section 315(c) of such Act (47 $ 5855 (2) by redeslgnatiug subsection (e) as (f), and by inserting after subsection (d) tho following new subsection: licensee shall maintain a "is) recordEach of station any political advertisement broadcast, with ittheto identification of the persontogether who caused be broadcast, for a period of two years. The record shall be hours.".available for public inspection at reasonable (e) The Campaign Communications Re.. form Act is repealed. CHANG_S IN DEI_INIPlYONSFOR REPORTING AND DISCLOSIJ-RE SEC. 202. (a) Section 301 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (relating to definitions) is amended by(1) striking out ", and (5) the election of delegates to a constttutionaI convention for proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States" in paragraph (a), and by inserting "and" before "(4)" in suclx paragraph; (2) striking out paragraph (d) and inserting in lieu thereof the following: "(d) 'political committee' means-"(1) any committee, club, association, or oth_r group of persons which receives contributlons or makes expenditures during a calendar year in an aggregate amount exseeding $1,000; "(2) any national committee, association, or organization of a political party, any State affiliate or subsidiary of a national political party, and any State central committee of a political party; and "(3) any committee, association, or organization engaged tn the administration of a separate segregated f_md described in seetion 610 of title 18, Unt_ed States Code;"; (3) inserting in paragraph (e) (I) after "subscription" the following: "(including any assessment, fee, or membership dues)"; U.S.C. lows: 315(c) ) is amended to read as fol"lc) No station licensee may make any charge for the use of any such station by or on behalf of any legally qualified candidate for nomination for election, or for election, to Federal elective office unless such candidate (or a pe2son specifically authorized by such candidate In writing to do so) certifies to such licensee in writing that the payment of such charge will not exceed the limit on expenditures applicable to ghat candidate under section 504 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1071, or under section 614 of title 18, United States Code.". for (4)tho striking purBose outof ininfluencing paragraph the(e) election (1) "or of delegates to a constitutional convention for proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States" and insertln_g in lieu thereof the following: "or for the purpose of financing any operations of a political committee (other than a payment made or an obligation incurred by a corporation or labor organization which, under the provisions of the last paragraph of sec~ tion 610 of title 18, United States ,Code, does not constitute a contribution by t:hat corporation or labor organization), or for the putpose Of paying, at any time, any debt or obit- (2) Section 315(d) toofread such asAct (47 U.S.C. 315(d) ) is amended follows: *'(d) If a State by law imposes a limitation upon the amount which 'a legally quailfled candidate for nomination for election, or for election, to public office (other than Federal elective office) within that State may spend in connection with his campaign for such nomination or his campaign for electlon, then no station licensee may make any charge for the use of such station by or on behalf of such candidate unless such candidate (or a person specifically authorized in writing by him to do so) certifies to such licensee in writing that the payment of such charge will not violate that limitation.". id) Section 317 of such ACt (47 U.S.C. 817), is amended by-(I) striking out in paragraph (1) of subsection (a) "person: PrevieWerS,That" and inserting in lieu thereof the following: "person. If such matter is a political advertisement soliciting funds for a candidate or a political committee, there shall be announced at the time of such broadcast a statement that a copy of reports filed by that person with the Federal Election Commission is available from the Federal Election Commission, Washington, D.C., and the licensee shall not make any charge for any part of the costs of making the announcement. The term"; and gation incurred by a candidate or acampaign political committee in connection with any for nomination for election, or for election, to Federal office"; (5) striking out subparagraph (',t) of paragraph (e), and amending subparagraph (S) of such paragraph to read as follows: "i2) funds received by a political com_ mittee which are tran:fferred to that cornmittee from another political committee;"; (6) redesignattng subparagraphs (4) and (5) of paragraph (e) as paragraphs (3) and (4), respectively; (7) striking out paragraph (f) and inserting in lieu thereof the following: "(1) "(f) 'expenditure'-means a purchase, payment, distrt-. bution, loan, advamce, deposit, or gift of money or anything of value, mwae for the purpose of__ "(A) influencing the 'nomination for elecrich, or the election, of any perSon to Federal office, or to the office of presidential and vicepresidential elector; "(B) influencing the result of a primary election held for the celectlon of delegates to a national nominating convention of a political party or for the expression of a preference for the nomination of persons for election to the office of President; "lC) financing arty operations of a political. committee; or 531 ,5 5856 CONGRBSSIONAL "CD) paying, at any time, ally debt or ohligation incurred by a candidate or a political committee in connection with any campaign for nomination for election, or for election, to Federal office; and "(2) means the transfer of funds by a political committee to another political cornmittee; but "(3) does not include-"(A) the value of services rendered by indlviduals who volunteer to work without compensation on behalf of a candidate; or "(B) any payment made or obligation in. curred by a corporation or a labor organization which, under the provisions of the last paragraph of section 610 of title 18, United States Code, would not constitut_ an expenditure by that corporation or labor ergonization;"; (8) striki.ng "and" at 'the end of paragraph (h); (9) striking the period at the end of paragraph (i) and Inserting in lieu thereof a semicolon; and (10! adding at the end thereof the followlng new paragraphs: "(J) 'identification' means-"(1) in the case of an individual, his full name and the full address of his principal place of residence; and · "(2) in the case of any other person, _he full name _nd address of that person; "(k) 'national committee' means the organization which, by virtue of the bylaws of a political party, is responsible :for the dayto-day operation of that political party at the national level, as determined by the Cornmission; and "(1) 'political party' means an association, committee, or organization which nominates a candidate, for election to any Federal office, whose appearsof that on the election ballot as the name candidate association, cornmittee, or organization.", (b) (1) Section 302(b) of such Act (re1.ating to reports of.contributions in exceSS of $10) is _mended by striking ", t.he name and address (occupation and principal place o_ business, if any)" and inserting "of the contribution and the identification". (2) Section 302 (c) of such Act (relating to detailed accounts) is amended by striklng "full name and mailing address (occupotion and the principal place of business, if any)" in paragraphs (2) and (4) and insorting in each such paragraph "identification", (3) Section 302(c) of such Act is further amended by striking the semicolon at the end of paragraph (2) and inserting "and, if a person_s contributions aggregate more than $100, the _count shall include occupation, and the principal place of business (lf any);", I_EGISTRATION OF CANDIDATES AND _OLITICAL COB_I_ITTEES SEC. 203. (a) Section 303 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (relating to registration of political committees; statemeats) is amended by redeslgnatfng subsesikons (a) through (d) as (b) hhrough (e), respectively, and by inserting after "SEC. $03/' the following new subsection (a): "(a) Eact_ candidate shall, within ten days after the date on which he has qualified under State. law as a candidate, or on which he, or any person authorized by him to do so, has received a contribution or made an expenditure L_ connection with his campaign or for the purpose of preparing to undertake his campaign, file with the Conunisslon a registration statement in Such form as the Commission may prescribe. The statement shall includ e.-- "(1) the identification of the candidate, and any individual, political committee, or other person he has authorized to receive contributions or make expenditures on hie behalf in Connection with his campaign; 532 RECORD -- SENATE _(2) the tdentificatiomt of his campaign depositories, together with the title a:_.d number of eac:_ account at each such dopesltory which is to be used in cc_nnection with his campaign, _my safer5 del_sit bo× to be used in connection there'vith, and the ideatlfica_ion of each individual authorized by him to make any expend:ture or withdrawal from such account or box; and "(3) such additional r_levant information as the Commission may require.", (b) The first sentence of subsection (b) of such section (as redesig_ated by subsecth'm (a) of this section) is amenc[ed to read _ follows: "The treasurer of ,_ach political committee shall file with the Commission a statement of organizatlca within ten days after the date on whici_ the committee is organized.". (c) The second senten:e of such subsectiou (b) is anaended by striking out "this Act" and inserting in lieu thereof the followlng: "the Federal Elect:on Campaign Act Amendments of 1974". (d) Subsection (c) of _uch section (as redesignated by subseetior. (a) of this section) is amencted by-(1) inserting "be in _uch form as t:_e Commission sl_all prescribe, azLd shall" after "The statement of organJzation shall"; (2) striking out paragr_,ph (3) and inser'_,lng in lieu thereof the following: "(3) the geotp'aphic are_or political Juri._ diction within which the com_lttee will opcrate, and a general descliptlo:a of the com.mittee's authority and ac ;lvitb,'s;"; and (3) striking out paragr_.ph (I_) and insert.lng in. lieu thereof the fo lowing: "(9) the nmme and address of the campaign depositories used IF that committ :ce, together with 'oho title a_Ld n_nber of each account deposit ;ory, bo_:and usedtheby ldentheft committee andat safety each deposi tification of each lndivicLual authorized t;o make withdrawals or payments out of such account or box:". (e) The caption of mmh _ectlon 303 J_ amended by in/;erting "ca:_Dma'r_ AND" after "REGISTRA_rIONO_"'. C_ANGES IN REPORTnqG REQIJIREi_fENTs April 11, 19 7.4 operates in more than one State, or upon its own motion, the Commission may waive the reporting dates (other than January 31) set _ortll in paragraph (1), and require instead that '_uch candidates or political committees file reports not less frequently than monthly. The Commission may not require a presidential candidate or a political committee operating in more than one 8tare to file more than eleven reports (not counting any report 1;o be fled on January 31) during any calendar year. If the Commission acts on its own motion under this paragraph with respect to a candidate or a political committee, that candidate or committee may obtain Judicial review in accordance with the provisions of chapter 7 of title 5, United States Code.". (b) (1) Section 304(b) of such Act (rela'ting to reports by political committees and candidates) is amended by striking "full name and mailing address (occupation and the principal place of business, if any)" in paragraphs (9) and (10) and inserting in lieu thereof in each such paragraph "ideatificatlon". (2) Subsection (b)(5) of. such section 304 Is amended by strlking out "lender and onctorsers" and inserting in lieu thereof "lender, endorsers, and guarantors". (c) Subsection (b) (12) of such section is amended by inserting immediately before the scrnicolol_ a comma and the following: ", together with a statement as to the cireumstances and condtttons 'under which any such debt or obligation is extinguished and the consideration therefor'". (d) Subsection (b) of such section is amended by_ (1) striking graph (12); andthe "and" at the end of para(2) redeslgnatlng paragraph (13) as (14) and by inserting after pare_raph (12) the following new paragraph: "(13) such information as the Commission may require for the disclosure of the nature, s_nount, source, and designated recipient of any earmarked, encumbered, or restricted c:ontrlbution or other special fund; and". (e) The first sentence of subsection (c) of SEc. 204. (a) Section ,'-04 of the Federal such ,,;ection is amended to read as follows: Election Campaign Act o:' 1971 (relating to "The roberts required to be filed by subsecreports by political comnxlttees and candition (a) shall be cumulative during the caldates) is amencied by-endar year to which they relate, and during (1) inserting "(1)" after "(a)" in subsetsuch _ditlonal periods of time as the Corn-. tion (a); mission may require.". (2) striking out "for election" each place (f) Such section 304 is amended by addit appears in the first s_ntence of subsetlng at the end thereof the following new tion (a) and in_erting in 1Leu thereof in eacl_ subsections: such place "fei' nominatl, m for election, or _"(d) This section does not require a Merefor election,"; bet of Congress to report, as contributions (3) striking out the s,;condi sentence ,Df received or as expenditures made, the value subsection (a) and insert ng In lieu thereof c,f photographic, matting, or recording servthe following: "Such repvrts _shall be filed ices furnished to him before the first day on the tenth day of April, July, and October c,f January of the year preceding the yea_ of eac:_ year, on the tentI, day preceding an in which his term of office expires if those election, on the tenth day _f December in the services were furnished to him by the Senyear of an election, and on the last day of January of each year. Notwithstanding th_ preceding sentence, the r,;ports required by that sentence to be filed during April, July', and October by or relati:lg tc_ a candidate during a year in which _o Fe_teral eleetio_x is l_eld in which, he is a mndidate, may be filed on the twentieth da) of each month."; (4) striking _ut everything after "filing" In the third sentence of subsection (a) and inserting in lieu thereof a period and itu) following: "If t:'ae person r_aking any anony., mous contrlbu_;ion is subsequently identi.. fled, the identification o_ the contrlbut_)r shall be reported to the Commission within the reporting period wllhin which he is identified."; and (5) adding at the end of subsectior_ (a) 'the following new paragraph: "(2) Upon a request mlde b3' a presldenrial candidate or a politico _committee whictx a_e R_ording Studio, the House Recording _C_tudio, or by any individual whose pay is disbursed by the Secretary of the Senate or the Clerk of the House of Representatives and who furnishes such services as his primary duty as an employee of the Senate or House of Representatives, or if such servi,_es were paid for by the Republican or Dcmocratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, the r)emoeratic National Congressional Commlttee, or the National Republican Congressional Committee. "(e) Every person (other than a political comm!Lttee or candidate) who makes contrlbutlons or 'expenditures, other than by contribution to a political committee or candidate, in an aggregate amount tn excess of $100 within a calendar year shall file with the Commission a statement containing the information required by thio section. Statemeuts required by this aubsection shall be April 11, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL filed on the dates on which reports by polltlcal conmaittees are filed but need not be cumulative.", (g) The caption of such section 304 is amended to read as follows: "REPORTS". "REQUIREMENTS RELATING '(B) do not operate in more than One State or do not operate on a statewide basis.", ZSTABLISI-IMENTOF FEDERALELECTION COMMISsioN; CENTRAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEES;, TO CAMPAIGN ADVERTISING "SEc. 305. (a) Ho person shall cause political advertisement to be published any un- less he furnishes to the publisher of the advertisement his identification in writing, together with the identification of any person him to cause such publication. authorizing "(b) Each published political advertisemerit shall contain a statement, in such form as the Commission may prescribe, of thc identification of the person authorizing the publication of that advertisement. "(c) A publisher who publishes any politlcal advertisement shall maintain such records as the Commission may prescribe for a period of two years after the date of publication setting forth such advertisement and any material relating to identification furnished to him In connection therewith, and shall permit the public to inspect and copy those records at reasonable hours, "id) NO person who sells space in a newspaper or magazine to a candidate, or to the agent of a candidate, for use in connection with that candidate's campaign, may change any amount for such space which exceeds the amount charged for comparable use of such space for other purposes, "(e) Each political committee shall include on the face or front page of all literature and advertisements soliciting contributlonsthefollowlngnotice: "'A copy of our report is filed with the Federal Election Commission and is available for purchase from the Federal Election ConmMssion, Washington, D.C.' "if) As used in this section, the term-."(!) 'political advertisement' means any matter advocating the election or defeat of any candidate but does not include any bona fide news story (including interviews, cornmentarie6, or other works prepared for and published by any newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication the publication of which work is not paid for by any candidate, political committee, or agent thereof); and '"(2) 'published' means publication in a newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, distribution of printed leaflets, pamphlets, or other documents, or display through the use of any outdoor advertising facility, and such other use of printed media as the Commission shall prescribe.", WAIVER OF REPORTING REQIYnlEMENTS SEC. 206. Section 306(c) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (relating to formal requirements respecting reports and statements) is amended to read as follows: "(e) The Commission may, by a rule of general applicability which is published in the Federal Register not less than thirty day before its effective date, relieve--"(1) any category of candidates of the obligation to comply personally with the requirements of subsections ia) through (e) of section 304, if it. determines that such action is consistent with the purposes of this Act, and "(2) any categoryof political committees of the obligation to comply with such section if such committees--"iA) prtn_artly support persons seekh_g State or local office, and S 5857 SEC. 207. ia) Title III of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (relating to disclosure of Federal campaign funds) is amended by redesignatlng section 308 as section 312, and by inserting after section 307 the following new sections: "FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION "SEC. 308. (a)(1) There is established, as "(6) The Conuni,,;sion shall elect a Chairman and a Vice Chairman from among its members for a term of two years. The Chairman and the Vice Chairman shall not be affiliated with the same political party. The Vice Chairman shall act as Chairman in the absence or dL_ability of the Chairman, or in the event of a vacancy in tJnat office. "(b) A vacancy in the Commis',sion shall not impair the right of the remaining merebets to exercise all the powers of the Cornmission. Four member,,; of the Commission shall constitute a quorum. "(c) The Commission shall have an official seal which shall be Judicially noticed. an of executive independent branch of theestablishment Government of the the United States, a commission to be known as the Federal Election Commission. "(2) The Commission shall be composed of the Comptroller General, who shall serve at the close of "(d) each The fiscalCommission year report shall to the Congress and to the President concerning 'the action it has taken; the names, salaries, and duties of all individuals in its employ' and the money it has disbursed; and shall :make such Without the right to vote, and seven merehers who shall be appointed by the Pres(dent by and with the advice and consent of further reports on thc, matters within its jurisdiction and such :recommendations for 'further leigslation as raay appear desirable. CAMPAIGN CAMPAIGNADVERTISEMENTS SEC. 205. Section 305 of the Federal Eleclion Campaign Act of 1971 (relating to reports by others than political committees) is amended to read as follows: RECORD--SENATE DEPOSITORIES the Senate. Of the seven members--"iA) tworecommended shall be chosen from among dividuals by the President inpro "(e) The principal office of the' Corem(ssion or near Distz'ict any of Columbia,shallbutbe itin may meet the 'or exercise ,az' tempore of the Senate, upon the recommendations of the majority leader of the Senate and the minority leader of the Sen- all its powers in any State. "if) The Commission shall appoint a Gen-. eral Counsel and an Executive Director to ate; and "(B) two recommended shall be chosenby from among individuals the Speaker of the House of Representatives, upon the recommendations of the majority leader of the House and the minority leader of the House. The two membe'rs appointed under subparagraph iA) shall not be affiliated with the same political party; nor shall the two merehers appointed under subparagraph (B). Of the members not appointed under such subparagraphs, not more than two shall be affilited with the same political party, "(3) Members of the Commission, other than the Comptroller General, shall serve for terms of seven years, except that. of the members first appointedt "iA) one of the members not appointed under subparagraph iA) or (B) of paragraph (2) shall be appointed for a term endlng on the April thirtieth .first occurring more than six months after the date on which he is appointed; "(B) one of the members appointed under paragraph (2)iA) shall be appointed for a term ending one year after the April thirtieth on which the term of the member referred to in Subparagraph iA) of this paragraph ends; "(C) one of the members appointed under paragraph (2)(B) shall be appointed for a term ending two years thereafter; "iD) one of the members not appointed under subparagraph iA) or (B) of paragraph (2) shall be appointed for a term ending ihree years therafter; "(E) one of the members appointed under paragraph (2)iA) shall be appointed for a term ending four years thereafter; "iF) one of the members appointed under paragraph (2) (B) shall be appointed for a term ending five years thereafter; and "(G) one of the members not appointed under subparagraph iA) or (B) of paragraph (2) shall be appointed for a term ending six years thereafter, "(4) Members shall be chosen on the basis of their maturity, experience, Integrity, irapartiality, and good Judgment. A member may be reappointed to the Commission only once., "(5) 'An individual appointed to fill a vacaney occurring other than by the expiration of a term of office shall be appointed 0nly for the unexpired term of the member he sucdeeds. Any vacancy occurring in the office of member of the Commission shall be filled in the ,____ner in which that office was originally _lled. serve at the pleasure of the Commission. The General Counsel shall be The the chief legal Df-. of-. ricer of the Commission. Executive rector shall be responsible for the admlnis-. trative operations of the Commission and shall perform such other duties as may be delegated or assigned to him from time ti, time by rules or order:; of the Commission. However, the Commission shall not delegate the making of rules regarding elections to the Executive Director. "tg) The Chairman of the Commission shall appoint and fix the compensation of such personnel as are necessary to fulfill the duties of the Commission in accordance with the provisions of title 5, United States Code. "{h) The Commission may obtain tile services of experts and consultants in ac-. cordance with section _1109 of title 5, United States Code. "ii) In carrying out its responsibilities under this title, the Commission shall; to the fullest extent practicable, avail itself of the assistance, including personnel and facilities, of the General Accounting Office and the Department of Justice. The Comp.troller General and the Attorney General may make available to the C0mmt_sion such personnel, facilities, and other assistance, with or without reimbursement, as the Com-. mission may request. "(J) The provisions of section 7324 of title 5, United States Code, shall apply to mere-. hers of the Commission notwi_hstanding the provisions of subsection id)(:3) of such section. "(k) (1) Whenever the Commission sub-. mits any budget estimate or request to tile President or the Office of Management and Budget, it shall concurrently transmit a copy of that estimate or request to the Congress. "(2) Whenever the Commission submit.'; any legislative recommendations,. Or testl.. mony, or comments on legislation, requested by the Congress or by any Member of Con.. gress to the President or the Office of Man-. agement and Budget, it shall concurrently transmit a copy thereof to the Congress or to the Member requesting the same. No Grocer or agency of the United States shah have any authority to require the Commission to sub-. mit its' legislative recommendations, testimony, or comments on legislation, to any office 'or agency of the 'United States for approval, comments, or review, prior to the submission of such recommendatitons, testt-. mony, or comments to the Congress. 5:,:l S 5858 CONGRESSIONAL "POWERS OF COMMISSION "SEc. 309. (a) The Commission has the power-"(1) to require, by special or general orders, any person to submit In writing such reports and answers to questions as the Commission may prescribe; and such submission shall be rnade within such a reasonable period of time and under oath or otherwise as the Commission may determine; "(2) to administer oaths; "(3) to require by subpena, signed by the Chairman or the Vice Chairman, the attend.anee and testimony of witnesses and the pro·duction of all documentary evidence relating to the execution of its duties; "(4) In any proceeding or investigation to order testimony to be taken by deposition before any ]person who is designated by the Commission and has the power tx) administer oaths and, in such instances, to compel testimony and the production of evidence in the same manm;r as authorized under paragraph (3) of this subsection; "(5) to pay Witnesses the same fees and mileage as are paid in like circumstances in the courts of the United States; "(8) to initiate (through civil proceedings for injunctive relief and through presents., tions to l_deral grand Juries), prosecute, defend, or appeal any civil or criminal action in the name of the Commission for the putpose of enforcing the provisions of this Act and of sections 602,'608, 610, 611, 612, 613, 614, 815, 616, 617, and 618 of title 16, United States Code, through lis General Counsel; ''(7) to delegate any of its functions or powers other than the power to issue subpenas under, paragraph (3), to any officer or employee of bhe Commission; and "(8) to make, amend, and repeal such rules, pursuant to the provisions of chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code, as are necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act. "(b) AnyUnited States district court withIn the Jurisdiction of which any inquiry is carried on, may, upon petition by the Cornmission, in (mss of refusal to obey a subpena or order of the Commission issued under subsection (a) of this section, issue an order requiring compliance therewith. Any failure to obey the order of the court may be punlshed by the court as a contempt thereof. "(c) No person shall be subject to civil liability to any person (other than the Cornmission or the United States) for disclosing information at the request of the Commission. "(d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Commission shall be the primary civil and criminal enforcement agency for violations of the provisions of this Act, and of sections 602, 608, 610, 611, 612, 613, 614, 815, 616, 617, and 618 of. title 18, United States Code. Any violation of any such provision shall be prosecuted by the .4.ttorney General or Department of Justice personnel only after consultation with, and with the consent of, the Commission. "(e) (1) Any person who violates any provision of this Act or of section 602, 608, 610, 611, 612, 613, 614, 615, 616, 617, or 618 of title 18, United States Code, may be assessed a civil penalty by the Commission under paragraph (2) of this subsection of not more than $10,000 for each such violation. Each occurrence of a violation of this Act and each day of noncompliance with a disclosure requirement of this title or an order of the Commission issued under this secticn shall constitute a separate offense. In determining the amount of the penalty the Commission shall consider the person's history of prev.ious violations, the appropriateness of such penalty to the financial resources of lhe person charged, the gravity of the violation, and the demonstrated good faith of the person charged in attempting to achieve rapid compliance after notification of a violation, "(2) A Civil penalty shall be l_sessed by 534 RE(ZORD -- SENATE the Commission by ord_,r only after th,s person, charged with a violation has been given an opportun.ty for a hearing and the Commission has , ietermined, by declsion incorporating Its findings of fact therein, that a violation did o,2cur, and the amount of the ]penalty. Y.ny ELearing under this .section shall be of r_cord and shall be held in accordance with caapter 5 of title 5, United[ States Code. "(3) II' the person aga.nst whom a civil penal_y is assessed fails t,) pay the penalty, the Commission shall file a petition for ehforeement of its order assessing the penalty In any appro!criate dist] ici court of tl?,,,_ United[ States. The petition shall designate the person agai:ast whom _he order is sought to be enforced as the res]_ondent. A copy ,Df the petition shall be sen_ by registered or certified mail to the respondent and his al; .... torney of record, and iht reup0n the Con:L.mission shall certify and file in such court the record upon which such order sought t;o be enforced was issued. Tie court shall havi) jurisdiction to enter a Ju:lgment erdorcing, modifying, and enforcing as sc, modified, or setting aside ir. whole or in p_rt the orde{ f and decision oil the Commission or it ma![ remand the proceedings to the Commlssio_l :for such further action as it miry direct..The court may determine de ncvo all. issues of law but tl_e Commission's findings cf fact, if sup.. ported by substantial etidenee, shall b,') conclusive, "(fi Upon application made by any individual holding Federal office, any candi.date, or any political con.mitt,_e, the Com.:mission, through its Gen(ral Counsel, shn. ll provide within a reasonable period of tints an advisory opinion, as to whether a specifi,c transaction or activity _nay constitute a 'flotation of any provision of tlhis Act or of any provision of title 18, EnttedL States Code, over which the Commis_;ion has primary jurisdiction under subsection (d). Ap'ri[ 11) 19 74 to fulnish that report to the Commission. Any report properly furnished to a central campaign committee under this subsection shall be, for purposes of this title, considered to have been furnished to the Commission at the time at which it was furnished to such central campaign committee. "(2], The Commission may, by rule, require any political committee receiving contributions or making expenditures in a State ork behalf of a candidate who, 'under subsection (a), llLaS designated a State campaign cornraittee for that State to furnish its re]ports to that State campaign committee instead of furnishing such reports to the central campaign comn%ittee of that candidate. "(3) The Commission may require any pol[tical committee to furnish any report dfrectly to the Commission. (d') Each political committee which is a central campaign committee or a State earnlc,sign committee shall receive, consolidate, and f_rnish all reports filed with or furnished to it by other political committees to the Commission, together with its own reports and statements, in accordance with the provision.,; of this title and regulations prescribed by the Commission. "CAMPAIGi_ DEPOSITORIES "SEc. 311. (a) (1) Each candidate shall deslgnate one or more National or State banks as his campaign depositories. The central campaign committee of that candidate, and any other political committee authorized by him to receive contributions or to make expenditures on his behalf, shall maintain a checking account at a depository designated by the candidate and shall deposit any contribut:/ons received by that committee into tlhat account. A candidate shall deposit any payment received by him under section 506 of this Act in the account maintained by his central campaign committee. No expendlture may be made by any such committee on behalf of a candidate or to influence his "CENTRAL OA1VIPAIGN I'.OMMITTEES election except by check drawn on that ac"SEc. 310. (al Each candidate shall det!;.count, other than petty cash expenditures ignate one political committee as his central as provided in subsection (bi. · campaign corrmfittec. A ct.ndidate for nora .... (2) The treasurer of each political cornination for election, or for election, to th_ mitres (other than a political committee office of President, may also designate one _uthorlzed by a candidate to receive contripolitical committee in ea(h State in which buttons or to make expenditures on his be_ae is a candidate as his State campaign com.. half) shall designate one or more National n_ittee for that State. The designation shall or State banks as campaign depositories of be made in writing, and _ copy of the de';,, tlhat committee, and shall maintain a checklgnation, together with such information _; lng account for the committee at each such the C cmmission may reqr_ire, shall be fur,. deposlVOry. Ail contributions received by that nished to the Commission upon the designs., c._nxml.ttee shall be deposited in such an action of any such committee, count. No expenditure may be made by that "(b) No political comm:ttee may be de,q_committee except by check drawn on that ignatcd as the central caIapaign committee account, other than petty cash expenditures of more than cue candida,re, except that a as provided in subsection (b). political committee described in sectio:t._. "(b) A political committee may maintain 301(d) (2) may be designa:ed as the central a petty cash fund out of which it may make campaign committee of more than one expenditures not in excess of $100 to any candidate for purposes of the general elec-, person in connection with a single purchase tion campaign and if so designated, it shaH. o:c transaction. A record of petty cash discomply with all reporting _md other require-, bnrsements shall be kept in accordance with ments of law as to each candidate for whom requirements established by the Commission, it is so designa_:sd as ff ii were the centrs,1 and such statements and reports thereof shall cmmpaign comm.ittee for that candidale be furnished to the Commission as it may alone. The central campaign committee, and. require. each State campaign committee, designated "(c) A candidate for nomination for elecby a candidate nominated by a political rich, or for election, to the Office of Presiparty for election to the office of President dent may establish one such depository in shall be the central car_.paign committee, each State, which shall be considered by his and the State campaign _'ommittee of the State campaign committee for that State candidate nominated by ti.at party for elecu and any other political committee authortion to the office of Vice _resicient. izod by him to receive contributions or to "(c) (1) Any political committee authormake expenditures on his behalf in that izod by' a candidate to accept (×)ntributlons ;State, under regulations prescribed by the or make expenditures in connection with ht_; Commission, as his campaign depository. The campaign for nomination lot election_ or :for campaign depository of the candidate of a election, which is not a 2entrai campaign political party for election to the office of committee or a .State ear_palgn committee, Vice President shall be the campaign deshall furnish each report _equh'ed of it un-. pository designated by the candidate of that der section 304 (other than reports required party for election to the office of President.". tinder section 211(b)) to that; candidate's (b) (1) Section 5314 of title 5, United central campaign committ_,e at the time it States Code, is amended by' adding at the would, but for _his subse(tlon, be required end thereof the following new paragravh:- APril 11, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE "(60) Members (other than'the Comptroller General), Federal Election Commission (7)." (2) Section 5315 of such title is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new paragraphs: "(98) General Counsel, Federal Election Commission. ''(99) Executive Director, Federal Election Commission." (c) Until the appointment and qualification of all the members of the Fedef_aL Election Commission and its General Counsel and until the transfer provided for inthis subsection, the Comptroller General, the Secretary of the Senate, and the Clerk of the House of Representatives shall continue to carry out their responsibilities under title I and title III of the Federal Election Cam- hated by subsection (a) of this section) by-(A) striking out "him" in paragraph (1) and inserting in lieu thereof "it"; (B) striking out "btm" in paragraph (4) and inserting in lieu thereof "it"; and (C) striking out "he" each place it appears in paragraphs (7) and (9) and insertlng in lieu thereof "it"; (11) striking out "supervisory officer" in section 312(b) (as redesignated by subsection ia) of this subsection) and inserting in lieu thereof "Commission"; (12) amending subsection (c) of section 312 (as redesignated by subsection (a) of this section)by-(A) striking out "Comptroller General': eaoh place it appears therein and insertlng in lieu thereof "Commission" and strlk- paign Act of 1971 as such titles existed on the day before the date of enactment of this Act. Upon the appointment of all the merehers of the Commission and its General Counsel, the Comptroller General, the Secretary of the Senate, and the Clerk of the House of Representatives shall meet with the Commission and arrange for the transfer, within thirty days after the date on which all such members and the General Counsel are appointed, of all records, documents, memorandums, and other papers associated with carrying out their responsibilities under title I and title III of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971. (d) Title III of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 is amended by-- lng out "his" in the second sentence of such subsectio n and inserting in lieu thereof "its"; and (B) striking out the last sentence thereof; and (13) amending subsection (d) (1) of section 312 (as redesignated by subsection (a) of this section) by-(A) striking out "supervisory officer" each place it appears therein and inserting in lieu thereof "Commission"; (B) striking out "he" the first place it appears in the second sentence of such section and inserting in lieu thereof "it"; and (C) striking out "the Attorney General on behalf of the United States" and .inserting in lieu thereof "the Commission". INDEXING AND PUBLICATION OF REPORTS (1) amending section 301(g) (relating to definitions) to read as follows: "(g) 'Commission' means the Federal Electton Commission;"; (2) striking out "supervisory officer" in section 302(d) and inserting in lieu thereof "Commission"; (3) striking out section 302(f) (relating to organization of political committees); (4) amending section 303 (relating to registration of political committees; statements) by-(A) striking out "supervisory officer" each time it appears therein and inserting in lieu thereof "Commission"; and (B) striking out "he" in the second sentence of subsec/_ion (b) of such section (as redesignated by section 203(a) of this Act) and inserting in lieu thereof "it"; (5) amending section 304 (relating to reports by political committees and candidates) by-(A) striking out "appropriate supervisory officer" and "him" in the first sentence thereof and inserting in lieu thereof "Cornmission" and "it", respectively; and (B) striking out "supervisory officer" where it appears in the third sentence of subsection ia) (1) (as redesignated by sectlon 204(a)(1) of this Act) and in paragraphs (12) and (14) (as redeslgnated by section 204(d) (2) of this Act) of subsection lb) and inserting in lieu thereof "Commission''; (6) striking out "supervisory officer" each place it appears in section 306 (relating to formal requirements respecting reports and statements) and inserting in lieu thereof "Commission"; (7) striking out "Comptroller General of the United States" and "he" in section 307 (relating to reports on convention financing) and inserting in lieu thereof "Federal Electlon Commission" and "it", respectively; (8) striking out "SUPERVISORY OFFICER" in the caption of section 312 (as redeslgnated by subsection (a) of this section) (relating to duties of the supervisory officer) and inserting in lieu thereof "COMMISSION"; (9) striking out "supervisory officer" in section 312(a) (as redeslgnated by subsection (a) of this section) the first time it appears and inserting in lieu thereof "Commission"; (10) amending section 312(a) (as redesig- SEC. 203. Section 312(a) (6) (as redesig nated by this Act) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (relating to duties of the supervisory officer) is amended to read as follows: "(6) to compile and maintain a cumulatire listingCommission all statementsduring andeachreports filed index with the cal- S 5859 551 of title 5, United States Code, by the Commission. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO STATES TO PRO_XOTE COMPLIANCJE SEC. 210. Section 309 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (relating to statements filed redesignated bysection with314 State of suchofficers) Act andis amended as (1) striking (a) out supervisoryin lieuofficer" subsection and "ainserting thereofin "the Commission"; (2) striking out "itl which an expenditure is made by him or on his behalf" in subsection (a)(1) and illsertinghe is ina candidate lieu thereof or the following: "in which in him which or substantial expenditures by on his behalf"; and are made (3) adding following to new subsection: "(c) There isthe authorized be appropriated to the Commission in each fiscal year the sum of $500,000, to be made available in such amounts as the Commission deems priate to for thewithpurpose sisting themthe inStates complying their as set forth in this section.". approof as.duties CONTRIBUTIONS IN THE NAME OF ANOTHER PE_SON SEC. 211. Section 310 of the Federal Election Campaign Act o:_ 1971 (relating to prohibition of contributions in name of another) Is redesignated as section 315 of such Act and amended by lrtserting after "another person", the first time it appears, the following: "or knowingly permit his name to he used to effect such a contribution". ROLE OF POLITICAL PARTY ORGANIZATION IN PRESIDENTIAL CA]YiPAIC,NS; USE OF EXCESS CAMPAIGN FUNDS; AUTHORIZATION PRIATIONS; PENALTIES OF APPRO- SEC. 212. Title III of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1.971 is amended by striklng out section and by adding at the end of such title the 311following new sections: endar year by political committees and ean_ didates which the Commission shall cause to be published in the Federal Register no less frequently than monthly during even-numbered years and quarterly in odd-numbered years and which shall be in such form and shall include such info_nation as may be prescribed by the Commission to permit easy identification of each statement, report, candidate, and committee listed, st least as to their names, the dates of the statements and reports, and the number of pages in each, and the Commission shall make copies of statements and reports listed in the index available for sale, direct or by mail, at a price determined by the Commission to be reasonable to the purchaser;", JUmCZAL REVIEW SEC. 209. Title III of the Federal Election CamPaign Act of 1971 is amended by insertlng after section 312 (as ,redesignated by this Act) the following new section: "JUDIC_L REVIEW '_APPROVAL OF PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN EXPENDITUBES BY N'ATIONAL COMMITTEE . "SEC. 316. (a) Nit expenditure in excess of $1,000 shall be made by or on behalf of a candidate who has received the nomination of his political party for President or Vice Prestalent unless such expenditure has been .specifically approved by the chairman or treasurer of that political party's national committee or the designated representative of that national committee in the State where the funds are to be expended. "SEC. 313. (a) An agency action by the Commission made under the provisions el this Act shsll be subject to review by the United States Court of Appeals for the Distrlct of Columbia Circuit upon petition filed in such court by an interested person. A petition filed pursuant to t]ais section shall be filed within thirty days after the agency action by the Commission for which review is sought, "(b) The Commission, the national cornmlttee of any political party, and individuals eligible to vote in an election for Federal office, are authorized to institute such actions, including actions for declaratory Judgment or injunctive relief, as may be appropriate to implement any provision of this Act. "(c) The provisions of chapter 7 of title 5, United States Code, apply to Judicial review of any agency action, as defined in section CERTAIN PURPOSES "SEC. 317. Amounts received by a candidate as contributions that are in excess of any amount necessary to defray his expenditures (after the application of section 507(b) (1) of this Act), and any other amounts contributed to an individual for the purpose of supporting his activities as a holder of Federal office, may.be used by that candidate or individual, as the case may be, to defray any 'ordinary and necessary expenses incurred by him in connection with his duties as a holder of Federal office, or may be contributed by him to any organization described in section 170(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954. To the extent any such contribution, amount contributed, or expenditure thereof is not otherwise required to be disclosed under the provisions of this title, such contribution, amount contributed, or expenditure shall be fully disclc_ed in accordance with rules pro- "(b) Each national committee approving expenditures under subsection (a) shall cornregister under section 303 as a rolitical mittee and rel_rt e_ch expenditure it approves as ff it had made that expenditure, together with the identification of the person seeking approval and making the expendlture. "(c) No political party shall have more than one national committee. "USE OF CONTRIBUTED AMOYffNTS FOR 535; S 5860 CONGRESSIONAL mulgated by the Commission. The Commission is authorized to promulgate such rules 'as may be necessary to carry out the prov_sions of this section. "SUSPENSION OF FRANK FOR MASS _AILINCS IiVI_IEDIATELY BEFORE EL_:CTION8 "SEc. 318. Notwithstanding any other pr_vision of law, no Senator, RepresentatiwL l%esident Commissioner, or Delegate shall tnake any mass mailing of a newsletter ¢,r mailing with a simplified form of addres_ under the frank under section 3210 of title 39, United States Code, during the sixty days immediately preceding the date on which ;any election is held in which he is a candidatc. _'PROttIBITION OF FRANKED SOLICITATIONS "SEC. 319. NO Senator, Representative, Resident Commissioner, or Delegate shall make any solicitation of funds by a inailing under the frank under section 321(I of title 39, United Ste, tes Code. "AUT]_IORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS "SEC. 3210. There are authorized to be appropriated to the Commission for the purpose of carrying out its functions under this title, title V, and under chapter 2!) of title 18, United States Code, not to exceed $5,000,000 for the fiscal year eliding June 30, 1974, and ' not to exr:eed $5,000,000 for each fiscal thereafter. ':PENALTY FOI'_ VIOLArlONS year "SEC',. 321. (a) Violation of any provision of this title ts a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $10,000, imprisonment for not moe than one year, or both. "(b) Violation of any provision of this title with knowledge or reason to know that the action committed or omitted is a violation of this title is punishable by a fine of not more than $100,000, imprisonment for not moro than five years, or both.", APPLICABLE STATE LAWS SEC.213. Section 403 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 is amended to read as follows: "EFFECT ON STATE LA%V "SEC. 403. The provisions of this Act, and of rules promulgated under this Act, preerr, pt any provision of State law with respect to campaigns for nomination for election, m' for election, to Federal office (a_ such term' is defined in section 301(c)).". EXPEDITIOUS REVIEW OF CONSTrrUTIONAL QUESTIONS SEC. 214. Title IV of the Federal[ Election Campaign Act of 1971 is amended by adding a5 the end thereof the following new section: "JUDICIAL REVIEW "SEC. 407. (a) The Federal Election Commission, the national committee of any politieal party, and individuals eligible to vote for President are authorized to ilxslt[tute such actions, including actions for declaratory. judgment or injunctive relief, as may be approprlate to Implement or construe any provision of 'this Act or of chapter 29 of title 18, United[ States Code. The district court shall immediately certify ali questions of constitutionality of this Act to the United States court of appeals for that circuit, which shall hear the matter sitting en banc. "(b) Notwithstanding any other provisio_ of law or rule any decision on a matter certifled under subsection (a) shall be reviewable by appeal directly to the Supreme Court of the United States: Such appeal must be brought within twenty days of the court of appeals decision, "(c) It shall be the duty of the court of appeals and of the Supreme Court of the United States to advance on the docket ami to expedite to the greatest possible extent the disposition of any question certified under subsection (a) ." 536 RECORD-- SENATE April 11, 1974 TIq:7_,E III---C_RIMES I_IILATING TO EL}i_TIONS AND POLITD_AL ACTIVITIES1 CH^NOES Ir_ ngFINrrIoIqs SEc..301. (a) Paragra!ch (a) of section 591 of title 18, United Stat,_s Code, is amendel by-'(1) inserting "or" beiore "(4)"; and (2) striking out ", an,! (5) the electiol> of delegates to s, constitut deal convention for proposing amendments to the Constitu'tioa of the United States." (b) Such section 591 :s amended by striklng out paragraph (d) LEd inserting in lie _ thereof the following: "(d) 'political commi;tce' means--"ii) any committee. _lub, association, or other group of persons whicla receives contributions or makes ex])enditures during _ calendar year in an aggregate amount !._xceedlng $1,00¢; "l 2) any national committee, as,seciation, or organization of a polilical party, any Stat_ affiliate or subsidiary of a national political party, and any State co_ mitt_e of a. polit:icai party: and "[3) any committee, :[ssociation, or erisanization engaged in the admi_nistration c,I a separate segregated funff described in s_.c _ tide 610;". (el Such section 591 i.' amended by-- work without compensation On behalf of a canctidate;". (e) Such section 591 is amended by striklng out "and" at the end of paragraph (g), striking out "States." In paragraph (h) and inserting in lieu thereof "States;", and. by adding at the end thereof the following new paragraphs: "(i) 'political party' means any associatidE. committee, or organization which nominates a candidate for election to any Federal office whose name appears on the elcctide ballot as the candidate of that association, committee, or organization; "(j) 'State committee' means the organlzation which, by virtue of the bylaws of a political party, is responsible for the day-reday operation of that political party at the State level, as determined by the Federal Elec_ ion Commission; and "(k) 'national committee' means the ergsnization which, by virtue o[ the bylaws of the political party, is responsible for the day-.to-day operation of that political party at the national level as determined by the Federal Election Commission under section 301(k) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971.". EXPE:!_IDITURE OF PERSONAL AND FAMILY FUNDS FOR FEDERAL CA1VI:PAIGNS (1) insertirg in paragraph (e) Ill) sill:e: "subscription" the follJwing: "(includ[n.t[ any assessment, fee, or membership dues.)"; (2) striking out in sue h paragraph "or i'd: the purpose of influencing the elect[on of delegates to a consistutiDnal convention I'e,: proposing amendments ;o the Constitution of the United States" a id inserting in lieu thereof the following: ':or for the purpose of financing any opera ;ions of a political committee, or :[or the purpose of paying, a; any time, any debt or obligation incurred by a candidate or a political committee irt conuection with any caIapaign for nomi:i_atide for election, or for election, to Federal office"; (3) striking ()ut subpa:'agraph (2) of para., graph (e), and amending subparagraph ',iii of such parag::aph to read as follows: "(q) funds received by a petit[cai commit.tee which arc transferred to that committec from another political ec.mmittee;"; _and (4} redesignating sub])aragraphs (4) and (5) of paragraph (e) as paragraphs (3) and (4), respectively. (d) Such section 591 i_ amended by sir[k., lng (>ut paragraph (f) sad inserting in lieu thereof the following: "(f) 'expenditure' mesns-"ii.) a purchase, patment,, distributi,'m, loan (except a loan of money by a Natio:c[a[ or State bank made in _,ceordance with i.b_c app!icable bar.king laws :md regulations, and iix the ordin:_ry course of business), ad.. vance, deposit, or gift of money or anyth:ing o_ value,,made for the purpose of-"(A) influencing the I.ominatio_n for else., tidE, or the election, of sly person to Federal office, or to th{_ office of Pi esidential and Vice.. Presidential elector; "(B) influencing the :e§ult of a primary election held for the selection of delegar.es to a national nomlnaticxg convention of a political party for the expres:slon of a pref.. erence for the nomination of persons f.ol! elections to the Office o: Pre.,;ident; "(C) financing any op*ratlons of apoli, ticommittee; or "(D) paying, at any ti_ae, any debt or obliigat[on incurre¢i by a ca_dldate or a politl., cal committee in connection with any carn- SEC. 302. (a) (1) Subsection (a) (1) of sectidE, 608 of title 18, United States Code, is amelided to read as follows: "(t,_) (1) No candidate may make expenditure.,_ from his personal funds, or the personal funds of his immediate family, In connection with his campaigns'for nomination for elec _ tidE, and for election, to Federal office in exee.,;s, in the aggregate during any calendar year, of-"(A) $50,000, in the case of a candidate for the office of President or Vice President; "(B) $35,000, in the case of a candidate for the office of Senator; or "(C) $25,000, in the case of a candidate for the ,:>fliesof Representative, or Delegate or ttesident Commissioner t 9 the Congress.". (2) Subsection (a) of such section is ameL, ded by adding at the end thereof the following new paragraphs: "(3} No candidate or his immediate family may make loans or advances from their persons[! funds in connection 'with his campaign for Item[nation for election, or election, to Federal office unless such loan or advance is evidenced by a written instrument fully disclosing the terms and conditions of such l(_an or advance. "(_) For purposes of this subsection, any such loan or advance shall be included, in com]puting the total amount of such expenditures only to the extent of the balance of sneh loan or advance outstanding :and unpaid." (b) . Subsection (c) of such section is ame_rded by striking out "$1,000" and insetting in lieu thereof "$25,000", and by striking out "one year" and inserting in lieu thereof "five years". (e} (1) The caption of such section 608 is ameL, ded by adding at tile end thereof the following: "out of the candidates' personal and family funds". (2) The table of sections for chapter 29 of _ible 18, United States Code, is amended by striking out the Item relating to section 608 and inserting in lieu tlhereof the folh)wlng: "608. Limitations on contributions and expenditures out of candidates' [_rsonal and family funds.". paign for nomination for tion, to Federal office; and "(2) the transfer of t cominlttee to another [ but "(3) does not include rendered by indlvlduais (d) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 608 of title 18, United States Code, it shall not be unlawful for any individual who, as of the date of enactment of this Act, has outstanding any debt or obligation incurr_l on his behalf by any political commlttee in connection with his campaign prior cal elect[on, or for elec.. unds by a polit[c_, olitical committee; the value of servi_ who volunteer t(_ April 11, 21974 CONGRESSIONAL _o January 1, 1972, for nomination for eleetlon, and for election, to Federal office, to satisfy or discharge any such debt or obligation out of his own personal funds or the personal funds of his immediate family (as such term is defined in such section 608). SEPARATESEGREGATEDi_UlffD MAINTENANCE B3r GOVERNMENTCONTRACTORS SEC. 303. Section 611 of title 16, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new paragraph: "It is not a violation of the provisions of this section for a corporation or a labor organizatlon to establish, administer, or solicit contributions to a separate segregated fund to be utilized for political purposes by that corporation or labor organization ff the establishment and administration of, and solicltation of contributions to, such fund are not a violation of section 610.". LIMITATIONS ON POLITICAL CONTRXBUTXONS AND EXPENDITURES; R1VLBEZZLEI_tENT OR COI_VERslo_T OF CAI_PAXGI_T FUNDS; EARLY DISCLOSURE OF PRESn)ENTXALELECTXO_TRESULTS SEC. 304. (a) Chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new sections: '§ 614. Limitation on expenditures generally '(a) (1) No candidate may make expendltures in connection with his campaign for nomination for election, or for election, to Federal office in excess of the amount to which he would be limited under section 504 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 if he were receiving payments under the title V of that Act. _(2) Expenditures made on behalf of any candidate are, for the purposes of this seclion, considered to be made by such candidate. _(3) Expenditures made by or on behalf of any candidate for the office of Vice President of the United States are, for the purposes of this Section, considered to be made by the candidate for the office of President of the United States with whom he is running, _(4) For purposes of this subsection, an expenditure is made on behalf of a candidate, including a Vlce Presidential candldate, ff it is made by-_(A) an authorized committee or any other agent of the candidate for the purposes of making any expenditure, or "(B) any person authorized or requested by the candidate, an authorized committee of the candidate, or an agent of the candidate to make the expenditure, "(5) The Federal Election Commission shall prescribe regulations nnder which any expenditure by a candidate for Presidential nomination for use in two or more States shall be attributed to such candidate's expenditure limitation in each such State, based on the voting age population in such State which can reasonably be expected to be influenced by such expenditure, "(b) (1) Notwithstanding any other provisions of law with respect to limitations on expenditures or limitations on contributions, the national committee of a political party and a State committee of a political party, including any subordinate committees of a State committee, may make expenditures in connection with the general election campaign of candidates for Federal omce, subJect to the limitations contained in paragraphs (2) and (3) hereof, "(2) The national committee of a polttical party may not make any expenditure in connection with the general election who cam-is paign of any candidate for President affiliated with that party which exceeds an amount equal to 2 cents multiplied by the voting population of the United States. "(3) The national committee of a political party, or a State committee of a political party, including any subordinate committees of a State committee, may not make expenditure in connection with the general RECORD-- SENATE S 5861 election campaign of a candidate for Federal office in a State who is affiliated with that party which exceeds-"(A) in the case of a candidate for election to the office of Senator, or of Representative from a State where a Representative is required to run statewlde, the greater of-"(i) 2 cents multiplied by the voting age population of that State, or "(ii) $20,000; and _(B) in the case of a candidate for election to the office of Representative in any other State, $10,000. "(4) For purposes of this subsection-- that individual for that campaign exceeds $3,000, or from any person (other than an individual) which, when added to the sum of all other contrl_autions a_ocived from that person for that campaign, exceeds $6,000. #(2) (A) No candidate may knowingly solicit or accept a contribution for his campalgn_ "(1) from a foreign national, or _(ti) which is made in violation of section. 613 of this title. _(B) For purposes of this paragraph, the term 'foreign national' means-_(1) a 'foreign principal' as that term is "(A) voting the term 'voting age certified population'for means age population the year under section 504(g) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971; and "(B) the approval by the national cornmittee of a political party of an expenditure by or one behalf of the presidential candidate Of that party as required by section 316 of that Act is not considered an expenditure by that national committee. "(C) (1) NO person may make any expenditure (other than an expenditure made on behalf of a candidate under the provisions of subsection (a) (4) advocating the defined Registration in section 611(b) of the Foreign Agents Act of 1038, as amended, other than a person who is a citizen of tho United States; or "(tt) an individual who is not a citizen of the United States and who is not lawfully admitted for permanent :residence, as deflnedl in section 101(a) (20) of the Immigration and Nationality Act". "(3) No officer or employee of a political committee or of a political party may know-. ingly accept any contribution made for the benefit or use of a candidate which that candidate could not accept under paragraph durlngelecti°n didate or defeats calendar°f a clearlyyearidentifiedwhich, whenCan' (1),(c)Or ((_)'For purposes of the limitations added to all other expenditures made by contained in this sc_ction all contributions that person during the year advocating the m_de by any person directly or indirectly to election or defeat of that candidate, exceeds or for the benefit of a particular candidate, $1,000. including contributions which are in anyway "(2) For the purposes of paragraph (1)_ earmarked, encumbered, or otherwise df"(A) 'clearly identified' means-rected through an intermediary or conduit to "(t) the candidate's name appears; that candidate, shall be treated as contrlbu"(ii) a photograph or drawing of the lions from that person to that candidate. candidate appears; or ' '(2) Contributions made to, or for the "(iii) the Identity of the candidate is apbenefit of, a candidate nominated by apollt.. parent by unambiguous reference; lcal party for election to the office of Vice "(B) 'person' does not include the naPresident shall be 'considered, for purposes tional or State committee of a political of this section, to be made to, or for the bene.party; and fit of, the candidate nominated by that party "(C) 'e_penditure' does not include any for election to the office of President. payment made or incurred by a corporation ',(3) For purposes of this section, the term or a laff0or organization which, under the 'campaign' includes all primary, primary run.. provisions of the last paragraph of section off, and general election campaigns related 610 would not constitute an expenditure by to a specific general election, and all primary, that corporation or labor organlzatAon, primary runoff, and special election cam."(3) This s_bsection docs not ap_ly to the palgns related to a specific special election. Democratic or Republican Senatorial Campalgn Committee, the Democratic National Congressional Comaulttee, or the National "(d) (1) No individual may make a con.. trlbution during any calendar year which, when added to the sum of all other contrlbu- Republican Committee. or will"(d) Any Congressional person who knowingly fully violates the provisions of thls section, other than subsection (a) (5), shall be punlshable by a fine of $25,000, imprisonment for a period of not more than five years, or both. If any candidate is convicted of violating the provisions of this section because of any expenditure made on his be:half (as determined under s_bsection (a) (4)) by a political committee, the treasurer of that cornmlttee, or any other person authorizing such expenditute, shall be punishable by a fine of not to exceed $25,000, imprisonment for not to exceed five years, or _0oth, i,f such person knew, or had reason to know, that such ex_aenditure was in excess of the limitation _pplie_able to such candidate under this section. lions made by$25,000. that individual during tha_ year, exceeds "(2) Any contribution .made for a campaign in a year, other than the calendar year in which the election is held to which that campaign relates, is, for purposes of para_ graph (1), considered to be _nade during the calendar year in which_that election is held. "(e) This section does not apply to con.. tributions made by the Democratic or Re_ publican Senatorial Campaign Committee, the Democratic National Congressional Com.. mtttee, or the National Republican Centressional Committee. "(f) Violation of the provisions of this section is punishable by a fine of not to exceed $25,000, imprisonment for not to ex.. teed five years, or both. "§ 616. Perm of contTlbutions _§ 615. Limitations on contributions "(a) (1) No individual may make a contrlbutton to, or for the benefit of, a candidate for that candidate's c_mpalgn for election, whioh, when added to the sum of all other contributions made by that individual for that campaign, exceeds $3,000. No person may make a contribution to, or for the benefit of, any candidate or political committee in excess, in the aggregate during any calendar year, of $100 unless such con-. trlbution is made by a written instrument identifying the person making the contrlbu.. tion. Violation of the provisions of this section is punishable by a fine of not to exceed $1,000, imprisonment for not to exceed one "(2)make No person (ot_er _han may a contri,bution to, oranforindividual) the bensfit of, a efindidate for nomination for election, or election, which, when added to the sum of all other contributions made by that p_rson for that campaign, exceeds $6,000. "(b) (1) No candidate may knowingly accept a contribution for his campaign from any individual which, when added to _he sum of all other contributions recelved fro_a year, or both. "§ 617. Embezzlement or conversion of po-. litical contributions agent of a political "(a) No candidate, officer, employee, or agent of a political conmdttee, or person actlng on behalf of any candidate or political commltte_ shall embe_le_ knowingly con- 537 S 5862 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE April 11, 19 74 vert to his own use or the use of another, or deposit in any place or in any manner except as authorized by law, any contributions or campaign funds entrusted to him or under his possession, custody, ar control, or use any campaign funds to pay or defray tt_e costs of attorney fees for the defense of any person "618. "619, Voting fraud, Early disclosure oF election results i_ Presidential elco;ion years, "620. Fraudulent misre!cresecLtation of c_tmpaign au_hc¢ity '. REPEAL OF ClkRTAll_ EXCEPTIONS TO CONTR]B_YTION AiND EXPENDr_URE LI1VirrATIONt_ pur(_hase or sale of his pe]monal residence, of real property or any interest therein by him, or by him and his spouse Jointly, or by any person acting on his behalf or pursuant to his ,direction, during the preceding calendar year ff the value of property involved in such pUl'C, hase or sale exceeds $1,000. or perso_ charged with the a crime; or receive, conceal, same with intent to convert SEc, United Cb) l%eports required by this section (other thax_ reports so required by candidates for :'._omination for or election to Federal ofrice) shall be filed not later than May 15 of each year. A person who ceases, prior to such date in any year, to occupy the office or posimon the occupancy of which imposes upon him the reporting requiJ_ements contained in subsection (al shall file such report on the last day he occupies .'tach office or posltlon, or on such later date, not more than three months after such last day, as the Commission may prescribe. Cc) Reports required by this section shall be in such form and detail as the Commission may prescribe. The Commission may provide for the grouping of items of income, sources of income, assets, liabilities, dealings in securities or commodities, and purchases and sales of real property, when separate itemization is not feasible or is not necessary for an accurate disclosure of the income, net worth, dealing in securities and com:Lnedities, or purchases and sales of real property of any individual. Cd) Any person who willfully fails to file a report required by this section or who know- cormnisslon or retain it to his of the per- sonal use or gain, knowing it to have been embezzled or converted. ' "Cb) Violation of the provisions of this seetion is punishable by a fine of not more than $25,000, imprisonment'for not more than ten years, or both; but if the value of such property does not exceed the sum of' $100 fine, the fine shall not exceed $1,000 and the iraprisonment shall not exceed one year. Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, any surplus or unexpended campaign funds may be contributed to a national or State political party for political purposes, or to educational or charitable organizations, or may be preserved for use in future campaigns for electiw_ office, or for any other lawful purpose. "§ 618. Voting fraud "(al Nc, person shall in a Federal elcolion"(1) ca,_t, or attempt to cast, a ballot in the name of another person, "(2) cast, or attempt to east, a ballot if he is not qualified to vote, "(3) forge or alter a ballot, "(4) miscount votes, "(5) tamper with a voting machine, or "(6) commit any act (or fail to do anything required of him by law), with the intent of causing an inaccurate count of lawfully cast votes in any election., "Cb) A violation of the provisions of subsection (al is punishable by a fine of not to exceed $1()0,000, imprisonment for not more than tenyears, orboth, 305. Section States Code 61_:(c)(3) (as _gldec[ of this (as addedAct), by and sectionsettlor304 of 'title by section 13, 304 615(e) title of tlais of Act)such (re]at- lng to the application of such sections to eeltain campaign committe m) are repealed. _'_ection 615 of title 18, Un!ted _tates Code ,(as added by seetion 304 of t his Act) , is amendel by striking out "(fl" and inserting in HeLl thereof "(el". TITLE IV--DISCLOSUt:E C,F FINANCIAL INTERESTS BY CER:?AIN FEDERAL OYFICERS AND EM'PLOZE/ES FEDERAL EMPLOYEE FINANCIAL DISCLOSUP. E REQUIREMENTS SEc. 40'1. (al, Any cand.date for nominatio:} for or electio:l to Feder _1 office who, at the time he becomes a candidate, does not occupy any such office, shall ill.; within one mox_.t;1 after' he becomes a candidate for such office, and each Member of C_ngress, each cribber and employee of the Urited States (includlng any member of a uniformed service) whJ is compensated, at a rat_ in excess of $25,003 per annum, any individual occupying the i:,osition of an o:T_cer or em ployee of the Uni!;e,l States who performs du_ les of the 'type ganerally performed by an individual oecupyin_ grade OS-16 of the Gem_ral _mhedule or an y higher grade or positior (as determined b7 the Federal Election Corn mission regardless of ingly and willfully files a false report under this section, shall be fined not more than $2,000, or imprisoned for not more than five year:;, or both. (el All reports filed under this section shall the rate of compensation of StLCh individual) ' the President, and the Vi,:e President shall file annually, with the Comrlissien a report c_.:ntainJng a full and coml,lete statement of-(]) the amount of e_.ch tax paid by !:h_ individual, or by the individual and the individual's spouse filing join_;ly, for the preceding calendar year, and far purposes of this "tax" meansand any State, paragra!c,h or local income t_x any Federal, Federa!, be n_aintalned the Commissio_ records, which, by under such reasonable as public rules s3 it shall prescribe, shall be available for inspection by members of tlle public. (fl, For the purposes of any report requiz'ed by this section, an individual is c_)nsidered to be President, Vice Preslderzt, a i%_enc_ber of Congress, an officer or employee of the United States, or a _nember of a unifern:Led service, during any calendar year if State, or local property t_x; (2) the amount and. _ource of each iten_ of income, each item el reimbursement for any expenditure, and each gift or aggregate he s_rves in any such position for more than si_ months during such calendar year. (gl 'As used in this section-(1) asThe term in"income" come defined section 61means of the gross Internalin- ment of Presidential electors, _rlor to midnight, easl_rn standard time, on the day on which such election is held shall be fin_! not more than $6,000, imprisoned for not more than one year, or both. "§ 620. Fraudulent misrepresentation of campaign authority "Whoew_r, being a candidate for Federal office, as defined herein, or an employee or agent of such a candidate-"(1) fraudulently misrepresents himseIf or any committee or organization under his control as speaking or writing or otherwise acting for or on behalf of any other candidate or political party or employee, or agent of gifts from one source (other than giRs received from his spouse! or any member of his immediate family) received by him or by him and his spouse jointly dnrlng t:h_ preceding calendar yea r which exceeds $103 in amount or value, irclud:mg any fee or other honorarium received by him for or ill connection wi.th the preparation or delivery of any speech or addres_, attendance at any convention or other assembly of individual.% or the preparation of _.ny article or otter composition for publican;ion, and the mouetary value ef subsiste _ce, entertainment, travel, and other facilities received by him in kind; ttevenue thereof on a matter which ls damaging to such _ther candidate or political party cc employee or agent thereof; or "(2) willfully and knowingly participates in or conspires to participate in any plan, scheme, or design to violate paragraph (al hereof, shall, for each such offense, be fined not more than $50,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both." Cb) Section 591 of title 18, Unlted States Code, is amended by striking out "and 611" and inserting in lieu thereof "911, 614, 615, 616, 617, 618, and 619". Cc) The table of sections for chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at _he end thereof the following new items: . "614. Limitation on expenditures generally, "615. Limitation on contributions, "616. Form of contributions, "617. Embezzlement or converskmof political contributions. (3) the identity of each asset held by b.i.r_, or by him and his spou_;e jointly 'which has a value in excess of $1,_00, a:ad the amc'nut of each liability owed b_ him or by him a:v_d his spouse jointly which is in excess of $1,c,0,l as of the close of the preceding calendar year; (4) any trsx_sactions in securities of an:_ business enti_;y by hlm or by him and hi_ spouse Jointly, or by any person acting on _i_ behalf or pursuant to his d:irectlon during the preceding calendar _eax if the aggregate amount involved in tra:_sactions in the securlties of such buslress entity exceed_ $1,000 during such year; (5) all tran,'actlons in ,;ommodltles by him, or by him and his spou,,e Jointly, or by _nv person acting on his beaalf or pu,'suant to his direction during the preceding calends: year if the e4'gregate _mount involved in such transactkms excee(_ $1,000; and (6) any purchase or ,,ale, other than 'the (6) The term "officer" has the same meanlng _s in section 2104 of title 5, United States Code. (7) The term "employe_" has tho s_rne meaning as in section 21ff5 of such title. (8) The term "uniformed service" means any Jf the Arrnec} Forces, the commissioned corp:; of the Public Health Service, or the commissioned corps of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (9) The term "immediate family" means the child, parent, grandparent, brothar, or sister of an individual, and the spouses of such persons. Ch) Section 554 of title 5, United States Code, is amen_led by adding at the end thereof t_Le following n_w subsection: "(r) All written communications and memorandums stating tt_e circumstances, source, and substance of all oral communications made to the agency', or any office or enaployee thereof, with respect to any ad- "§ 619. Early disclosure of election results in years information "Whoeverl:_'estdentialelection makes public any w4th respect to the number of votes cast for any candidate for election to the office of Presidential and Vice-Presidential elector in the general election held for the appoint- 535 Code of 1954. (2) The term "security" meatus security as defined in section 2 of the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77b). (3) The term "commodity" means cornmodify as defined in section 2 of the Comraoc_ty Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 2). (4) The term "transactions in securities or (x)mmodities" means any acquisition, holding, withholding, use, transfer, or other dispo_tion involving any security or cornmodLty. (5 The term "Member of Congress" means amissioner, Senator, aor Representatiw_, a Reaidex_t Coma Delegate. April 11, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL Judication which is subject to the provisions of this section by any person who is not an officer employee the agency be made aor part of the ofpublic record shall of such case. This subsection shall not apply to eommunications to any officer, employee, or agent of the agency engaged in the performance of investigative or prosecuting functions for the agency with respect to such case." (i) The first report required under this section shall be due thirty days after the date of enactment and shall be filed with the General ofofthethisUnited States, who Comptroller shall, for purposes subsection, have the powers and duties conferred upon RECORD--SENATE Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I ask a government democratic is not how unanimous consent that the Secretary much power the public officials have, but Of the Senate be authorized to make such rather how public officials secure and technical and clerical corrections in the retain their offices. Events Surrounding engrossment of the bill, S. 3044, including the last general election have been and changes in the designation of titles, secwill, no doubt, continue to be examined tions, and subsections and cross-referand investigated in an effort to deterences thereto, as may be necessary to remine the source of enormous amounts of fiect any changes in the bill made by campaign moneys. Coupled with these amendments adopted by the Senate. investigations are repeated cries for reThe PRESIDING OFFICER. Without -form, for changes in the law concerning Objection, it is so ordered, campaign financing. And surely some ,,, changes are in order. Mr. President, I do not think anyone ORDER TO PRINT S. 3044 AS PASSED can provide a simple answer to the quesMr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask tion, "Does money win elections?" It is unanimous consent that S. 3044, a bill to undeniable that money does play a major amend the Federal Election Campaign role in winning. It does not guarantee ACt of 197L be printed as passed, victory, but the amount of money colThe PRESIDING .OFFICER. Without lected and spent can in some cases be objection, it is so ordered, decisive. Money cannot totally 0bliterMr. CANNON. Mr. President, the Senate the influence of issues and candiate has demonstrated a genuine interest dates' party orientation on voting deci- the Commission by this section. TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS SXMULraN_OUSPOLL CLOSXNG T_Mr SEC. 501. On every national election day, commencing on the date of the national elections in 1976, the closing time of the polling places in the several States for the electior_ of electors for President and Vice President of the United States and the electien of United States Senators and Representatives shall be as follows: 11 postmeridian standard time in the eastern time in true election reform by the adoption zone; 10 postmerldian standard time in the of the Federal Election Campaign Act of central time zone; 9 postmeridian standard 1974. time in the mountain time _zOne; 8 postNot only has the Senate agreed to set meridian stand_rd time in the Pacific time reasonable limitations on contributions zOne; 7 postmerldian standard time in the by individuals and committees, but also Yukon time zone; 6 postmeridian standard strict limits on expenditures by canditime in the Alaska-Hawaii time zone; and 5 postmeridian standard time in the Bering dates in primary and general elections. time zone: Provided, That the polling places Further, the Senate has agreed to proin each of the States shall be open for at vide Federal funds in primary elections least twelve hours, on a matching grant basis and with full FEDERALELECTXON DAY funding in general elections, SEC.502. Section 6103(a) of title 5, United Candidates have the option under the States Code is amended by inserting bill S. 3044 to raise private funds for each between-election or to accept public funds in "Veterans Day, the fourth Monday in Oc- whole orinpart, tober." and the following new item: With a strong and independent Federal "Thanksgiving Day, the fourth Thursday Election Commission; with central camin November." the following new item: paign committees; with campaign de"ElectionDay, the first Wednesdaynext after the first 1Vfonday in November 1976, positories and timely and full disclosure and every second year thereafter.", of all receipts and expenditures, we have attempted to eliminate all weaknesses in REVIEWOF XNCOi_ETAX RETURNS the bill and the citizens of the United andSEc. every 503. year (a) On hereafter, or beforetheJulyComptroller 1 of each States will be encouraged to restore their General of the United States shall obtain confidence in the elective process, from the Internal Revenue Service all returns Mr. President, I wish to commend my of income filed by each Member of Congress, colleagues for their support in gaining each employee or official of the executive, passage of this bill. Judicial, and the legislative branch year whoseexceeds gross members And I wish to thankwithall the of Committhe staff income for most recent who worked $20,000 for the five previous years. Upon recelpt of such returns, the Comptroller General cf the United States shall submit such income returns to an intensive inspection and audit for the purpose of determining liability. (b) Upon completion of such inspection and audit, the Comptroller General of the United States shall prepare and file a report of the results' of his inspection and audit with the taxpayer and the appropriate officer of the concerned Internal Revenue Service for such further action with respect to such return as the Internal Revenue Service shall deem proper. The Comptroller General of the United States shall deliver a copy of such report and results of such audit and inspection to the taxpayer concerned, (c) the The Comptroller Internal Revenue Service shall asisst General of the United States as necessary in administering the provisions of this section, Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed, Mr. PASTORE. I move to lay that motion on the table, The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. S 5863 tee and the Senate final passage: in bringing about Jim Duffy, Joe O'Leary,on Rules and Jim Medill, of the Committee and Administration. Lloyd Ator and Bob Cassidy legislative counsel, Cary 'Parker of Senator KENNEDY'S staff, Burt Wides of Senator HART'S staff, Ken Davis, assistant to the minority leader, and many others who gave of their time and efforts, Mr. CHILES. Mr. President, I _;oted for final passage of S. 3044, the Federal election campaign financing bill. Although I was not completely satisfied with all of the features of this legislation I felt the time for change from the old way was due. We must move away from an atmosphere of influencing Government decisions affecting the daily lives of our citizens from the prices they pay to the quality of their lives, I believe that one of the crucial factors determining whether or not we consider sions, but it can and often does make a difference. NO longer should ambassadorships be given as a basis of huge campaign contributions nor should decisions for milk supports be swayed by political contributions. Some Americans view public policy-. making as a sordid process where the wealthy control elected officials. And while there is some corruption, I believe its reputation for moving the wheels of government is far greater than its per-. formance. But money can twist policy in subtle way.sr--andany effort we eanmake to erect a barrier between the direct translation of money into policy decisions must be made. After weeks of debate on this bill and amendments to it, I felt the Senate has made a close examination of the concept of specific proposals for public financing. While I wish the tax checkoff system would adequately provide funds for this approach, I am convinced that it Will not and I am now ready to vote for and approve the spending of other tax dollars to finance Presidential campaigns. Public financing of congressional elections needs additional consideration, however. It is my understanding that the feeling in the House of Representatives is such that little--ff any_public financlng of congressional elections will be accepted. For now, this may be just as well, for if I had to draft a public financing bill for congressional elections that would be fair and workable, I am not sure that I could. However, I did support an effort by Senator STEVENSON to allow a partial funding of congressional elections without going the entire way. The purpose of public financing is to eliminate the large and potentially corrupting contributions of big money from our politics. This amendment would have accomplished that purpose but it would not have eliminated the innocent, small contributions which are a healthy form of participation in our political system. This amendment would have limited the campaign contributions of individuals to Federal campaigns to $3,000 in primaries and $3,000 in general election campaigns. In that l_spect, it did not 539 S 5864 CONGRESSIONAL alter the ]provisions of the bill reported by the Rules Committee. · It would also have limited the contributtons oil committees to $6,000, which could be allocated between a general election c:_npaign and a primary election campaign as the committee sees fit. It established a system of partial public financing as opposed to the 10O percent public financing which is established in the bill reported by the Rules Committee. Instead of 100-percent, public financing, congressional candidates would have received a front-end subsidy 25 percent of the expenditure limit applicable to congressional campaigns. In addition, private contributions of $100 or less would have been matched with public funds on a dollar-for-dollar basis. When I was thinking about running for the Senate, I discovered I was not going tobe able to raise a large war chest to finance, my campaign. So, I had to run a different kind of campaign that was less expensive than the conventional way. During my walk through Florida, I talked with thousands of people who were encouraged by this kind of campalgn; one of the primary reasons was that campaign was not costing huge sums my of money. In sum, I voted for this bill even though it contained the large funding for congressional elections because I believe the public funding concept is vitally important. Even though I am not satisfied with the congressional funding provisions, I feel this legislation should be sent to the House for their consideration. To vote against this legislation would be a signal that I am against public funding of Presidential elections. I feel this part of the legislation is absolutely necessary and vital. I hope that the House will favorably consider plans for public funding of Presidential elections and begin some efforts toward public funding on congressional races so at least we may have a plan in this. area to move with. TRIBUTE TO SENATORS ON PASSAGE OF CAMPAIGN REFORM Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I Wish to pay well-deserved tribute to the: many Senators who were responsible for this magnificent achievement--one of the most significant reform proposals that In my judgment has passed the Senate. What, it says fundamentally is that public officials will answer first and last to the public and not to this or that speeial inter_,_t group. It is an essential step that must be taken to restore public faith and confidence in the institutions of Government. ! am proud, indeed, of the Senate's great _,_itiative on this issue, Senator' CA_ON, the distinguished chairman of ti e Committee on Rules deserves the ht,,nest commendation for his leadership _nd devotion. So, too, does Senator COOK. They joined in cooperatire __ort_ to handle this most important prol_)sal and they assumed the task _qith the b_-eatest skill and ability, The Senator from California (Mr_ CEa_S_ON) deserves praise for his many 540 RECORD -- SENATE April 11, 19 74 outstanding efforts to sssure this Success His work in behalf of public election reform indeed was in lispensable. The same may be said of tlle efforts of Senator KENNEdZ, Senator PrLL, and the many others whose ildtitiative started this process some time _,go. I was particularly impres:sed with the leadership of the able ]_epublican leader (Mr. HUGH SCOTT) witLout whose efforts a measure as effective as this could not have been ]_ossible. &nd to Senator BROCK, Senator CLARK, Senator STEVE_r_ SON, Senator BAKES, Senator ALLEN, a_d the many others who joined with statements, With amendmen _s, and with viewpoints, we are especi_fily indebted l'or providing a debate Gad discussion of the highest c,rder, All in all, '_he Senat _ may take great pride in this achievement. Mr. KENNF. DY. M:-. President, the final passage, achieve d today, of the legislation fo]'campaigl_ reform and public financing of elections is one of the finest hours of the Senate i:a this or a:ny other Congress. Most, if not ail, of the things that are wrong with governmen; today have their roots in the way we _nance campaigns for public off(ce. The c3rro,,dve influence of private money in pu])lic life is the ptimary cause of the lack of responsiveness of government to the people Now, through public financing, we csq.n change all that. Once public financing is signed into l_tw, it will begin to have 'an immensely sEfiutary effect on every djmension of governmen ;, as it sends ripples through ,_veryissu_ with which Congross and the administration have 1;o deal. At least, the stranglehold of wealthy this body who worked so hard in this important area. As one who has been interested in this issue for some time, I wish to express great admiration for the work done by the raanager of the bill, the distinguished Senator from Nevada (Mr. CANNON) and ibis able staff. He has been on the floor continuously these past 3 weeks, avail:able for discussion and debate on the extremely complex and difficult issues posed in this legislation. I think he has (/one a brilliant job. All the members of the Committee on Rules and Adinlnistra_ion are to be commended, and the ,staff is also to be commended for their extraordinary efforts. I also praise the especially important role played by the Senate leadership. The distinguished majority leader (Mr. MAN,';FZELD),the distinguished Republican :ieader (Mr. HUGH SCOTT), and th_ distinguished Democratic whip (Mr. I_OBEI_TC. BYRD) were the keys to the successful struggle for cloture this week. 'Without their effort, We could not have 'won today. We could not have obtained cloture or been successful in passing this ]egis]orion if we had not had the very strong leadership that the three of them provided; not only in rounding up the votes;, but also in presenting to our colleagues the significance and importance of action by the Senate at the present time. Their contributions were immense, and a,ll of us are in their debt. M_ny other Senators also played a key role. The Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. PELL) was chairman of the subcommittee that held extensive hearings on this issue, hearings that laid a solid foundation our present action, and ihe should beforcommended. campaign contributors and special interest groups on the election process will be broken, and democracy' will[ be the winnor. Only when ali rice people pay for elections will all the people be truly represented by their Oovelnment. No one believes that l)ublic financing is a panacea for America's every social ill What we do believe is that it is the notion's preeminent reform, the reforz_ that must lead all the rest ff we are seriGUS about bringing i.ltegvity back to government ired giving fair, honest, arid clean elections to the t_eople. Long before Watergste, we knew about, the problem. Now, becsuse of Watergate, we have gained the strength to solve i,t By voting for public :_narLcing, we are telling the l_!ation ths t the day of the dollar in public financing is over, that elective office is no longer for sale to the highest private bidder. Rarely has the Senate sent so clear s message to every citiz,m. I praise M_K_: MANSFIELD, HUGH Sco _T, t_OBERT BYRD. HOWAR_ CANNON,ALANCRANSTON,and e_l] the other Senators axed public interest groups, especiany Con,non Cause and the Center fo,r Public Yinancing, who did so much to bring this legislation to the, Senate floor, to win th,; fight for cloture, and to make this victory possible. Finally, M:.'. Preside_t, I do not think we should close this pa._'ticular chapter of the campaign financing effort of the Senate without recogzdtion of the special contributions by _aany Members of When we consider public financing, we have 'to recognize as well that this legislation really builds on the genius of the distinguished Senator from Loui.'_iana (Mr. LONG), who initially pre,sent_:d the $1 checkoff for Presidential elections in 1966 and who helped to lead the successful effort to cement the checkoff into law in 1971. Many of the most imPortant aspects of this legislation build on the work of Senator LONG, the chairman of the Committee on Finance. Another very important part of the debate was the distinguished senior Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. PASTORE), who also helped to lead the effort for the enactment of the $1 checkoff meGsure :in 1971, and who has always been such an eloquent sPokesman for campaig_._ reform. Then when we consider the history of the present movement, I would single out the Senator from Michigan (Mr. HAaT) for special praise. He was the first Senator to introduce legislation for comprehensive public financing of all Federal elections, primaries as well as general elections. In a very real sense, he started the ball rolling in this Congress, and he never let the momenttun fade. Senator ALAN CRANSTONof California, was tireless in his efforts, not only in preparing the legislation itself, but also in rounding up the votes. Although the latter work is not a role which is generally acclaimed or understood outside Apr_ 11, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD m SENATE the Hans of Congress, no one here is unaware of his effective work on the Senate floor. I doubt that we could have won today without his careful and successful daily attention to the bill. Senators MONDALE and SCHWEIKER were also real leaders in developing the coficept of public financing, especially the concept of matching grants for primaries. Their early efforts led to a strengthening of the proposals for this legislation, and a new awareness that it would be possible to include primary elections in the bill for public financing, Senator CLARK of Iowa was another pillar of the Senate effort, both in the early stages of the legislation and in the floor debate, and I congratulate him on the leadership:he has displayed. Senator MATHL_Sand F,enator STAFFORD also worked closely in these early efforts, and were particularly instrumental in giving this bill the broad bipartisan support it had to have if final passage was to be achieved, Finally, the Senator from Illinois (Mr. STEVENSON)Was very active in the whole debate and discussions. There were points on which we disagreed, but he has been an outstanding pioneer in bringing this issue to the attention of the Senate and the People, and there was no fundamental disagreement on the importance of public financing of political campaigns. Finally, I would like to commend the public interest groups, led by Common Cause and the Center for Public Financing of Elections. I do not think the public interest has ever been better served than by the joint efforts of those in and out of Congress with whom they worked, These two groups, and others with whom they, worked were extreme- Mr. CRANSTON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?· Mr. KENNEDY. I yield, Mr. CRANSTON. I want to echo and endorse the praise the Senat °r from Massachusetts has given to Senator Cannon, the leadership, and many others who have worked so hard on this messure, which is fully as important as the Senator from Massachusetts has stated, I thank the Senator for his kind Words on my behalf, I want to add that if we had not had the imaginative and successful and bold efforts of the Senator from Massaehusetts, we would not have achieved the resuit that has been achieved in recent days and on the floor of the Senate today. The Senator from Massachusetts initially, in joining with the Senator from Pennsylvania, provided the impetus which gave great strength to this effort, At every point when his strength was required, the Senator from Massachusetts moved into it swiftly, wherever it was necessary and effectively, and with great imagination, and we all owe him a great debt of gratitude, ly successful in making these issues plain and clear to the Members of hopeful this bodythat and they to thewillcountry, be as successful and I am with the House of RepresentativeS. I think the action that has been taken by the Senate shows the American people that the Senate can act, and that it can act effectively in the important and sensitive area of election reform. I think we have demonstrated quite clearly that the Senate is'aroused by the crisis over Watergate, and that we have responded in the most effective legislative way we could in assuring that future elections of Members of the Senate and the House and for the Presidency will be free of the corrosive and corruptive power of large campaign contributions, I think this is really one of the finest efforts for reform I have ever seen in this body. Public financing of elections will rank with the great reforms of the politicai process in our history, a milestone of which every Member of this body should be proud, I think the American people can be reassured that the Senate is alive and well in Washington, and that in what we achieved today, we acted in the best interests of all the people of this Nation. Public financing can be one of democracY's finest hourS, and I hope that the issue will do as well as it navigates its difficult course through the House of Representatives and to the President for his signature. Will be stated by title. ! The second assistanl legislative clerk read as follows: ! A bill (S. 3292) to authorize appropriations to the Atomic Energy Coramission in accordance with section 261 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, md for other purposes, _ _ AUTHORIZATION C _ APPROPRIATIONS TO THE A :OMIC ENERGY COMMISSION Mr. MANSFIELD. 1M:. President, I ask unanimous consent th: ; the Senate proceed to the considers ion of Calendar Order No. 745, S. 3292, bill to authorize appropriations to the Atomic Energy Commission. It is my u: derstanding that this measure will not ta :elong, that there is agreement, and it i} not anticipated there will be a rollcall v_te. The PRESIDING O]rFICER. The bill The Senate proceede to consider the bill. Mr. PASTORE. Mr. ! 'esident, the bill now under consideratic x, S. 3292, would authorize appropriation totaling $3,676,833,000 for both "ope atlng expenses" and "plant and capita equipment" for the coming year. Tha amount is approximately 2 percent more than the amount requested by Jae Commission. Approximately 42 perc at of the Cornmission's fiscal year 19_ i estimated program costs will be for i allitary applications and the balan :e for civilian applications. Last year the portion for the military program w m about 46 percent. This indicates a o ntinued shift of the fraction of work aw _y from military programs. The propom _ authorization also emphasizes energy ] ,. & D. programs, The energy R. & D. prot rams in this authorization bill are 32 percent greater than last year. The civi ian applications Portion includes $132.2 nillion in opersting costs for the hig] energy physics program for which the ,_ _.Cacts as principal funding agent for t]e entire Federal Government. S 5865 oP_Arfi a _-_s Turning to the biI it_self, the individual sections are explain d in the section-bysection analysis beg nning at page 46 of the committee repo 4. verY briefly, section 101(a) would a ithorlze $2,551,533,000 for operating exl enses and this total figure consists of th, programs listed in the table on page 3 _ f the committee report with a detail_ discussion of each portio n thereof beg at page 7 of the committee repor You will note from the table on page 3 the committee has recommended adjustments to the AEC's :authorization, the net total of is an increase of $82,110,000. I would like to some of the significant areas by the com-. mittee's Recognizing the Nation's need : amounts of clean energy, committee recom-. mended an increase of $9.2 million for the light water reactors, $8.9 million for energy programs and $9 million for fusion en.. ergy research. We have also recommended an increase of $12.7 million in the Commission's and regula-. tory program to pe r a reduction in the licensing ·time powerplants. The committee is recommending a $15 million in the nuclear weapons program, the increase is only about 1 V2 zbove the Com-. mission's request, it for a very critical area in our weapons program which is the testing program. We have looked into this very carefully and found that if this work is not strengthened, there a high probability that our nuclear apons technology would be frozen. CONSTRUCTII With regard to plant and capital equipment portion the budget, con-. tained in section 10: (b) of the bill, a total of $1,125,300,00 is recommended which is a reduction $5,550,000 from the amount by the AEC. The bill authorizes $273,3( ),000 for new con-. struction projects, $2_ D00 for capi-. tal equipment not ated to construc.. tion, and a :)0 increase in au-. thorization for authorized projects. The major recommended in this area are a $26.9 Ilion reduction for two reactor develc facilities and an increase of $7.1 for improving Sections 102, 103, 106 of the bill set forth certain regarding the application of funds authorized by this bill. These similar to provi-. sions incorporated tion acts. Sections 104 105 authorize the Commission to certain re-. ceipts and to operating funds to other Federal for the per-. formance of ,, of work. These sections were included in appropriations acts. Section 107 required legislation concerning the highest priorit_ which is the liquid fast breeder program. This section concerns indemnification and of the first LMFBR plant which is 541 S 5866 COlS_GRESSIONAL RE CORD -- SENATE a cooperative These are The Joint bill provides for tion necessary level the essential ties of the out without Senate members Mr. President sent that a which section 101, and pages 47, 48, 49, on page 51, page 51 with rather than the RECORD. There being no was ordered to be as follows: Section 101 of the proj- at the :)roJects under this lated, s s in previous year;_, the propo_,_ed bills suband other backgroul:_d fur:nished by t:he of the AEC au.not intended to preve_.t charLges which are or de,_lrab]e by the Colxl.the scope and put- the anal in the RECORn It is intended authorization _e r to the analysh_ mitted by the and explanatory Commission in thorizatlon bill. It technical and considered mission pose of the Pursuant to prlations are ment not amount of $208,81 necessary to equipment at equipment is expanding nolog_'. Examp:les clude'machine equipment. Th,_ receive a report on suant to ANALYSZS 101 bill authorizes appro- 102 of Llar to those in )section (a) bill _rovid.es limitations _uthorization acts. tha_ the Comm_s_ star; projects set forth 101(b) only cost of the project _hah 26 percent the _at 10roJeet set forth in Sec_ion 105 transfer sums from _ppropriation to ernment for whictl the moneys provision has appropriation acts. $ecl limitation.s subpar, ts of subsection the increase may not _ees_lmated coet showu Sec'bion 106 of the tion :'or the transfer "Operating capital equipment" vlded in the appropr propriation acts that not to exceed atlons for and capital between such ever, that creased by more transfer. It is transfer shall be Joint Committee on of the bill. believes that the ' ' authorizaout at a viable and activiIt was reported House or limous conanalysis, with through d 50, and ; on the words ection, last prlations to thewith Energy Commission, in accordance oi section 261' of the Atomic Act of 1954, as amended, :for expenses" and "Plantand Section 101 (a) of bill deals with the authorization of lng expenses." The authorization request under _is heading was prescnted to tt_e of costs to be incurred during _al year 1975, adjusted in total to the oblJ to be incurred during the fiscal ' The Joint is recommending authorization of for "Operating expenses," not to $132,200,000 in operating costs for the hi program Joint Committee's intent that for any program or category be exceeded only in accordance with s _. arrangements which have been developed b the Commission and the committce, arrangements include provisions for reporting to the committee of changes in estimates of authorized programs. : hess informal procedures, embodied in. _ x exchange of torrespondence between the Atomic Energy Cornmission and the coma _ittee, have operated efficiently, It is the Jcl it Committee's belief that legislative measur s or other formal devices that would ira: )se legal limitations upon the reprograminl of Commission funds ate not necessary at this time. It is the committee's intent tha' the procedures specifled in this exchange o correspondence shall remain in effect durlnl fiscal year 1976. It is intended that co ts incurred pursuant to the authorization c retained in this act shall be generally in _ccordance wlth tho analysis of the propom bills submitted by tho AEC and other bacl round and explanatory materials furnishe by tho Commission _n Justification of the. EC's fiscal year 1975 authorization bill. Plant and capital e_ uipment obligations are provided in two sec ions of the bill. Under section 101 (b), autl 2rization is provided for new construction ,roJects and capital equipment not related o construction. This authorization, together _lth the changes in prior-year project autho izations provided for in section 107, comprise the total authorlzatlon for plant and ca_ tal equipment provialed in this bill. The I EC's request for authorization for these p_ 'poses was presented on the basis of new ol ligational authority required. New construct on projects authorlzed under subsections 1) through (13) of section 101{b) c_ the bl 1 total (273,300,000. 542 April 11, 19 74 does the bill. 101(b} (11), approfor capital equipto constrvLctlon in the 3,000. 'Phis equipment its obsolete or worn-out installations. Additional to meet the needs of an, l changing tecb.typical equipment I;_Lcorlput_rs, and om.ce Co_nmittee expects to 1 the Comrnission at least ms :incurred put_ _z for projects 101(b}, except exceed 10 in the bill. Subsection (c) ides limitations on geol.eral plant projects by subsectlo,_ 101 (b} (9), Commission may start such projects f the curr'ently estimated cost Of dces not exceed $600,000 and the currently estlLmated cost of imy in such project does not ,000; provided that the building _ may be exceeded if the that itt is necessary in the and economy, section (c) prorides that the total of all plar_:t projects shall not the c°'_t set forth in ]01(b) (9) more than 10 percent;, Under p)evio_mly _o by the Commission . the Joint the Commission. to the Committee and the' Commit. tee after the close ea_.'h fl.,cai year co_cerning the use of plant.project funds_ and such _all identify each project for which the _osed new authority has been utilized, Subsection (d) em._nts .,_ubsection (a) and provides _;tmt Commission is not authorized to incur in excess of 125 percent of the cost set fort:h for certain projects in subsection 1Ol(b), unless and addlitional approprlatlons are under section 261of the Atomic Energy Zlustratlvely, if the estimated cost set ia the act were $10 million, the would not be able to incur oblig_,tlons ';his project in e_:cess first obtaining an additional for appropriatioru_, This limitation, does apply to any proJecl with an _ost less than _5 million, Subsection (e) tements subsectio_.s (b) and (c) add imp( a similar limit_tion on certain described in other subparts of except that the increase may not 10 percent of the estimated cost in the bill. Th_ subsection likewise, is to prcJects with an cost less than $_ million. fOJ Seccion 103 of th mission to (tltle,_ I and II) which have been thorization bill by the Commission.: work would be the Commission that physical ti_ted as soon as s ecl hs_ve been Sec'lion 104 mission to retain lng expenses" ceived by the received from Atomlc Energy amended), notwiths section 3617 of the provt_,;lon has been erly belongs in the the Cornengineering design construction projects iuded in a proposed auto the Congress 5is understood that this on projects which are of such urgency should be ihtfor the proJ104 authorizes the Corncredit to its "Operatany moneys re(except moneys property under the Act of 1955, as the provisions of Revised Statutes. This in previous apbut more propauthorizing legislation. _05 the Commission to "Operating expenses" agencies of the Gooof the work for appropriated. This included in prevlous 106' provides authorizaamounts between the and the "Plant and gs proThe AEC apin past years, provided of the approprlexpenses" and "Plant could be transferred provided, howbe ln5 percent by any such that any such promptly to the Energy. 107' Section 107 of the bill amends prior-year authorization acts follows: "(a) Section 101 Public Law 69-428, as amended, is amended by striking from subsection pro,ecl 67-3--a, fast flux test facility, the _ure '$87,600,000', and substJ, tutlng the figure '$420,000,00O'. "(b) Section 101 Public Law 91-273, as is amended by striking subsection (1), project '/l-l-f, gaseous dilplants, tho '$172,100,000' and sub the figure '$295,100,000,. (c) 106 Public Law 91-273, as is further amended by striking from tho figure '$2,000,000' and the figure '$3,O00,000,' and by: _he following new subsection "'(c) The is hereby authorized to agree, by to the definifive cooperative reflecting such chang;es therein as appropriate for such purpose, to (1) to execute and deliver to to the AEC definitive undertakings of )stifled in said cmntr_ct, which shall be subJect to atlons to tho Atomic Enegy. any other Feder.._l agency to pertinent functions at ._ome future time) _i_slons of _ction 3679 of the Revised St_tttee, as amen_ed; and (2) to uire owner_p and custody of the constltutll_,g_ the Liquici Metal Fast Reactor ld_wer- H.R. 16090 93o CONGRESS IN THE H.R. 16090 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES JrJLI_ 24, 1974 Mr. HAYs (for himself, Mr. T_mrrrso_r of New .Jersey, Mr. DEN% Mr. NEDZI_ Mr. BRADE_IAS, Mr. Gr_Y, Mr. HAWKINS, Mr. GrTTYS, Mr. ANNUNZIO, Mr. GAyDOS,Mr. MOLLOni>r, Mr. KocH, Mr. CLEVELAND,Mr. WARE, and Mr. FROE_LICH) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on House Administration A BILL To impose overall limitations on campaign litical contributions; and po- to provide that each candidate for Fed- eral office shall designate a principal provide expenditures for a single reporting to receipts and expenditures campaign committee; responsibility with respect by certain political committees; to change the times for the filing of reports regarding paign expenditures for public financing and Presidential and political of Presidential primary to elections; cam- contributions; to provide nominating conventions and for other purposes. I Be it enacted by the Senate and House o[ Repre_enta- 2 rives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 3 That this Act may be cited as the "Federal 4 paign Act Amendments Election (Jam- of 1974". I 547 2 I TITLE I--CRIMINAL 3 Srx_. 101. (a) CODE AMENDMENTS Section. 608 of title 18: United 4 Code, relating to limitations 5 tures, is amended *by redesigmating subseetior_ 6 as subsections 7 immediately (f) and States on COntributions and expendl.- (g), after subsection respectively, (b) and (c) and by inserl;!_ng (a) the following new sub,sec- 8 tions: 9 "(b) (1) Except as olkherwiseprovided by paragraphs 10 (2) _nd (3), no person 11 candidate with respect 12 which, in the aggregate, 13 "(2) No polkical shall make contributions to any' election for Federal to any ,,,:r.[fice exceed $1,000. coramittee (other t]_an a prin,cipal 14 campaign 15 didate with respect ;o any election for' Fede:cal office which, 16 in tlhe aggregate, 17 tional committee of a political party serving as the principal 18 campaign conunittee 19 of the United States shall not exceed the limitation imposed 20 by the preceding sentence with respect to s,ny other can,dj- 21 date for ]Federal office. For 22 the term 'political committee' means an organ!ization ]t'egls.- 23 tered as a political committee under section 303 of the ]?ed- 24 eral Election Campaign Act of 1971 for a reriod of no?; less 25 than 6 months which has received contribuLions from more 548 committee',) shalJ, make contributions exceed $5,000. Contributions to any can- by the na- of a candidate for the office of Presh]ent purposes of this paragraplh, 3 1 than 50 persons and, except for any State political party 2 organization, has made contributions to 5 or more candidates 3 for Federal office. 4 "(3) No individual shall make contributions aggregat- 5 ing more than $25,000 in any calendar year. 6 "(4) 7 For purposes of this subsection-"(A) contributions to a named candidate made to 8 any political committee authorized by such candidate, 9 in writing, to accept contributions on Zhisbehalf shall 10 be considered to be contributions made to such candidate; 11 and 12 "(B) contributions made to or for the benefit of 13 any candidate nominated by a political party for elec- 14 tion to thc office of Vice President of the United States 15 shall be considered to be contributions made to or for 16 the benefit of the candidate of such party for election 17 to the office of President of the United States. 18 "(5) 19 The limitations imposed by paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection shall apply 'separately wi_h respect 20 to each election, except tha_tall elections held in .any ealen21 dar year for the office of President of the United States (ex-. 22 cept a general election for such office) .shall be considered to 23 be one election. 24 "(6) ]For purposes of the limitations imposed by 25 this section, all contributions made by a person, either 549 4 1 directly or indirectly, on, behalf of a particular candidate, 2 including contributions which are in any w_y earmarke,_lor 3 otherwise directed throug]a ail intermediary or condu_t to 4 such candidate, shall be treated as contributions from ,,tach 5 person to such candidate. The intermediary or conduit', shall 6 report the original ,_;ourceand the intended redpient of t_uch 7 contribution to the appropriate supervisory officer and t:othe 8 intended recipient. 9 "(c) (1) No candidate shall make expenditures in e_:eess 10 of-11 $10,000,000, in the case o:_a candi&te for "(A) 12 nomination for election to the office of President ot the 13 United States; 14 "(B) 15 16 $20,000,000, in the case o:!a candidat_ for election to the office of President of fie United States; "(C) in the case of any campsign for nomina- l7 tion for election, or for election,, by a _3andidatefo:r the 18 office of Senator, the greater of--. 19 "(i) 5 cents multiplied by the population of 20 the geographical area with respect to which the 21 electionis held; or 22 "(ii) $75,000; 23 24 55O "(D) $75,000, in the ca,_e of any campaign for nomination for election, or for electior, by a candidate 5 1 for 2 District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner; 3 the office of Representative, "(E)$15,000, 4 nomination 5 for Islands. 7 "(2) the or for for election, or for election, by a candidate from Guam or the Virgin For purposes of this subsection-- 8 "(A) 9 candidate expenditures made by or on behalf of any nominated by a political 10 to the office of Vice President 11 . be considered to be expenditures 12 of the candidate 13 of President of the United States; 14 from in the case of any campaign the office of Delegata 6 Delegate "(B) party for election of the United States shall made by or on behalf of such party for election to the office expenditm'es made on behalf of any candi- 15 date by a principal 16 such candidate 17 eral Election Campaign Act of 1971 shall be deemed 18 to have been made by such candidate; and 19 "(C) the campaign committee under section 302 (f) (1) population of any designated by of the Fed- geographical area 20 shall be the population according to the most recent 21 decennial 22 tion 141 of title 13, United 'States Code. 23 "(3) census of the United 'States taken under sec- The limitations imposed by subparagraphs (C), 551 6 1 (D}, and (E) of paragraph (1) of this subsection :droll 2 apply separately with re.,;pect to each election. 3 "(d) (1) At the beginning cf each calendar y¢_lr 4 (commencing in 1[,75), as there becomes available r,,:,ces- 5 sar3, data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics ot!the De.part- 6 merit of Labor, tlhe Secretary of Labor sh_ll (_rtify t,'.,tim 7 Comptroller General and put'_lish in. the l'edcral Register 8 the per centmn difference between the price index for' the 9 12 months preceding the beginning of such calendar year 10 and. the price index for the base period. Each limilafion 11 established by subsection (c) shall be incre_Lsedby' such 12 per centum difference. }_ach amount so increased 13 be 'the amount in effect for such cale:adar year. 14 "(2) tPorpurposes}ofpa.ragraph (1)_ 15 "(A) the term 'price index' means the avc..::age 1.6 over a calendar t7 (all items--United 18 monthly by t.he Bureau of Labor Statis[ies; and 19 "(B) shall year of the (_onsunter Price States city average) h_dex pub)5_;hed the term 'base period' me,ms the ca],f!,,:adar 20 year I973. 21 "(e) (1) No person may make any e_.penditure ',[4her 22 than an expenditure made by or on behalf of a canal]date 23 under the provisions of subsection (c)) relative _o a 24 clearly identified candidate daring _[ caleb[dar year ¥(ficlh, 552 7 I when added to all other expenditures 2 during the year advocating 3 candidate, 4 5 "(2) made by such person the election or defeat of such exceeds St,000 For purposes of paragraph (1), the term 'clearly identified' means-- 6 "(A) the candidate's name appears; 7 "(B) a photograph or drawing of the candidate 8 appears; or 9 "(C) the identity of the candidate is apparent 10 unambiguous reference.". 11 (b) 12 Code, relating 13 tures, Ssamended to read as follows: Section 14 "(a) (1) 15 his personal 16 family, 17 for election, 608(a)(1) of title to limitations 18, United on contributions No candidate by States and expendi.. may make expenditures from funds, or the personal funds of his immediate in connection with his campaign or election, to Federal for nomination office in excess of xs $25,000.". 19 (c) (1) Notwithstanding section 608(a)(1) to limitations of title 20 18, United States Code, relating on expend]- 21 tures from personal funds, any individual may satisfy or dis- 22 charge, out of his personal funds or the personal funds of his 23 immediate family, any debt or obligation which is outstanding 24 on the date of the enactment of this Act and which was in-. 553 8 1 curr_d by him or on his betudf by any politicH committee in 2 connection with any campaign ending before the close of De-. 3 cember 31, 1972, for election to Federal 4 (2) For purposes of this subsection--- 'V 5 (A) the terms "election", "Federal office", '"political committee" 7 by section 591 of title ][8, United States Ct)de; and[ 9 10 11 (B) the meanings the term "immediate family" ing given it by section 608 (a) (2) given ;ired 6 8 have office. tl::_cm has the recall[- of title 18, Un!ted States Code. (d) (1) The first paragraph of section (;13 of'title 18, 12 United States 13 foreign agents, is amended--- 14 (A) Code, relating by striking to contributions by cerlain out "an agent of _[ foreign p:in- 15 cipal" and inserting in lieu thereof % foreign national "; 16 and 17 (B) by striking out ", either for or on behalf of 18 such forcign principal or otherwise in [Lis capacity as 19 agent of such foreign principal,". 20 (2) The second, paragraph 21 amended 22 from such foreign principal" 23 "foreign national".. 24 25 554 {3) by striking out "agent of such section 613 is of a foreign t)rincipal and inserting or :in lieu ther,_of The fourth, paragq'aph of such section 613; is amended to read as follows: 9 1 "As used in this section, the term 'foreign national' 2 means-3 "(1) a foreign principal,as such term is defined 4 by section 1 (b)of the Foreign Agents Registration Act 5 of 1938 (22 U.S.C. 611 (b)), 6 'foreign national' shall not include any !mdividual who is 7 a citizen of the United States; or 8 "(2) ex,pt that the term an individual who is not a citizen of the 9 United States and who is not lawfully admitted for per-- 10 manent residence, as defined by section 101 (a I (20) of 11 the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 12 (a)(20)).". 13 (4) (A) The heading of such section 613 is amended 14 by striking out "agents of foreign principals" and inserting 15 in lieu thereof "foreign nationals". 16 (B) The table of sections for chapter 29 of title 18, 17 United States Code, is amended by striking out the item 18 relating to section 613 and inserting in lieu thereof the 19 following: _61_, Cor_tributions by foreign nationals.". 90 21 (e) (1) Section 608 (g) of title 18, United States Code (as so redeslgnated by subsection (a) of this sectlon), 22 relating to penalty for violating limitations on contributions 23 and expenditures, is amended by striking out "$1,000" and 24 inserting in lieu thereof "$25,000". H.R. 16090----2 555 10 I (2) ':t_hesecond paragraph, of section _.10 of tide __S, 2 United States Code, relating to penalties for violating pi:obi3 bitions against contributions or expenditures 'by nati,:mal 4 hanks, corporations, or labor organizations, is amende&..... 5 6 (A) by striking out "$5,000' thereof "$25,000"; an(] 7 8 9 and inserting in. lieu (B) by striking out "810,¢O0" and inserfin{!: in lieu thereof "$50:,000". (3) Section 611 of title 18, United States Code (_Ls 10 amended by section 103 of this Act):, relating 1to contri'brt-. 11 tions by firms or individuals contract:ing with the Unil:,d. 12 States, is amended in the fir:st paragraph thereof by s_ritding 13 out "$5,000" and inserting in lieu thereof "825..000". 14 (4) 'The third paragraph of section 613 .of title :l.8, 15 United States Code (as amended by subscctim (d) of 2,is 16 section), relating to contributions by foreig:a n_ationals is 17 amended by striking out "$5,000" I8 19 and inserting in i%a thereof "$25,000". (f) (1) .Chapter 29 of rifle 18, 'United States Cede, 20 relating to elections and political actMties, is amended iL,y 21 adding at the end thereof the follow!ing new sections: 22 "§ 614. Prohibition 23 556 "(a) of contributions in name of another No person shall make a con'tributioa in the name 11 I of another person, and no person shall knowingly 2 contribution made by one person accept a in the name of another 3 person. 4 "(b) Any person who violates 5 fined not more than $25,000 6 one year, or both. 7 "§615. Limitation 8 "(a) 9 of the United or imprisoned on contributions States or currency of any foreign 11 gate, .exceed $100, 12 candidate for nomination 13 office. wi_h respect Any person 16 one year, or both. 17 "§ 616. Acceptance 18 "Whoever, 21 (excluding 22 subsistence 23 article; or of such this section shall 5e or imprisoned not more than of excessive honorariums while an elected or appointed employee of any branch of the federal "(1) which, in the aggre.- to any campaign who violates fined not more than $25,000 20 country for election, or election, to Federal 15 19 not more than No person shall make contributions of currency to or for the benefit of ally candidate "(b) shall be of currenc_ 10 14 this section accepts any honorarium officer or Government-of more than $1,000 amounts accepted for actual travel expenses) for any appearance, speech, and or 557 t2 I "(2) accepts honorariums 2 paragraph 3 than $10,000 in any calendar year; (not prohibited by of this subsection) aggregating, more (1) 4 shall be fined not ]hessthan $1,000 nor more th_m $5,00,C,.'. 5 (2) Section 591 of title 18, United States Code, relat- 6 lng to definitions, is amended by striking out the matter 7 preceding paragraph 8 9 (a) a_nd :inserting in lieu thereof the following: "Except as otherwise speci[fically provided, when utsed 10 in this section and in sections 597, 599, 600, 602, 608,. 61,0, 11 12 611, 614, and 615 of this title--" (3) The table of sections for chapter 29 of ;itle :[8, 13 United States Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof 14 the :following new items: "614. Prohibition of eontributimm in name of anotl_er. "615. Limitation on contributions of currency. "616. Acceptance of excessive honorariums.". 15 (4) Title III of the Federal Election C_mpaign Act 16 of 1971 is amended by 8trildng out section 'Il0, relating to 17 prohibition of contributiona ilnthe name of another. 18 DEFINITIONS 19 EXPENDITIIRE, 20 OF POLITICA_L AND OOHMITTE_ PRINOIPAL (_ONTi_IBU'I_0ON, (_A,MPAIG_ OOMHrI!_:I_13 S_c. 102, (n) Section 591 (d) of tttle 1_1,United States 21 Code, relating to the definition of poUt[cai _mmlttee, is 22 amended by inserting immediately after "$ [,000" the fo123 ]owing: ", or which eommil;s any act for the purpose of i_.- 558 13 I fluencing, directly or indirectly, 2 or election, of any person _ Fed_al 3 communication 4 tion which is not included within the definition of the term 5 'expenditure' 6 the nomination for election, office, except that any referred 'to in paragraph (f) (4) of this sec- shall not be considered such an act". (b) .Section 591 (e) (5) of title 18, United States Code, 7 relating to an exception 8 amended 9 and by inserting by inserting to the definition of contribution, "(A)" immediately immediately i8 after "include" before the semicolon at the 10 end thereof the following: ", (B) the use _)freal or personal 11 property by an individual ,owner or lessee in rendering volu:n- 12 tary personal 13 mittee, 14 beverages 15 didate-related 16 erage by a vendor for use in a candidate's 17 charge 18 charge for use in a candidate's campaign is at least equal to 19 the cost of such food or beverage 20 unreimbursed 21 for travel expenses with respect to the rendering 22 tary personal services by such individual to any candidate or 23 political committee, or (E) the payment by a State or local 24 committee of a p ol-itical party of the costs of preparation, 25 play, or mailing or other distribution incurred by such com- services to any candidate _ucluding provided the less than cost of' invitatioT_s and on the individual's activities, or political com- (C) the normal food premises and for can- the sale of any food or bev- comparable campaign charge, to the vendor, purchase or other payment at a if such (D) any by any individual of volun- dis- 559 ].4 1 mittee with respect to a printed slate card or sample halle,t, or 2 other printed listing, of 3 or more candidates for _my 3 public office for which an election is held in the State, in 4 which such committee is organized, except that this chase 5 shall, not apply in the case of costs incurreiL by such c,_m6 mittee with respect to a display of any such listing made 7 on broadcasting stations, or in magazines rr c,ther si_:filar 8 types of general public political advertising 9 newspapers): (other ':]nan Provided, That the cumulati-e value of ac- 10 tivities by any person on behalf of any candidate under cech 11 of clauses (B) or (D) shall not exceed $500 with resl?,,_ct 12 to any cie'orion". 13 (c) Section 591 (f) olf title 18, Unite_i States Co,]e, 14 relating to the definition of expendittrre, is amerLded.-15 16 17 18 19 20 21 (1) in subt)aragraph (2) thereof, by striking out "and"; (2) in subparagraph (3) thereof, 10,yinserting "and" immediately after the semicolon: and (3) by adding at the end thereol! the following new subparagraph: "(4) notwithstanding ti:re foregoing meanin.g_ 22 of 'expen_ture', 23 any news story, commentary, or eiitorial distr':_b- 24 uted through the :fac'dities af any bzoadcasting sl;a.- 25 fion, newspaper, 56O such term does net include (A) :magazine, or ol;her periodical 15 1 publication, unless 2 controlled by any political party, political committee, 3 or candidate, 4 encourage individuals to register to vote or to vote_ 5 (C) any communication by any membership orga- 6 nization or corporation to its members or stock-- 7 holders, if such membership organization 8 tion is not organized primarily for the purpose of 9 influencing the nomination (B) such facilities nonpartisan are owned or' activity designed to or corpora- for election, or election, 10 of any person to ]Federal office, (D) the use of real 11 or personal property by an individual owner or lessee 12 in rendering voluntary personal services to any 13 candidate 14 of invitations and food .and beverages provided on 15 the individual's 16 tivities, (E) any unreimbursed purchase or other 17 payment by any individual for travel expenses with 18 respect 19 services by such individual to any candidate or polit- 20 leal committee, 21 son which is not made for the purpose of influencing 22 the nomination for election, or election, of any per- 23 son to Federal office, (G) the payment 24 or local committee of a politicM.party 25 preparation, or political committee, to the premises rendering including the cost for candidate-related of voluntary ac- personal (F) any communication by ally per- by a State of the costs of display, or mailing or other distribution 561 1.6 1 incurred by such committee with respect to a pr'in_ed 2 slate card or sample ballot, el' other printed Iisi;lng, 3 'of 3 or more candidates for any public Gfiice 4 for which an election is held in the State in whic:h 5 such committee 6 clause shall not apply in tZhe ca,,,:e ,of costs, in- 7 curred by such committee with respect to a, disl?i[ay 8 of any such listing made on b:roadcasting stations, ,or 9 in magazines or other similar types of general is organized, (other that than this 10 public il papers), (It) 12 (including his principal campaign committee) in 13 connectiol_ with the solicitation of contributions by 14 such candidate, except that this clause slhal][not 15 apply with respect to costs incurred by a candid,,_te 16 (including his principal campaign committee], in 17 excess of an amount equal to 25 per centtun of the 18 expenditure limitation applic_tble to such candidate 19 under section 608 (c) of this title, or (][) any costs 20 incurred by a pol_/ticalcommittee (:ts such term is 21 defined by section 608 (b)(2 / of lhis rifle) with 22 respect to the solicitation of contributions to _ch 23 political committee or to any general political fired 562 political advertising except n,:,ws- any costs incurred by a candid..lte 17 I controlled by such political committee, 2 this clause Shall not apply to exempt costs incurred 3 with respect 4 any such political committee made through broad- 5 casting 6 advertising 7 general public political advertising: 8 the cumulative value ofactivities 9 behalf of any candidate to the solicitation stations, newspapers, _facilities, and except that (.)f,contributions magazines, other to outdoor ,_imilar types of Provided, That by any person on under each of clauses (D) 10 or (E) shall not exceed $500 with respect to any 11 election;". 12 13 14 (d) Section 591 of title 18, United States Code, re- lating to definitions, is amended-(1) by striking out "and" at the end of paragraph (g); 16 (2) by striking out the period at the end of para- 17 graph (h) and inserting in liea thereof "; and"; and 18 (3) by adding at the end thereof the following new 19 20 paragraph: "(i) 'principal campaign committee' means the 21 principal campaign committee designated by a can&date 22 under section 302 (f) (1) 23 paign Act of 1971.". of the federal Election (Jam- It.R. 16090 _ 3 563 18 I 2 3 POLITICAl, FUNDS O]? COi_POI{ATIONS OR LABOR OI_ANIZATION'S SEe. 103. Section 611 of tifie 18, Unit;ed States Code, 4 relating to contributions by firms or individuals contra¢;ing 5 with the United States, is amended by adding at the end 6 thereof the following new paragraphs :: 7 "This section shall not prohibit or make unlawful the 8 establishment or administration of, or the, solicitati(m of 9 contributions to, any separate segregated ft,nd by any' col 10 poration or labor organization for the purpose of influencing 11 the nomination for election, ar elec:_ion, ot any person to 12 Federal office, unless the provisions of secl;ion 610 of this 13 tifie prohibit or make unlawful the establishment or ad:mirLis14 tration of, or thc solicitation o:l contributions to, such t!_:md. 15 "For purposes of this section, the term qabor organlza- 16 fion' has the meaning given it by section 6] 0 of this t!itle.". 17 18 EFFECT SEc: :104. (a)The ON STATE LAW provisions of chapter 29 of title 19 18, United States Code, relating to elections and poli:Cical 20 activities, supersede and preempt any' provision of State [aw 21 with respect to elect]on to Federal[ office. 22 (b) For purposes of this section, the t3rms "e]ecti.:n', 2'3 "Federal office", and "State" have the meanings given l:hem 24 by section 591 of title 18, 'U'nited States Code. 564 1.9 i TITLE II--DISCLOSURE OF FEDERAL 2 FUNDS 3 4 PRINCIPAL CAMPAIGN Act of 1971, relating to organization 6 is amended 7 lieu thereof the following: 9 COMMITTEE SEc. 201. Section 302 of the Federal Election Campaign 5 8 CAMPAIGN "(f) of political committees, by striking out subsection (1) Each individual (f) and inserting who is a candidate in for Fed- eral office (oSher than the oftqce of Vice President of the 10 United States) 11 as his principal campaign eommittee, iV<)political committee 12 may be design:ated as the principalcampaign 13 more than one candidate, except that the candidate 14 office of President 15 political party may designate the national committee of such 16 political party as his principal 17 "(2) shall design.ate a political committee to serve Except of the United as otherwise commJ.ttee of States nominated campaign for the by a committee. provided in section 608 (e) 18 of title 18, United States Code, no political committee other 19 than a principal campaign committee 20 didate under paragraph 21 behalf of such candidate. 22 "(3) (1)may Notwithstanding 23 each report or statement 24 ical committee designated by a canmake expenditures on any other provision of this title, of contributions :received by a polk- (other than a principal caInpaign committee) 565 '?0 1 which is required 'to :be filed with a supervisory officer under 2 this title shall be filed instead with the prbLeipal campaign 3 committee for the candidate on whose behal:! such cont:Sbu4 tions are accepted. 5 "(4) It shall be the duty of each prircipal campaign 6 committee to receive, all rel?ort_,_and statements required to 7 be filed with it under paragTaph (3) of this subsection and 8 to compile and file such reports and statements, together 9 with its own reports and statements, with ;he appropriate 10 supervisory officer in accordance with the plovisions of this 11 title. 12 "(5) For purposes of paragraph,,_(1) _,nd (3) of tiffs 13 subsection, the term 'political committee' does not incl,:de 14 any political committee which supports rlore than cms 15 candidate, except for the national committe,_ of a political 16 party designated by a candidate for thc office of President of 17 the United States under paragraph 18 19 REGISTRATION OF POLITICAL (1) of this subsections,". COMMITTEES; STATEMEI!;[T8 SF,C. 202. Section 303 of the Federal Election Campaign 20 Act ,of 1971, relating to registration of political committee,_ 21 and statements, is amended by adding at the end thereof the 22 following new subsection: 23 "(e) In the case of a political cc,mmittee which is not 24 a principal campaign committee and which does not support 25 566 more than one candidate, n_ports and notificitions requ!iredC 21 I under this section to be filed with the supervisory 2 shall be ·filed instead with the appropriate principal officer cam- 3 paigncommittee.. ' " 4 5 REPORTS BY POLITICAL SEC. 203. COMMITTEES AND CANDIDATES (a) Section 304 (a) of the ZFederal Election 6 Campaign Act of 1971, relating to reports by political com- 7 mittees and candidates, is amended-- 8 9, 10 (1) by striking out the second and third sentences and inscrting in lieu thereof the following' "The reports referred to in the preceding sentence shall be 11 filed as follows' 12 "(A)(i) In any calendar year in which an in- 13 dividual is a candidate for Federal office and an election 14 for such Federal office is held in such year, such reports 15 shall be filed not later than the tenth 16 date on which such election is held and shall be com.- 17 plete as of the fifteenth day before the date of such 18 election; except that any such report filed by registered. 19 or certified mail must be postmarked 20 close of the twelfth day before the date of such election. 21 "(ii) day before the not later than the Such reports shall be filed not later than the 22 thirtieth day after the date of such election and shall be 23 complete as of the twentieth day after the date of such 24. election. 25 "(B) In any other cMendaryear hx which an in.- 567 512 1 dividual is a candidate for FederM office, suc}t report;s 2 shall be filed after December 31 of such calendar :.!,,'exr, 3 but not later than January 31 of the following cah:.mdar 4 year and shall be complete as. of the close of the 5 calendar year with respect to which the report; is f'.i]ed_ 6 "(C) Such reports shall be filed not later l:]aan 7 the tenth day following the close, of any ca_lendar q[tar-- 8 ter in which the candidate or political committee con-- 9 cerned received contributions in excess of 81,0007 or 10 made expenditures in excess of 81,000, and shall, be 11 complete as of the close of such calendar quarter; ex,[_ep_: 12 that any such report required to be filed after D(..cem- 13 ber 3:1 of any calemtar year w:[th respect; to wh!ch t; 14 report is required to be filed under subparagraph {B) 15 shall :be filed as provided in such subparagraph. 16 "(D) When the last day l!or filing ,_myqua:t:l:erly 17 report required by subparagraph 18 days of an election, the filing of such quarterly re]?ort 19 shall be waived and superseded :by the report req,a[red 20 by subparagraph (A) (i) o 21 (C) occurs with.!Ln]LO Any contribution of $1,000 or more received after tlhe 22 fifteenth day, but raore than 48 hours, before any election 23 shall be reported within ,18 hours alter its receipt."; and 24 (2) by striking oat "Each" at the b%4nnlng ,,:,:_ the 25 first sentence of such section 31)4(a) and[ inserti:at,rin 568 23 I lieu thereof "(1) Except as provided by paragraph 2 (2), each", and by adding at the end thereof the follow- 3 lng new paragraph: 4 "(2) Each treasurer of a political committee which is 5 not a principal campaign committee 6 support more than one candidate shall file the reports re- 7 quired under 8 campaign this section with and which does not the appropriate principal committee.". 9 (,b) (1) Section 304 (b) (8) of the Federal Election 10 Campaign Act of 1971, relating to reports .by political eom- 11 mittees and candidates, is amended by inserting immediately 12 before the semicolon at the end thereof the following: 13 together between 14 committees 15 do not support more than one candidate". 16 (2) with total' receipts less transfers which support Section 304(b) (11) relating and whic]_ Federal 18 committees 19 mediately before the semicolon at the end thereof the follow- 20 lng' 21 tween political committees 22 and which do not support more than one candidate". 23 FORMAL and candidates, ", together to reports Election Campaign 25 of 1971, of the political 17 24 Act the same candidate ", is amended with total expenditures REQUIEEMENTS which support FOR i_EPORTS by political by inserting less transfers ira- be- the same candidate AND STATEMENTS SEC. 204. Section 306 of the Federal Election Campaig n Act of 19'71, relating to forms! requirements.respecting re-. 569 24 I ports and statements, 2 of the following new subsection: 3 "(e) is amended by adding at the end there- If a report or statement required by sectim:_ 303, 4 3o4 (1) (A) (ii_)o, , , or aOX(a)( 't(c) 5 of this title to be filed by a treasurer 6 or by a candidate, 7 this titl.e to be filed by any' other person, is delivered by reg- s istered 9 ofticer or principal of a political comt_:_it_ee or if a report re(]!uired by section ?,(_5 ,f or certified mail, to the campaign appropriate committee to be filed, the United supervisory with whom 10 required 11 on the cover of the envelope or other container in which 12 such report 13 be the date of filing.". 14 or statement Slates postmark it is st_J_tped is so mailed shall be deemed to vuTms ov TnI_ SUPERVISOt_YOffiCER 15 SEC. 205. (a) (1) Section 308 (a) of the Federal }]lee- 16 tion Campaign Act of 197'1, relating to duties of the super- 17 visory officer, is amended by striking' out paragraphs 18 (7), 19 (11), 20 res]pectively, and by inserting 21 (51} the following new paragraphs: 22 (8), (9), and (10), (12), "(6) and (13) and 'by redesignatirtg as paragrapLs (8), immediately (9), ('6), paragraphs and (:!0), after parag'raph to compile and main'lain a cunmlative htdex 23 of reports and statements 24 published in the Federal Register at regular int,_:rvals 570 :filed with him, which sha)l be 25 1 and which shall be available for purchase directly or by 2 mail for a reasonable price; 3 "(7) to prepare and publish from ,time to time spe- 4 eial reports listing those candidates for whom reports 5 were filed as required by this tifie and those candidates 6 for whom such reports were not filed as so required;". 7 (2) Notwithstanding section 308 (a) (7) of the federal 8 Election Campaign Act of 1971 (relating to an annual report 9 by the supervisory officer), as in effect on the day before the 10 effective date of the amendments 11 this subsection, no such annual report shall be required with 12 respect to any calendar year beginning 13 1972. 14 15 (b) (1) Campaign made by paragraph Section 308 (a) (10) Ac;_ of 1971 (1) of after December of the Federdl (as so redesignated 31, Election by subsection 16 (a) of this section), 17 regulations, is amended by inserting before the period at the 18 end thereof the following: 19 sions of subsection (b)". 20 21 (2) relating to the prescription ", in accordance with the provi-- 'Section 308 of such Act, relating to duties of the supervisory officer, is amended-- 22 (A) by striking out subsections 23 (B) by redesignating 24 of rules and subsection (bi .and (c); (d) as subsection (c); and It.R. 16O9O 4 571 26 I (0) by inserting immediately after subsection (a) 2 the following new subsection: 3 "(b) (1) The supervisory officer, before prescribing 4 any' rule or regulation raider this section, shall transntJ!t a 5 statement with, respect to such rule or regulation t(_. the 6 Committee on Rules and Administration of file SenaL,_or 7 the Committee on ttouse Administration of tlhe ]EIou_!;,_. of 8 Representatives, as the case ]may be, in accordance with 9 the provisions of this subsection. Such statement shall set 10 forth, the proposed rule or regulation and shall cont_;_[:aa 11 detailed explanation and justification of such rule or ref,;fia.12 tion. 13 "(2) If the committee of file Congress which receives 14 a statement from thc supervisory o_i(',erunder this subs_'ct.!ion 15 does not, througlh appropriate action, disapprove the pro- 16 posed rule or regulation set forth in such statement no i[ater 17 than 30 legislative clays after receipt of such statement, then 18 the supervisory officer may prvscribc such rule or regulal:io:n. 19 In ][heease of arty rule or regulation proposed by the Clomp- 20 troller General of the Un:ired States, both the Conm'fitt,_,_on 21 Rules and Administration of the Senate and the Comm!im3e 22 on House Administration of t]he House of Represent_:Ltves 23 shall have the pow,er to disapprove such proposed rul,_ or 24 regqfiation, and the Comptroller OenLeralmay not prescribe 572 27 I any rule or regulation which has been disapl)roved by either 2 such committee. No supervisory 3 rule or regulation 4 5 officer may prescribe which is d:_sapproved under any this para- graph. "(3) If the supervisory officer proposing to prescribe 6 any rule or regulation under this section is the Secretary 7 the Senate, he shall transmit such statement 8 tee on Rules and Administration 9 visory officer is the Clerk of the/Iouse 10 shall transmit such statement of to the Commit-. of the Senate. H the super-. of Representatives, to the Committee on _ouse 11 Administration 12 supervisory officer is the Comptroller General of the United 13 States, he shall transmit 14 mittee. 15 "(4) of the House he of Represen_tlves. such statement If the to each such com- For purposes of this subsection, the term 'legisla- 16 tive days' does not include, with respect to statements trans- 17 mittcd to the Committee on Rules and Administration 18 Senate, any calendar day on which the Senate is not in scs- 19 sion, with respect to statements 20 tee on/touSe 21 any calendar day on which the _ouse 22 not in session, and with respect 23 to both such committees, 24 _ouses of the Congress are not in session.". Administration transmitted of the to _he Commib of the House of Representatives, of Representatives to statements is transmitted any cMendar (lay on which both 573 28 1 2 3 DEFINITIONS OF POLITIC,kL EXPENDITURE, SEc. 206. AND COMMITTEE, SUPERVISORY ()ONTRIBU_.r]DN, OFFICER (a) (1) Section 30]. of the Federal t_lec- 4 tion Campaign Act of 1971, relating to definitior,s, is 5 amended by striking out: the matter preceding parag'mph 6 7 (a) and inserting in lieu thereof the following: "SEc. 301. When used in this title and in title ]["ir of 8 this: Act--". 9 (2) Section 401 of tile Federal Election (_ampa'ign 10 Act of 1971, relating _o extension of credit by regulated 11 industries, is amended by striking out "(as such terra is 12 defined in section 31)1(c) of the Federal Election Camp:riga 13 Act of 1971.)". 14 (3) .Section 402 of! the Federal Election Campaign 15 Act of 1971, relating to prohil)itioll_ against use of c,:!_rtain 16 Federal funds for election activities, is amended by striking 17 out the last sentence. 18 (b) Section 301 (d) of the Federal Election Can_- 19 paign Act of 1971, relat,ing to the definition of polit20 leal committee, is amended by inserting hnmediately aft:er 21 "$1,000" the following: "', or which commits any act for 22 the purpose of influencing, directly or indirectly, the nora23 ination for election, or election, of any person to Fed.eral 2t: office, except that any eommunieatio,n referred to _msection 25 301.(f) (4) of this Act which is not included withh [he 574 29 1 definition of the term 'expenditUre ' shall" not 'be considered 2 such an act". 3 (c) Section 301'(e) (5) of the Federal Election Cam- 4 paign Act of 1971, relating to an exception to the definition 5 of contribution, 6 after "include" 7 semicolon at the end thereof the following: 8 of real or personal property by an individual owner or lessee 9 in rendering is amended by inserting'" and by inserting voluntary (A)" immediately immediately before the ", (B) the use personal services to any candidate or 10 political committee, including the cost of invitations and food 11 and beverages provided on the individual's premises for can- 12 didate-related activities, 13 age by a vendor for use in a candidate's campaign at a charge 14 less than the normal comparable 15 use in a candidate's 16 of such food or. beverage 17 bursed purchase'or (C) campaign the sale of any food or bever- charge, if such charge for is' at least equal to the cost to the vendor, other payment (I)) by any individual for 18 travel expenses with respect to the rendering 19 personal 20 services by such individual any Unreim- of voluntary to any candidate or political committee, or (E) the 'payment by a' State or local 21 Committee of a political party of the 'costs of preparation, 22 display, or mailing or other distribution 23 committee 24 ballot, 25 for any public 6ftice for which an election is held in the State with respect to a printed or other printed incurred by such slate card or sample listing, of 3 or more candidates 575 130 1 in which such con'nnittee is organized, except tha'3 ';his 2 clause shall not apply in thc case of costs in.carred 'by 3 such committee with respect to a display of.ahy such ].5_,iin_g 4 made on broadcasting stations, or ]n magazhms or other 5 similar types of general public political advertising 6 than newspapers): (_[:_.ther Provided, That the cumulative vaJlL:t(_ .of 7 activities by any person on beMlf of any candidate t:t_::d,er 8 each of clauses (B) or (D) shall not exceed 8500 ','dl:h 9 respect to any election". 10 (d) Section 301 (f) of the Federal Election Camp_tign 11 Act; of 1971, relating to the definition of expen,_lltm:e,is 12 amended-13 14 (1) in subparagra,ph (2) thereof, by' striking out "and"; 15 16 (2) in subparagraph thereof, by !insert!big "apd" immediately after the semicolon; and 17 18 (3) (3) by adding at the end[ thereof the following new subparagraph: 19 "(4) notwithstanding the _oregolng meanin,g:_ of 20 'expenditure', such term does not include (A) any ,_e,_ 21 story, commentary, or editorial distributed tln'ough tlhe 22 facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, m_ga- 23 zinc, 24 :fac'fiifies are owned or controlled by any po]Eik, ical 25 party, political committee, or c_mdidate, (B) nor[pa,r_i- 576 or other periodical publication, unless .ach 31 1 san activity designed to encourage individuals to register 2 to vote or to vote, (C) 3 membership 4 or stockholders, 5 poration is not organized primarily for the purpose of 6 influencing 7 any person to Federal 8 personal property by an individual owner or lessee in 9 rendering any communication by any organization or corporation if such membership the nomination organization for election, office, (D) to its. members or cor- or election, of the use of real or voluntary personal services to any candidate 10 or political committee, including the cost of invitations 11 and food and beverages provided on the individual's 12 premises 13 reimbursed purchase or other payment by any individual 14 for travel expenses with respect to the rendering 15 voluntary 16 or political committee, 17 person which is not made for the purpose of influencing 18 the nomination 19 to Federal 20 local committee of a political party of 'the costs of prep- 21 aration, 22 cuffed by such committee with respect to a printed 23 slate card or sample ballot, or other printed 24 3 or more candidates for any public office for which 25 an election is held in the State in which such committ ee for candidate-related activities, (E) any un- of services by such individual to any candidate (F) by any for election, or election, of any person office, or (G) display, any communication the payment or mailing or other by a State or distribution in- listing, of 577 32 I is organized, except that this clause shall not _q_p]ky 2 in the case of costs incurred by such committee w!tth 3 respect to a display of any such listing made on 4 broadcasting stations, or in magazines or other 5 types of general public political advertising (other than 6 newspapers): 7 activities by any person on behalf of any candidate ur:Lder 8 each of clauses (D) or (E) 9 with respect to any election;". lO S]]lli]t[lar Provided, [['hat the cunmlative value of shall not exceed _LS00 (e) Section 301 (g) of the Federal Election Camp_:ga 11 Act of 1971, relating to the definition of supervisory ofi_icer, 12 is amended to read as follows: 13 "(g) 'supervisory officer' means the Secretary of 14 the Senate with respect to candidates for the Sem:te, 15 and committees supporting such candidates; the C]!er]b; '16 .of the House of Representatives'with 17 dates for Representative, Delegate, and Resident Com- 18 :missioner, and committees supporting such candi&,t,_s; 19 and the Comptroller General of tlhe United States with 20 ]respect to candidates for Presidentt and Vice President, 21 and committees suppm_ing such candidates.". 22 23 24 25 578 respect to candi- (f) Section 301 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of ][971, relating to definitkms, is amended--. (1) by striking out "and" at the end of para.graph (h); 33 I (2) by striking out the period at the end of para.. 2 graph (i) and inserting in lieu thereof a semicolon; and 3 4 5 (3) by adding at the end thereof the following new paragraphs: "(j) 'principal campaign committed' means the 6 principal campaign committee designated by a candidate 7 under section 302 (f) (1); and 8 9 10 11 "(k) 'Board' means the Board of Supervisory Officers established by section 308 (a) (1).". BOARD OF SUPERVISORY SEC. 207. (a) Title III OFFICERS of the Federal Election 12 Campaign Act of 1971, relating to disclosure of Federal 13 campaign funds, is amended by redesignating section 311 as 14 section 314; by redesignating sections 308 and 309 as sec-- 15 tions 311 and 312, respectively; and by inserting ira-- 16 mediately ,after section 307 the following new sections: 17 18 "BOARD OF SUPERVISORY OFFICERS "SEc. 308. (a)(1) There is hereby established the 19 Board of Supervisory Officers, which shall be composed of 20 7 members as follows: 21 "(A) the Secretaryof the Senate; 22 "(B) the Clerk of the House of Representatives; 23 "(C) the Comptroller General bfthe United States; 24: "(D) two individuals appointed by the President 25 ofthe Senate, upon the recommendations of the majority lq.R. 16090 5 579 1 leader of the Senate and the minority leader of []he 2 Senate; and 3 "(E) two individu,als a.ppoir_tedby thc Spca.kcs'of 4 the House of B.eprescntatives, upon the recornmenda- 5 tions of the majority leader of the House and the m'inor- 6 ity leader of the House. 7 Of each class of two members appointed under subparagr.ai?hs 8 (D) and (E), not more t]han one shall be appointed from 9 the same political party. An indivi&aal appointed to :fill a 10 vacancy occm'ring other than by the expiration of a t,a'm 11 of off:ice shall be appointed only for the unexpi_red term for 12 the member he surce_ ' eds..' Any vaca:ncy occm:ring in. the 13 membership of the Board sMll be fill.ed in the same manner 14 as in the case of the original appointment. Members o:[ the 15 Board appointed under subparagraphs (D) and (E) ..... 16 "(i) shall be chosen :from among individuals who 17 are not officers or employees in the executive, ].egis- 18 lative, or judicial branch of t!_e Government 19 United States 20 cials); o:1!the (including elected and appointed )fi_- 21 "(ii) shall be chosen on the basis of their :matmity, 22 experience, integrity, impartiality', and good judgmc:at; 23 24 25 580 "(iii) shall serve for terms .al 4 years, except that, of the members first appointed under subparagraph (D), one shall be appointed for a term of 1 year an(![ one 35 _ I shall be appointed for a term of 3 years and, of the 2 members first appointed under subparagraph 3 shall be appointed for a term of 2 years; and 4 "(iv) (E), one shall receive compensation equivalent to the 5 compensation paid at level IV of the Federal Executive 6 Salary Schedule (5 U.S.C. 5315), prorated on a daily 7 basis for each day spent in the work of the Board, shall 8 be paid actual travel expenses, and per diem in lieu of 9 subsistence expenses when away from their usual place 10 of residence, in accordance with section 5703 (b) of 11 title 5, United States Code. 12 "(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, it 13 shall he the duty of the Board to supervise the administra14 tion of, seek to obtain compliance with, and formulate 15 overall policy with respect to, this title, title I of this Act, 16 and sections 608, 610, 611, 613, 614, 615, and 616 of 17 title 18, United States Code. 18 J9 "(b) Members of the Board shall alternate in serving as Chairman of the Board. The term of each Chairman shall 20 be one year. 21 "(c) All decisions of the Board with respect to the 22 exercise of its duties and powers under the provisions of 23 this tifie shall be made by majority vote of the members of 24 the Board. A member of the Board may not delegate to any 581 36 I person his vote or any decisionmakhlg 2 vested in the Board by the provisions of this tJ[tle. 3 "(d) authority or duty The Board shall meet at lJle call of any member 4 of the Board, except that it shall meet at least once each 5 month. 6 7 8 9 "(e) The Board shall prepare written rules for the conduct of its activities. "(f) (1) The Board shall have a Staff Director and[ a General Counsel who shall be appointed by the Board. The 10 Staff Director shall be paid at a rate not to ex_ed the, rate 11 of basic pay in effect for level IV of the Executive Schedule 12 (5 U.S.C. 5315). 13 rate not to exceed the rate of basic pay in effect for level V 14 of the Executive 15 approval 16 and fix the pay of such additional personnel 17 siders desirable. Not less than 30 per centum of the addi- 18 tional personnel appointed by the Staff I)ire(¢or shall be 19 selected as follows: 20 21 The General Counsel shall be paid s.t a Schedule of the Board, "(A) (5 U.S.C. 531611. With the the Staff Director may appoint as he con- one-half from among individuals recom- mended by the minority leader of the Senate; and 22 "(B) one-half from among individuals recom-. 23 mended by the minority leader of the House of Relce- 24 sentatives. 25 "(2) 582 With the approval of the Board, the Staff l)h'eo- 37 1 tor may procure temporary and intermittent services to the 2 same extent 3 United 4 exceed the daily equivalent 5 in effect for grade GS-15 of the General Schedule as is authorized by section 3109 (b) of title 5, States Code, but at rates for individuals not to of the annual rate ,of basic pay (5 U.S.C. 6 5332). 7 8 9 "POWERS "SEc. 309. "(1) OF TItE BOARD (a) The Board shall haw_ the power-to formulate general policy and to review 10 actions of the supervisory officers with respect to the 11 administration 12 tions 608, 610, 611, 613, 614, 615, and 616 of title 13 18, United States (]ode; 14 15 "(2) of this title, tittle I of this Act, and sec- to oversee the development of prescribed forms under section 311 (a) ( 1); 16 "(3) to review rules and regulations prescribed 17 under section 104 of this Act or under this title to 18 assure consistency 19 assure that such rules and regulations 20 the extent practicable; their with the law and are uniform, to to 21 "(4) to render advisory opinions under section 313; 22 "(5) to expeditiously 23 hearings, 24 report apparent 25 forcement to encourage conduct voluntary investigations compliance, violations to the appropriate and and to law eh- authorities; 583 38 1 "(6) to administer oaths or afl_rmations; 2 "(7) to require by subpena, 3 mtm, the attendance 4 production 5 investigation 6 section 311 (c); and 7 "(8) signed by the Ch:ar-. and testimony of documentary of wimesses and the evidence relewmt to _my or hearing conducted by the Board under to pay witn,esses the same fees and mileage 8 as are paid in. like circ,umstances _n the courts of ;he 9 'United States. l0 ';'(b) Any district court ()Ifthe United 11 the jurisdiction 12 upon petition 13 subpena of the Board issued under subsection t4 an order requiring compliance with such subpena. Any :Jail- 15 ure to obey the order of such district court may be p'mri_;]:cd 16 by such district court as a contempt thereof. of which any ][nquiry is carried on, :n::t_CF , by the Board, 17 18 States, witLin in case of refusal to obey a (a) (7); i:!;s.ue ":KEPO][_TS "SEc. 310. The Board si:tall transmit reports to !;he of the 'U_ited States and to each ttouse of :lac 19 President 20 Congress no later than March 31 of ,each year. Each _;tLelh 21 report shall contain a detailed statement 22 activities of the Board in carrying 23 title:, together with respect, to. :he out its duties under this with recomn:Lendations for such legislative, or 24: other action as the Board considers appropriate.". 25 584 (b) (1) Section 311 (a) (9) of the Federal Elevation 89 I Campaign Act of 1971 (as so redesignated by subsection (a) 2 (1) of this section and by section 205(a) (1) of this Act), 3 relating to duties of the supervisory officer, is amended by 4 striking out "appropriate law enforcement authorities" and 5 inserting in lieu thereof "Board, pursuant to subsection 6 (c)(1)(B)". (2) Section 311 (c) (1) of such Act (as so redesignated 7 s 9 by subsection (a) (1) of .this section and by section 205 (b) (2) of this Act), relating to duties of the supervisory officer, * 10 is amended to read as :follows: 11 12 "(c) (1) (A) Any person who believes a violation of this title, title I of this Act, or section 608, 610, 611, 613, 13 614, 615, or 616 of title 18, United States Code, has oc/4 15 curred may file a complaint with the Board. "(B) Any supervisory officer who has reason to believe 16 a violation of this title, title I of this Act, or section 608, 610, 17 611, 613, 614, 615, or 616 of title 18, United States Code, 18 has occurred shah refer such apparent violation to the Board. 19 "(C) The Board, upon receiving any complain_ under 20 subparagraph (A) or referral under subparagraph (B), or if 21 it has reason to believe that any person has committeda vio22 lation of any such provision, shall notify the person involved 23 of such apparent violation and shall-- 24 "(i) report such apparent violation to the Attorney 25 General; or 585 40 1 "(ii) 2 lation. 3 "(D) make an investig'ation of such apparent rio- Any investigation under subparagraph (C)(ii) 4 shall..be conducted expeditiously and 'shall include a:[l ilk5 vestigation of reports and statements :filedby arty compl_in6 ant with respect to 'die apparent violation involved, if such 7 complainant is a candidate. Any notification or !investigation 8 made under subparaj,_raph (C) shall not be made public by 9 the Board or by any other person without the wr!itten cortsent 10 of fl_e person receiving such notification or the person v_ith 11 respect to whom such invest!iga.tionis raade. 12 "(E) The Board shall, at the request of any per:i;on 13 who receives notice of an apparent .violation under subpsra14 graph (C), conduct a hearing with respect to such apparent 15 violation, 16 "(F) If the Board shall determine, 'after any h_ves,dgi_;-- 17 tion under subparagraph (C) (ii), that there is rea:!;on 18 to believe that there has been an apparent violation of 19 this title, rifle I of this Act, or section 608, 610, 611, 61'1, 20 614,, 615, or 616 of title 1.8, United 8tares Oode, the Board 21 shall endeavor to correct arty such apparent violation by in22 formal methods of conference, conciliation, and persuasiono 23 "(G) The Board shall refer apl3arent viol_tions to the 24 appropriate law enforcement authorities if the Board is an25 able to correct sucl_ apparent violations, or if the t!_oa,rd 26 determines that any such referral is appropriate. 586 41 I "(H) Whenever in the judgment of the Board, after 2 affording due notice and an opportunity for a hearing, 3 person has engaged 4 practices which constitute or will constitute 5 any provision of this title, title I of this A.ct, or section 608_ 6 610, 611, 613, 614, 615, or 616 of title 1.8, United States 7 Code, the Attorney States 8 shall institute 9 nent or is s:bout to engage in any acts or a violation General on behalf of the United a civil action for relief, including or temporary 10 other appropriate any injunction, restraining of a pcrma-- order, or any order in the district court of the United 11 States for the district in which the person is found, resides, 12 or transacts 13 person has engaged or is about to engage 14 practices, 15 order, or other order shall be granted 16 court.". 17 business. a permanent Upon a proper or temporary showing that in such acts or injunction, restraining without bond by such (3) Section 311 of such Act (as so redesignated 18 section (a) (1) of this section), 19 supervisory 20 the following new subsection: such by sub_ relating to file duties of the officer, is amended ,by adding ,at the ,end thereof 21 "(d) In any case in which the Board refers an apparent 22 violation 23 shall respond 24 action t_ken by the Attorney 25 ent violation. Each such report shall be transmitted no later 26 than 60 days after the date the Board refers any apparent to the A:t_orney General, by report the .Attorney General to the /_o,ard with respeot _o any General regarding su'ch appar- $87 4:2 1 violation, and at the close of every 30-day period thereaiter 2 until there is final disposition of such al)parent violation. The a Board may from ,time ,to ti'me prepare and pu,blish rep'efts 4 on tl_e s*atus of .suchreferrkls.". 5 (4) The heading for section 311_ of. such Act; (ss so 6 redesignatcd by subsection (a) (1) of this section') is 7 amended to read as follows: 8 "DUTIES OF 9 THE SUPERVISORY BY THE OFFICER; INVESTIGATIONS BOARD". 10 (c) Title III of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 11 1971, rdating to disclosure of Federal c:ampail_ fund_',, is 12 amended by adding at the end ther{mf the following :nl_w 113 see_q:ons: 14: 15 16 "JUDICIAL lgEVIIqlW "Sst. 315. (a) The Board., the supervisory officers_';he national committee of any political pa.l:[y,,and any individml 17 eligible to vote in any election for the office ,of President. of 18 the 'United Sta.tes are authorized to institute such actions in 19 the appropriate distr!ict coru't of the United States, including 20 actions for declaratory judgmen_ or injunctive relief, as :me[y 21 be appropriate to implement, or eonsmm' any provision of t,_is 22 title, title I of this Act., or section 608, 610, 61][, 613, (;:[4, 23 615, or 616 of title 18, United States Code. The district co._rt 24 immediately shall certify a,ll' questions of constitutionallqF 25 of this title, title I of this Act;,, or section 608, 610, (;:11, 588 43 I 613, 614, 615, or 616 of rifle 18, United States Code, to 2 the United States court of appeals for the circuit involved, 3 which shall hear the matter sitting en banc. 4 "(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any 5 decision on a matter certified under subsection (a) shall 6 be reviewable by appeal directly to the Supreme Court of 7 the United States. Such appeal shall be brought no later than 8 :20 days after the &cision of the court of appeals. 9 "(e) It shall be the duty of the court of appeals and 10 of the Supreme Court of the United States to advance on 11 the docket and to expedite to the greatest possible extent 12 the disposition of any matter certified under subsection xa (a). 14 15 "AUTltORIZATION OF APPROPi_IATIONS "Sr_c. 316. Notwithstanding any other provision of 16 law, there are authorized to be appropriated to each of the 17 supervisory officers and to thc Board such sums as may be 18 necessary to enable each such supervisory officer and the 19 Board to carry out their duties under this Act.". 20 21 AI)VISOR¥OPINIONS S_C. 208. Title III of the Federal Election Campaign 22 Act of 1971, relating to disclosure of Federal 23 funds, is t_mended by inserting immediately 24 312 (as so redesignated by section 207(a) campaign after section (1) of this Act), 25 the following new section: 589 ,t4 I 2 "ADVIS0_Y "S_c. 313. OPI_I()NS (a) Upon written request to the B_r,_t 3 by any individual holding ]?ederal ofi_ce, any candidate I!,_r 4 _Federal office, or any political committee, the Board :_}_all 5 render an advisory opinion, in writing, within eLreasonable 6 time with respect to whether any specific transactioi:, o_' 7 activity by such individual, candidate, or political comm!iLtee 8 would constitute a violation of this title, title I of this Act, 9 or section 608, 610, 611, 613, 614, 615, or 616 of title 18, 10 United States Code. 11 "(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any 12 person with respect to whom an advisory opinion is render_:_d ;13 under subsection (a) who acts in good faith in accorden_e 14 with the provisions and findings of such advisory oplr:i(,n 15 shall be presumed to be in compliance with the provia_,!iC,,_ 16 of thiks title, title I of this Act, or section 608, 610, ¢;11 I, 17 613_ 614, 615, or 616 of title 18, United States Code, wi_h lS 19 respect to which such advisory opinion is rendered. "(c) Any request made, under subsection (_) shah [l,i_ 20 made public by the Board. The Board shaH, before :rende:c21 ing art advisory opkfion with respect to such request, provi,!ie 22 any k,terested party with an opportunity to transmit wl'itLen 23 comments to the Board with respect to such request.". 590 45 1 TITLE 2 III--GENERAL EFFECT PROVISIONS ON STATE LAW 3 SEC. 301. Section 403 of the Federal Election Cam- 4 paign Act of 1971, relating to effect on State law, is amended 5 to read as follows: (i 7 8 "EFFECT ON STATE LAW "SEc. 403. The provisions of this Act, and of rules prescribed under this Act, supersede and preempt any pro- 9 vision of State law with respect to election to ]?ederal office.". 10 11 PEi_IOD OF LII¥IITATIONS; ENFOI_CE1VKEI_T SEC. 302. Title IV of the Federal Election Campaign 12 Act of 1971, relating to general provisions, is amended by 13 redesignating section 406 as section 408 and by inserting 14 immediately after section 405 the following new sections: 15 16 "PERIOD OF LIMITATIONS "SEc. 406. (a) No person shall be prosecuted, tried, or 17 punished for any violation of title I of this Act, title III of 18 this Act, or section 608, 610, 611, 613, 614, 615, or 616 19 of title 18, United States Code, unless the indictment is 20 found or the information is instituted within 3 years after the 21 date of the violation. 22 23 "(b) l_otwithstanding any other provision of law"(1) the period oflimitation referred to in subsec- 59 ,t-6 1 tion (a) shall apply with respect to violations referr(d to 2 in such subsection committed before, on, or after i:he 3 effective date of this section; and 4 no person shall be pro:secuted,tried, or i[:,'_m- "(2) 5 ![shed for any act or omission which was a violati(,_ of 6 any provision of title I of this Act;, title III of this Act, 7 or section 608, 610, 611, or 61'1 of title 18, Uni'.ted 8 States Code, as in effect on the dt_y before 4he effective 9 (late of the Federal Election Campaign Act Amend[-- 10 ments of 1974, if 'such act or omission does m)t consfitl::t;e 11 a violation of any such provision, as amended 'by the 12 ]Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974. 13 Nothing in this subsection shall affect any proceeding pcn.!l.14 lng in any court of the United States on the effective (:.[ate 15 of this section. 16 17 "EN_FORCEMENT "!SEC. 407. 18 Supervisory (a) In any case in which _he Board of Officers, after notice and[ opportunity for a 19 heating on the record in accordance with section 554 c,f 20 title 5, United States Code, m_kes _ finding ths_t a pe_:_on 21 who, while a candid,_te for Federal office, failed to file a 22 report requh'edby title III of this Act;, a_d su.dt finding iks 23 made before the expiration of the time within which 2e 24 failure to file such report may be prosecuted a_sa violatior_ of 25 such title III, such person shall be disqualified from becc:m26 lng a candidate in any futttre election for ZFederaj office ir_,r 592 47 i a period of time beginning on thc date of such finding and 2 ending one year after ,the expiration of the term of the 3 Federal office for which such person was a candidate. 4 "(b) Any finding by the Board under subsection (a) 5 shall be subject to judicial review in accordance with the 6 provisions of chapter 7 of title 5, United States Code.". 7 TITLE IV--AMENDMENTS 8 9 EFFECTIVEDATES POLITICAL ACTIVITIES lo 11 12 TO OTHER LAWS; BY STATE AND LOCAL OFFICERS X_I)r_rnoxE_S Src. 401. (a) Section 15.02 (a) (3) of title 5, United States Code (relating to influencing elections, taking part in 13 political campaigns, prohibitions, exceptions), is amended to 14 read as follows' 15 16 "(3) ,bea candidate for elective office.". (b) (1) Section 1503 of title 5, United States Code, 17 relating to nonpartisan Political activity, is amended to read. 18 as follows: 19 .§ 1503. Nonpartisan 20 candidacies permitted ",Section 1502 (a) (3) of this title does not prohibit any 21 State or local officer or employee from being a candidate 22 in any election if none of the candidates is to be nominated 23 or elected at such election as representing a party any of 24 whose candidates for Presidential elector 25 the last preceding election at which receivedvotes in Presidential electors 26 were selected.". 593 48 1 (2) The table of sections for chapter 15, of title 5:, 2 United States Code, is amen&,,d by striking out the !ilt;,_._m 3 relating to section 1.503 Ired inserting in lieu thereof _:he 4 following new item: "150'k Nonpartisan candidacies permitted.". 5 (c) Section 1501 of tit]ke5, United States Code, :relf_t:,ng 6 to definitions, is amended-7 (1) by strikingoutparagraph (5); 8 (2) in para_aph 9 10 11 12 immediately after "Federal Reserve System ;" and (3) in paragraph (4) thereof, by striking out "; and" and inserting in lieu thereoJi a period. REPEAL OF COMMUlgI(_ATIOlgS MEDIA EXP]7_!x_DITU:Ii'_t] 13 14 (3) thereof, by inserting "and" I_IYfITATIONS SEC. 402. (a) (1) Title I of the Federal Election C_,,m- 15 paign Act of 1971, relating' to campaign communications:. !is 16 amended by striking out section 104: and by redesignating 17 sections 105 and 106;as sections 104 and 105, respectively. 18 (2) Section 1(}4 of such Act (as so redesignaterl by 19 paragraph (1) of tlhis subsection), :relating to regulafic,ns,. 20 is a_nended by striking out ", 1(],3(b), 104 (a), and :104(b)'" 21 and inserting in lieu thereof "and 103 (b)". 22 (b) Section 102 of the Federal ZElectionCampaign _55_t 23 of 1971, relating to defhfitions, is amended by striki,r_g 24: out paragraphs (1), (2), 594 (5), and ,{6), and by redesignat.- 49 ting 2 paragraphs (3) and (4)asparagraphs. (t)and (2), respectively. 3 (c) (1) Section 315 of theCommunieations Act of 1934 4 (relating t_) candidates for public office, facilities, rules) is 5 amended by striking out subsections (c), (d), and:(e), and 6 by redesignating subsections (f) and (g) as subsections (el 7 and (d), respectively. 8 (2) Section 315 (c) of such Act (as so redesignated by 9 paragraph (1) of this subsection), relating to definitions, 10 is amended to read as follows: 11 "(c) ]Forpurposes of this section-- 12 13 "(1) the ,term 'broadcasting station' includes a community antenna tele,dsion system; and 14 "(2) the terms 'licensee' and 'station licensee' 15 when used with respect to a community antenna tele- 16 vision system, mean the operator of such system.". 17 18 APPROPEIATIONS TO CAMPAIGN FUND SEc. 403. Section 9006 (a) of the Internal Revenue 19 Code of 1954 (relating to establishment of campaign fund) 20 is amendetl-21 (1) by striking out "as provided by appropriation 22 Acts" and inserting in lieu thereof "from time to time"; 23 and 24 (2) by adding at the end thereof tile following new 25 sentence: "There is appropriated to the fund for each 595 5O 1 fiscal year, out of amounts in the general fund of the 2 Treasury not otherwise appropriated, an amount eqnal 3 to the amounts so designated during each fiscal year, 4 which shall remain available to tZhefund without :ti_;cal 5 year limitation.". 6 ENTITLEMENTS OF ELIGII];LE CANDI-DATES 7 FROM PRESIDENTIAL 8 SEC. 404. (a) Subsection (a)(1) TO, PA,YM:I_NTS ]BLECTION CAMPAIGiN' ¥UNI1B of section 90('.,4 of 9 thc Internal Revenue Code of 1_954 I',relating to entifie:_:nalt lO of cligible candidates to payments) is amended to :_':z,ad 11 as follows: 12 "(1) The eligible candidates of each major ])_rty 13 in a presidential election shall be entitled to equal pay-. 14 ments under ._ection 9006 in an amount which, in fi;re 15 aggregate, shall not exceed $20,000,000.".. 16 (b) (1) Subs_tion (a) (2) (A) of section 9004 of 17 such Code (relating to entklement of eligible candidat,z!,,:_ to, 18 payments) is amended by striking out "computed" and in19 serting in lieu thereof "allowed". 20 (2) The first sentence of subsection (a) (3) of section 21 9004 of such Code (relating to entitlement of eligible can22 dida_testo payments) is amended by sl;rkkingout "computed" 23 and inserting in lieu thereof "allowed". 24 (c) (1) Section 9002 (1) of the Internal Revenue C,>de 25 of 11954 (relating to the definition c,f "authorized com:l_:,_it26 tee") is amended to read as follows: 596 51 1 "(1). ,The term 'authorized committee' means, with 2 respect to the candidates of a political party for Presi- 3 dent 4 political committee designated under section 302 (f) (1) 5 of the ]Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 by the 6 candidate of a political party for President of the United 7 States as his principal 8 (2) 9 10 11 12 13 14 definition and Vice President (A) (B) of such Code campaign in subparagraph out "an" and inserting United States, the campaign committee.". Section 9002 (11) of "qualified of the (relating expense") to the is amended-- (A) (iii) thereof, by striking in lieu thereof in the second sentence "the"; filereof, by striking out "an" and inserting in lieu thereof "his"; and (C) in the third sentence thereof, by striking out 15 "an" and inserting in lieu thereof "the". 16 (3) Section 9003 (b) of such Code (relating to major 17 parties ) is amended-- 18 (A) by striking out "committees" each place it 19 appears therein and inserting in lieu thereof at each 20 such place "committee"; 21 22 23 and (B) by striking out "any of" each place it appears therein. (4) Section 9003 (e) of such Code (relating to minor 24 and new parties) is amended by striking out "committees" 25 each place it appears therein and inserting in lieu thereof at 26 ca_nhsuch place "committee". 597 52 I (5) Section 9004 (b) ofsuch Code (relating to lim/uta- 2 tions) is amended by striking _)ut "committees" 3 it appears therein and inserting in lieu thereof ,at each such 4 place "committee". 5 each ]?][ace (6) Section 9004 (c) of such Code (relating to restric- 6 tions) is amended by striking out "committees" 7 it appears therein and inserting in lieu thereof at each such 8 place "committee". 9 (7) Section 9007 (b)(2) of such Code (relatin[!_to 10 repayments) 11 inserting in lieu thereof "committee". 12 (8) Section 9007 (b)(3) is amended by striking ()ut "comralttees" 13 repayments) 14 in lieu thereof "tl_e". 15 (9) each ]?]ace and[ of such Code (relating to is amended by striking out "any" and inserting Subsections (a) and (b) of section 9012 of Sl:LC]I 16 Code (relating to excess expenses and[ contributJ°ns, 17 tively), as amended by sections 406 (b) 18 Act, are each amended by striking out ':'any of his authorb;ed 19 committees" 20 thereof at each such place "his authorized 21 _ERTIFICATION 22 each place it appears FOR PAYMENT (2) and (3) of this an.d inserting BY C01_pTROLLER (relating to initial certifications 24 for payments) is amendedt:oread as follows: 598 GEN_[EA,L SEC. 405. (a) Section 9005 (a) o:f the Internal Rev,lmue Code of 1954 26 in lieu committee". 23 25 respec-. "(a) for eligibi][zity INITIAL CERTIFICA_rIONS,,---I_T0tlater days after the candidates of a political party than 16 for President 3 I and Vice President of the United States have met all ap-. 2 plicable conditions for eligibility to receive payments under 3 this chapter set forth in section 9003, the Comptroller Gen- 4 eral shall certify to the .Secretary for payment 5 candidates under section 9006 payment 6 which such candidates 7 (b) 8 Section 9003(a) conditions 9, 11 thereof 12 section out "with in paragraph is amended-- respect to which pay-. (1) and inserting in lleu by inserting "and" at the end of paragraph (2); 14 (3) 15 graph 16 by striking out ", and" at the end of para-. (3) and inserting in lieu thereof a period; and (4) by striking out paragraph FINANCING 18 OF PRESIDENTIAL SEC. 406. (a) Chapter (4). NOMINATING CONVENTIONS 95 of subtitle 1t of the Internal 19 Revenue Code of 1954 (relating to the presidential 20 campaign fund) 21 (relating to information on proposed expenses) lng in lieu thereof the following new section: 23 "SEC. 9008. PAYMENTS 24 election is amended by striking ()ut section 9008 22 25 9004.". "of such candidates"; (2) 13 under for payments) (1) by striking ment is sought" in full of amounts to of such Code (relating to general for eligibility 10 17 are entitled to such eligible FOR PRESIDENTIAL and insert;- NOMINATING CONVENTIONS. "(a) ESTABLmHMSNT OF Acco_zNTs.--The Secretary 599 54 1 shall maintain in the fund_ in addition to any accotmt w]_Ach 2 he main_:ains under section 9006 (a), a separate accomltt for 3 the :national committee of each major party and minor ;a,'l_v' . , va_ .D 4 The Secretary shall deposit in each such accounLtart amount 5 equM to the ampunt which ,each such committee may re,L_,E,,:ive 6 under subsection (b). Such deposits shall be drawn :fro]_l 7 amounts designated by individuals under section 6096 anLd 8 shall be made before any l_ansfer is made to any accour(; ti()]; 9 any eligible candidate under section 9006 (a). 10 "(b) ENTICrL.EHI_NTTO PAYHEN_ FROlVI:']:'H?E 11 _'Ul.CD.-12 "(1) MAJOR rAt_TIr_S.--Subject to the provii_ions ]3 of this section, the natlonal committee of a major _]:',._!J_ 14 shall be entitled to payments under paragraph 15 respect to any presidential nominating conventio:_::k, in 16 amounts which, in t]he aggregate, 17 $2,000,000. 18 "(2) MI_OR rARTIr_._Subject (3), wil_h shall not e_'!i:c,:_ed to the prov:isi,lms 19 of this section, 1;henation_[ connnittee of a mi_lor ]t?_':n;Y 20 shah be entitled to payments under paragr_]ph (3), _,;'ith 21 respect to any presidential nonfinating conventio_;i, !in 22 amounts which, in the aggregate, shah not exceed an 23 amount which 'bears t]he same ratio to the amounL;the 24 national committee of f; major party is entitled to re.L:_L _e 25 under paragraph (1) as the nmnber of popular v_)tes 600 i -d4_' 't 55 I received by the candidate 2 party, as such candidate, 3 election bears to the average number of popular 4 received by the candidates for President of the major 5 parties in the preceding presidential election. 6 "(3) for President of the minor in the preceding presidential PAY_E_Ts.--Upon receipt votes of certification 7 from the Comptroller General under subsection 8 Secretary shall make payments from the appropriate 9 count maintained under subsection (a) to the national party or minor party ac- 10 committee 11 elects to receive its entitlement 12 Such payments shall be available for use by such eom- 13 mittee in accordance with the provisions of subsection n of a major (g), the which under this subsection. (c). 15 "(4) LImTATION.--Payments to tile natlomd com- 16 mittee of a major party or minor party under this 17 subsection from the account designated for such eom- 18 mittee shall be limited to the amounts in such account 19 at the time of payment. 20 "(c) UsE or Fu_*Ds.--No part of any payment made 21 under subsection (b) shall be used to defray the expenses 22 of any candidate or delegate who is participating 23 presidential nominating convention. Such payments in any shall be 24 used only25 "(1) to defray expenses incurred with respect to 601 56 I a presidential nominating convention 2 payment of deposits) by or on behalf of the national 3 committee receiving such payments; or 4 "(2) (including' the to repay k,ans the proceeds of which were 5 used to defray such expenses, or otherwise to rcsl:ore 6 funds (other than contributions to defray such exi)cnscs 7 received by such committee) used to defray such ex- 8 penses. 9 "(d) LI_TAT_O>r or EXr'E_mTVRES.-- 10 "(1) MAaOR rAm:ms.--Except as provided hy 11 paragraph (3), the national committee of a, major ]?_,:r'[y 12 may not make expenditures with respect to a presidc,r:tial 13 nominating convention which, in. 'thc aggregate, exct-_cd 14 the amount of payments to which such committee is 15 entitled under subsection (b) (1). 16 "(2) MI_oR rARTms.--Except as provided by 17 paragraph (3), the national com:mittee of a mi:nor p:_rty lS may not make expenditures wi;ih respect to a p:<_si- 19 dential nominating convention which, in the aggre!'!:':tte, 20 exceed the amount of the entitlement of the national 21 committee of a major party under subsectic,n (b) (1]. 22 "(3) Excrr_rm_o--The Presidential Election (15tm- 23 paign Fund Advisory ]3oard may authorize the nat[,0ual 24 committee of a major party or minor party to make ex- 25 penditures which, in the aggregate, exceed the lhnita,llon 602 57 t established by paragraph (1) or paragraph (2) of '2. this subsection. Such authorization 3 a determination 4 and unforeseen 5 necessary to assure the effective operation of the presi- ¢; dential nominating 7 "(e) shall be based upon by such Board that, due to extraordinary circumstances, such expenditures are convention by sucZhcommittee. AW_dLAmLITY Or PAY_NTs.---The national corn- S mittee of a major party or minor party may receive payments 9 under subsection (b) (3) beginning 10 dar year immediately 11 a presidential 12 involved is held. 13 "(f) on July I of the calen- preceding the calendar year in which nominating convention of the political Tl_A_SrEg TOTm_ Fu_D.--If, convention after the close of a 14 presidential 15 committee 16 amount which it is entitled to receive under this section, there 17 are moneys remaining 18 mittee, the Secretary 19 to the fund. 2o "(g) 21 nominating party and after the national of the political party involved has been paid the in the account of such national comshall transfer the moneys so remaining CERTIFICATION BY COMPTROLLER GENERAL.--- Any major party or minor party may file fLst,atement with 22 the Comptroller General in such form and manner and-at 23 such times as he may require, designating the national com- 24 mittee statement shall 25 information required of such party. Such by section 803(b) include the of the federal 603 58 1 Election Campaigm Act of 1971, together with such addi2 tional information as the (_omp'troller General may requ_ire. 3 Upon receipt of a statement filed raider thc preceding :+;en4 tences, the Comptroller General promptly shall verify _ach 5 statement acc,oriting to such procedures and criteria _,:_]Lie 6 may establish anq shall certify to the Secretary for prxy:,:_tent 7 in full to any such c,ommittee of amounts to which s_,ach 8 committee may be entitled under subsection (b). Such 9 cerfifiea,tions shall be subject to an examination and aa(tit 10 Which the Comptroller General shall[ conduct :ao later than 11 December 31 of the calendar year in which the presi(t_!mt].al 12 nominating convention involved is held. 13 "(h) Rr_rxY_aE-x_rs..--Ttie Comptroller General :sMll 14 have the same authority to require repa_qnents from th,_!.ual5 tional committee of a ma,jot party or minor party lis ]_e 16 has with respect to repa_nnents from any eligible candidate 17 under section 900'7 (b). ']?heprovisions of seel;ion 90()7 (¢) 18 and section 9007 (d) shall apply with respect to any' r¢19 payment required by the Comptroller Genend underz this 20 subsection.". 21 (b) (1) Section 9009(a) of'such ,Code (relat]h,i!'t;,o 22 reports) is amended by striking' out "and" in paragraph ('2) 23 thereof; by striking out the period s_t the end of parag':taph 24 (3]) thereof and inserting in lieu tl_tereof "; ,_nd"; and by o 25 adding at the end thereof the folloxVing new paragr_:_phs: 604 59 I "(4) the expenses incurredby the national com.. 2 mittee of a major party or minor party with respect 3 to a presidential nominating convention; 4 "(5) the amounts certified by him under section 5 9008(g) for payment to each such committee; and 6 "(6) the amount of payments, if any, required from 7 such commit,tees under section 9008 (h)_ and the reasons 8 for each such payment.". 9 10 (2) The heading for section 9012 (a) of such Code (relating to excess campaign expenses) is amended by 11 striking out "CA_PAmN". 12 (3) Section 9012(a)(1) of such (:()de (relating to 13 excess expenses) is amended by adding '_t the end thereof 14 the following new sentence: "It shall be unlawful for the 15 national committee of a major party or minor party know16 ingly and willfully to incur expenses with respect to a presi17 dential nominating convention in excess of the expenditure 18 limitation applicable with respect to such committee under 19 section 9008 (d), unless the incurring of such expenses is 20 authorized by the Presidential Election Campaign Fund 21 ]Boardunder section 9008 (d) (3) .". 22 (4) Section 9012 (c) of such Code (relating to unlaw- 23 ful use 'cfipayments) is ,amended by rede'signating p_ragmph 24 (2) _s paragraph 25 paragraph (3) and by inserting immedia:tdy after (1) the tollowing new p_ragmph: 605 ,6O 1 "(2) It shall be unlawful for the national comn,.k,tee 2 of a major party or minor party which receives any pay- 3 ment under section 9008 (b) (3) to use, or authorize dae 4 use of, such payment,for any purpose other than a ]f_ur- 5 pose authorized by sec,tion 9008 (c).". 6 (5) Section 9012 (e)(1) of such Code (relati_g to 7 kickbacks and illegal payments) is amended by addhq' at 8 the end thereof the following new sentence: "It sha]] be 9 unlawful for the na,tional committee of a major party Orr:_inor 10 parl;y knowingly :and willfully :togive ,oraccept :any k-ic_,b,_tr,k '_' , , 11 or any illegal paymen.t in connection with ,any ex]'?,_nse 12 incurred by such committee w,ith respect to a presidential 13 nonfinating convention.". 14 (6) Section' 9012 (e) (3) of such Code (relating to 15 kickbacks and illegal payments) is amended by inse,:J?lin, g 16 immediately atter '"their authorized committees" the fol],:,w17 lng: ", or in connec.tion with any expense incurred by the 18 national committee of a major party or minors party with 19 respect to a presidential nominating convention,". 20 (c) The table of sections for chapter 95 of subtitle let 21 of such Code (relating to the presidential election c,ampa;gm 22 fund) is amended by striking out the item relating to s(....ion ',_'" 23 9008 and inserting in lieu thereof the following new iiil!em' "Sec. 606 9008. Payments tiolls?: for presidential nomJ[nating cc,n';'en- 61 1 (d) Section 276 of such Code (relating to certain indi- 2 rect contributions 3 lng out subsection 4 as subsection (c). 5 6 to political parties) is amended by strik- (c) and by redesignating TAX Rr._Vl_S sabsection (d) BY POI_I_ICAL CO_I_Tr_ES SEC. 407. Section 6012 (a) of the Internal Revenue 7 Code of 1954 (relating to persons required to make returns 8 of income) is amended by adding at the end thereof the 9 following new sentence: "The Secretary or his de.legate 10 shall, by regulation, exempt from the requirement of making' 11 returns under this section any political committee (as de-. 12 fined in section 301 (d) of the Federal Election Campaign 13 Act of 1971) having no gross income for the taxable year."_ 14 PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY MATCHING PAYMEN!r AbCOUNT 15 S_C. 408. (a) The analysis of subtitles at the beginning 16 of the Internal Revenue ©ode of 1954 is amended by adding 17 at the end thereof the following: "SuBTrrr._ H. Financing of presidential election campaigns.",, 18 (b) The analysis of chap,ters at the beginning of sub-. 19 title It of such Code is amended by adding at the end. 20 thereof the following: "CrrArrra 21 22 97. Presider_tial Account.". Primary M_tehing Payment ('c) Subtitle It of such Code is amended by adding at; the end thereof the following new chapter: 607 62 1 "CHAPTER 2 3 97--PRESIDENTIAL MATCHING "SEC. "Sec. "Sec. 9031. Short title. 9039. Definitions. "Sec. ';Sec. ';Sec. ';Sec. ;'Sec. "Sec. "Sec. "Sec. 9033. 9034. 9035. 9036. 9037. 9038. 9039. 9040. "Sec. "Sec. 9042. Criminal[ penalties. TITLE. "This chapter may be cited as the 'Presidential 5 Matching Payment Account Act'. 6 "SEC. 7 8 9 ACCOUNT Eligibility for payment. Entitlement of eligibZ[e candidates to payme:_,i::;. Qualified campaign expense limitation. Ceitification by Comptroller General. Payments to eligible cmldidates. Examirmtions and audits; repayments. Reports to Congress; r%oafiations. Participation of Comptroller General in jmi icial proceedings. 904t. Judicial review. 9031. SHORT 4 PAYMENT PRIMARY' 9032. DEFINITIONS. ":For purposes of this chapter-"(1) The term 'authorized :respect to the candidates committee' means, 'with of a polkical party for P:',_si- 10 dent and Vice President 11 polidoal comnfittee desilcated 12 of the :Federal Election Oampaign 13 candi&;te of a polkical party for President 14 States as his principal campaign committee. 15 Prin:,_ry "(2) of the United States, ffm uniter sec._ion 302 (f) (1.), Act ,of,1971 by the, of the U:niied The term 'candidate' means an individual ,M:to 16 seeks nomination 17 United States. :For purposes of this paragraph, 18 vidual shall be considered to seek nomination for ele('timl 608 for 4_ection to, be President of 'the an ]ndi- 63 I if he '(A) takes the action necessary under the law of 2 a State to qualify himself for nomination for 'election, 3 (B) receives contributions 4 expenses, or (C) gives his consent for any other person 5 to receive contributions 6 expenses on his behalf. 7 8 9 10 11 "(3) The term Comptroller "(4) or incurs qualified campMgn or to incur qualified campaign 'Comptroller General' means the General of the United States_ Except as provided by section 9034 (a), the term 'contribution'-"(A) means a gift, subscription, 10an, advance, 12 or deposit of money, or anything 13 ment of which was made on or after the beginning 14 of the ca.lendar year 15 calendar 'year of the presidenfiM 16 spect to which such gift, subscription, loan, advance, 17 or deposit; of money, or anything 18 for the purpose of influencing the result of a primary 19 election, 20 "(ZB) 21 ment, whether 22 a contribution for any .such purpose, 23 24 "(C) means of value, the pay- immedial_ly a contract, preceding file election with re- of 'value, is made, promise, or not legally enforceable, or agreeto make means a transfer of funds between polit- ical committees, and 609 t34 1 "(I)) means the payment by any person r:[thcr 2 than a candidate,, 3 compensation 4 person 5 conm_ittee witho,.t charge, 1)itt 6 or his aathorized for the personal which are rendered eommkt_z:._,,of services to the of a_:_,:ther candida i(, or "(_El)does_c,tinclude-- 7 "(i) except as provided 8 (D), 9 to or for the benefit of a candidate 1)v s:l[in- 10 dividual who receives no compensatim_ for 11 rendering 12 the candidate, or 13 the value of personal in subpi_ra,l?:ra]?h "(ii) such service t.o or for the ben(,:Iil of payments (5) 15 the Presidential 16 established under section 9037 (a). "(6) The term 'matching under section 9037. 14[ 17 services ren,:[,_r.c,d Primary payment account Matching Payment The term 'matching payment period' ]:I/('I_tl]S Ac,'_'unt n_,:_.._ms !8 the period beginning with the be:ginning of the cale:ltdar 19 year in which a general election for the office of }":,'si- 20 dent of the United States will be ihetd and ending {)_ Go 21 date on which 22 whose nomination 23 date for the office of l?resident of the United States;,, 24 25 610 "(7) the national convention cf the I.:Lt'ty a candidate seeks nornina]:es its c_,:_d[-- The term 'primary election' means an _:1,_,x,,- tion, including a rtmoff election or a nominating con v,m-- 65 ! tlon or caucus held by a political party, for the selection '2 of delegates to a national nominating 3 political party, or for the expression of a :preference for 4 the nomination of persons for electi_)n to the office of 5 President of the United States. 6 "(8) convention of a The term 'political committe_' means ally in-- 7 dividual, committee, association, or organization (wheth- 8 er or not incorporated) 9 incurs qualified campaign expenses for tile purpose of which accepts contributions or 10 influencing, 11 of any person for election to the office of President 12 of the United States. 13 "(9) or attempting to influence, the nomination The term 'qualified campaign expense' means 14 a purchase, payment, distribution, loan, advance, deposit, 15 or gift of money or of anything of valuc_-- 16 "(A) incurred or by his au.- in connection with his cam-- 17 thofized 18 paign for nomination for election, and 19 "(B) committee, by a candidate, neither the incurring a violation nor' payment of 20 which constitutes of any law of the 21 United States or of the State in which the expense 22 is incurred or paid. 23 For purposes of this paragraph, an expense is incurred 24 by a candidate or by an authorized committee if it is 25 incurred by a person specifically authorized in writing 611 166 1 by the candidate or ccnmnttee, 2 incur such expense on behalf o:i the candidate 3 committee. 4 5 6 7 "(10) as the case may b% to or the The term 'State' means each State oJ! '.:Zhe United States and the District of Columbia. "SEC. 9033. ELIGIBILITY "(a) FOR PAYMENTS. CoxmTIO_s.--To be eligible to receive payn:: mrs 8 under section 9037, a candidate 9 "(1) shall, in writing-- agree to obtain and furnish to the Comptrdler 10 General any evidence ihe may request of qualified .:['_m- 11 paign expenses, 12 "(2) agree to keep and furnish to the Comptro)ler 13 General any records, books, and[ other informatio:;B ]% 14= may request, and 15 "(3) agree to art audit and examination by i:Pe 16 Comp[roller General under section 9038 anq to pay :_:ay 17 amounts required to be paid under such section. 18 "(b) EXPENSE LIMtTATION; DECLARATION OF ]]._- 19 TENT; 20 ceive payments under section 9037, a candidate shall ceF?tify 21 to tlhe Comptroller General that-- 22 ]![INIMUM "(1) (Jo-x'rmB_C' _a'ro_xs.---To- be eligible tc t'e-- the candidate and his authorized corem;ti:ce 23 will not incur qualified, campaign 24 the limitation .on such expenses under section 903;.5, 25 612 "(2) the candidate expenses in ...,,x-,_'.._.;_:,., of is seeking nomination ['_,/' a 67 1 political party for election to the office of President of 2 the United Sta_es, 3 ' "(3) the candidate has received contributions 4 which, in the aggregate, 5 from residents of each of at least 20 States, and 6 7 8 "(4) the 'aggregate.ofeontributi, ons receivedfrom any person under paragraph "SEC. 9034. ENTITLEMENT 9 10 exceed $5,000 in contributions (3) does not exceed $250. OF ELIGIBLE CANDIDATES TO PAYMENTS. "(a) I_ GE>rE_AL.--Every candidate who is eligible to 11 receive paymen.ts under section 9033 is entitled to payments 12 under section 9037 in an .amo.unt equal to the amount of each 13 contribution received by such candidate on or after the begin- 14 ning of the calendar year immediately 15 year of the presidential 16 candidate is .seeking n.omin'ation, or by his authorized 17 mittee, disregarding 18 person the calendar election wit'h respect t,o which such any amount to the extent preceding of contributions tha$ the total com- from any of the amounts con-. 19. tributed by such person on or after the beginning of such 20 preceding calendar year exceeds $250. For purposes of this 21 snbsection 22 means a gift of money made by a written instrument 23 identifies the person making the contribution 24 and mailing 25 loan, advance, and section address, 9033 (b), the term 'contribution' which. by full name but does not include a subscdptlon,, or deposit of money, or anything described 61 3 68 i 2 3 in subparagraph "(b) (B), (C), or (D) of section 9032 (4). L_MITATm_S.--.The total amount of p.ayqnerL_t;:i_ to which a candidate is entitled under subsection (a) shall not 4 exceed 50 percent of the expenditure limi,t.ation established 5 by section 608 (c) (1) (A) of title 18, United States Cc,de. 6 7 "SEC. 9035. QUALIFIED CAMPAIGN F,XPENSE LIMITATIr,)N. "No candidate shall knowingly bm,ur qualit]M camp_!_.igm 8 expenses in excess ofthe expenditure limitation establ!istled 9 by section 608 (c) (1) (A) of title 18, United States ();ode. 10 11 "SEC. 90311. CERTIFICATION "(a) INITIAL BY COMPTROLLER CERTIFICATIONS.--_0t GENE]R/ti,. later thart 10 12 days after a candidate estttbli,shes his eligibility ander sec::;ion 13 9033 to receive p'ayments under section 9037, the 0o:lnp14 troller General shall certify to the Secretary for payl:!r_elat 15 to such candidate under ,seeti,on 90:'37 paymen,t in futl of 16 amotmts to which such ,candidate is entitled under sec'r:km 17 908;4. i8 "(b) FINALITY OF DISTERMIlgATIONS.---Initialc,,_:.,rti- 19 fications by the Comptroller General under subsection (;._), 20 and: all determinations made by him under this ch_q!ter, 21 are final and conclusive, except _o tike extent _hat they are 22 subject to examination and audit by the Comptroller General 23 und[e_ section 9038 and judicial review under seetbn 9041. 2_t 25 614 ~S]EIC. 90370 PAYMENTS "(_a) TO ELIGIBLE ESTABLISHMEIq'T OF CANDIDATES. Accov_T.--The Secreta:ry 69 :1 shall maintain in the Presidential Election Campaign Fund 2 established by section 9006 (a), in addi,tion to any account 3 which he maintains under such section, a separate account 4 to be known as the Presidential Primary 5 ment shall 6 matching Payment 7 political party 8 section 9033, the amount avaiMble ,after the Secretary 9 termines that amounts for paymen'ts under section 9006 (c) Account. The and for payments 11 for such payments. "(b) Pay- into the account, for use by the candida'te of any' under de-. under section 9007 (b) (3) are available PAYMENTS FROM THE 13 AccouNT.--Upon 14 troller General under section 9036, 15 ginning .of ,the matching 16 his delegate MATCHI:NG PAYMENT receipt of a certifica¢i,on from the Comp-- payment but not before the beperiod, the Secretary or shall promptly transfer the amount certified by :IT the Comptroller ]B deposit who is eligible to receive peyments 10 12 Secretary Matching General {rom the matching psyment ,ac-. o0qnt to the can.didate, In making tach transfers to candi., ._9 dates of 'the same political party, the ,Secretary _r his dele, _0 gate shall seek to achieve ail equitable distribution of fund_ 21 available under subsection (a), and _he Seoretary or hlm22 deleote shall take into account, in seeking to achieve aa 23 equitable distribution, the sequence in which such certifies, 24 tions are received. 25 litical party Transfers to candidates of the same po_ may not exceed an amount which is equal to 615 7O I 45 percent of the total amount awJlable 2 payment 3 exceed an amount which is equal to 25 percent of the l:c:,t_l 4 amount available in the matching 5 "SEe. account;, and transfers to any candidate 9038. EXAMINATIONS 6 "(a) 7 ing payment 8 a t]aorough examination 9 expenses of eve.fy candidate 10 11 12 payment may not account. AND AULDITS; REPAY]¥IEN'TS. EXA_I_ATIOXS A_D AUD:ITS.---Af.ter each m_l:eh.period, the Comptroller who received payments "(b) in the :matc,.]::_ng General shall co:a,iiuc:i and audit of the qtralified cam]?;_]'_,n and hi_ authorized commi:;tee under section 9037. REPAY_4r_z_s..-"(1) If the Comptroller General determines '21at 13 any portion of the paymen,ts made to a candidate :t!_..',om 14 the matching 1.5 aggregate 16 was entitled under 17 candidate, 18 or his delegate an amount ,equal vo the a_mount of excess 19 payments. 20 "(2) payment account was in excess o:l:.the amount .of payments to which such candi.,:![ate section 9034, tie shall1 not_y 1;he and the candidate shall pay to the Secr._,llary If the Corot)troller General determines that 21 any amount of any payment madLe to a candidate 22 the matching payment account w,_s used for any' put'pc)se 23 other than-- 24 616 "(A) to defray the qualified campaign f:l:om ,E_x.- 71 '1 penses with respect _;o which such payment was 2 made, or 3 "(B) to repay loans the proceeds to restore of which 4 were used, or otherwise funds (o.l;her 5 than contrlbutlorrs to defray qualified campaign ex- 6 penses which were received and expended) which 7 were u,sed, to defray qualified campaign expenses, 8 he shall notify such candidate of the amount so used, and 9 the candidate shall pay to the Secretary or his delegate 10 an amount equal to such amount. 11 "(3) 12 matching 13 liquidation of all obligations to pay qualified campaign 14 expenses incurred for a period not exceeding 6 months 15 after the end of the matching payment period. After 16 all obligations have been liquidated, 17 unexpended 18 .counts which bears the same ratio to the total unex- 19 pended balance as the total amount received from the 20 matching payment account bears to the total of all 21 deposits 22 promptly repaid to the matching payment account. 23 "(c) 24 Amounts received by a candidate frmn the payment account may be retained for the that portion of any balance remaining in the candidate's ac- made into the candidate's accounts shall be NOTIFmATIOX.---NO notification shall be made by the Comptroller General under subsection (b) with respect 61 '7 72 1 to a matching 2 end of such period. 3 "(d) payment period more than 3 years .a.fte_'Lihe DEposvr o_' R:EPAYME_'__cs.--All pa3mtent_ re- 4 ceived by _,he Secretary or his delegate under subsection 5 shall bt deposited by him ill the matching payment acco_:ln:I. 6 "SEC. 9039. REPORTS 7 "(a) 8 as practicable 9 a tull report 10 TO CONGRESS; REGULATIONS. ZREPOR_I!s.--TheComptroller General shall, as !!oon after each matching p,,.ayment period, to tlhe Senate and House submi[t of Re]?resental:i,;_es setting fort;h-- ll "(1) the qualified campaig_:l expenses; 12 such detail as the Comptroller 1.3 sary) 14 and their autlhorized committees, 15 16 (b) Ge:aeral detormines rt./!.ces- incurred by the ,_andidates of each politic_al p!t:r'ty "(2) the amounts certified by him under secl;ion 9036 for payment 17 (slhow, in to each eligible candidate, and "{3) the amount of pa.ymen_s, if any, required fr om 18 candidaJtes under section 9038, and ,the reasons for ,_!,ach 19 payment 20 Eae]h report 21 printed as a Senate document, 22 "(b) required. submitted pursuant to this section RI_OIJLATIOSS, E_rC,-- The sMll: he Com'pm llerOe: .4' ral 23' is all_horized _o prescribe rules and rel_tt!a,tions hi aeeord.a:l,ee with the provisimts of .mbseetkm 618 (e), to eondttot ex_ai:rm- 73 1 tions and audits (in addition to the examinations and audits 2 required by section 9038 (a)), 3 to require the keeping and submission of any books, records, 4 and information, 5 carry out his responsibilities 6 7 "(e) to conduct investigations, which he determines and to be necessary to, under this chapter. REVIEW OF REGULATIONS.-- "(1) The Comptroller General, before prescribing 8 any rule or regulation under subsection 9 mit a statement (b), shall trans- with respect to such rule or regulation 10 to the Committee on Rules and Administration 11 Senate and to the Committee on ]louse Administration 12 of the House of Representatives, 13 provisions 14 forth the proposed rule or regulation and shall contain 15 a detailed explanation 16 regulation. 17 "(2) of this subsection. of the in accordance with the Such statement shall set and justification If either such committee action, disapprove ot! such rule or does not, through 18 appropriate 19 regulation set forth in such statement; no latcr than 30 20 legislative 21 the Comptroller 22 regulation. 23 any rule or regulation 24 such committee under this paragraph. days after receipt General the proposed of such statement, may prescribe The Comptro_er rule or then such rule or General may not prescribe which is disapproved by either 61.9 74 1 "(3) For purposes of this subsection, the tc,rra 2 'legislative days' does not include any calendar da:,?.;m S which both Houses of the ('_ongressare not !in sessio:t:_, ·t "SEC. 9040. PARTICIPATION 5 6 BY COMPTROLLER GENE]t;L_-tff, IN JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS. "(a) ArP_mA_CE :S_ Cotr_S:SL. The Comptr_:,[ler 7 General is authorized to appear in and defend against any 8 action instituted under this section, &;her by attorneys e.m.9 ployed in his office or by counsel whom he may appoint wilh-10 out regard to the provisiorks of title 5, United States Cofie,, 11 governing appointments in the competitive service, a_:_.d. 12 whose compensation he may fix without regard to the p:_'o-. 13 visions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 5:!; of 14 such title. 15 "(b) Rr,covnR¥ ov Gm,TArN Px¥_Ex_rs. The Comp- 16 troller General is authorized, through attorneys and eou_:_:_cl 17 described in subsection (a),, to instltute actions in the dist:d,?t 18 courts of the United States to seek recovery of any arnout_t;s 19 determined to be payable to the Secretary or his delegate _ts 20 a result of an examination and audit made pursuant to s:,.,,>21 tion 9038. 22 "(c) Isarr_crrrvE tiE, mr.---The Comptroller (lena>ral 23 is authorized, through attorneys and counsel de:scribedin s_:_}:,.. 24: section (a), to petition the courtsof th e United States for in-. 620 75 1 junctive relief as is appropriate 2 of this chapter. 3 "(d) ArrEAL.--The to implement any provision Comptroller General is author- 4 izcd on behalf of the United States to appeal from, and to 5 petition 6 ments, or decrees entered with respect to actions in which 7 he appears pursuant to the authority 8 "SEC. 9 the Supreme 9041. JUDICIAL "(a) Court for certiorari to review, judg- provided in this section. REVIEW. llEVIEW or AGE_cY AcT_o:_ B_ ThE Co_rr- 10 _r_OLL_R GE_l_AL.--Any agency action by the Comp- 11 troller General made under the provisions of this chapter 12 shall be subject to review by the United States Court of 13 Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upon petition 14 filed in such court within 30 days after the agency 15 by the Comptroller 16 General for which review is sought. ,, (b) REvIm_ PROCEDUR_s.--The provi:_ions of chapter 17 7 of title 5, United 18 of any agency action, as defincd in section 551 (13) 19 5, United States Code, by the ComptrOller GenerM. 20 "SEC. 9042. CRIMINAL 21 action "(a) ExcEss States Code, apply to judicial review of title PENALTIES, CAMrAIO_ Exrr_rsEs.--Any person 22 who violates the provisions of section 9035 Shall be fined 23 not more than $25;000, or ]mprlsoned not more than 5 years, 24 or both. Any officer or member of any political committee 6:21 76 1 who knowingly 2 the provisions of section 9035 _shall be fined not more than 3 825,000, 4 5 consents to any expenditure in violations, of or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or b(::_t;]_.. "(b) U_LAWrUL Us_: OFPAY:m_XTS.-"(1) It is unlawful for any person who recc![ves 6 any payment raider section 9037, or to whom any por- 7 tion of any such payment _s transferred, 8 willfully to use, or authorize 9 or such portion for any purpose other than-- 10 11 knowingly ,%nd the use of, such payment "(A) to defray qualified campaign expe:_:i;es, "(B) to repay loans the proceeds of wktich or 12 13 were used, or otherwise to restore funds {other i:han 14 contributions 15 which were received and expended) 16 used, to defray qualified carapaign expenses. 17 "{2) to defray qualified campa!tgn expenses which were Any person who violates the provisiorts otf 18 paragraph l.q or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both. 20 '" (c) FALSE 21 "(1) 22 willfully-- 23 (1) shall be fined not more than $10,000,. STATEMEIq'TS, ETc.--. It is unlawful for any person knowingly and "(A) to famish any false, fictitious, or frmldu- 24 lent evidence, books, or infm_nation 25 troller General under this chapter, or to include in 622 to the ©omp- 77 I any evidence, books, or information so furnished any 2 misrepresentation 3 or conceal any evidence, books, or information role- 4 vant to a certification by the Comptroller General 5 or an examination and audit by the Comptroller 6 General 7 of a material under this chapter, "(B) fact, or to falsify or to fail to furnish to the Comptroller Gen- S eral any records, books, or information 9 by him for purposes of this chapter. 10 "(2) Any person who violates the provisions 11 paragraph 12 or imprisoned 13 "(d) 14 requested (1) of shall be fined not more than $10,000, not more than 5 years, or both. KICKnACKS AND ILI_r_GALPAYM:¢_TS.-"(1) It iS unlawful for any person knowingly and 15 willfully to give or accept any kickback or any illegal 16 payment in connection 17 expense of a candidate, 18 who receives payments under section 9037. 19 "(2) Any person 20 paragraph 21 or imprisoned 22 "(3) (2), (1) with any qualified or his authorized campaign committee, who violates the provisions of shall lie fined not more than $10,000, not more than 5 years, or both. In addition to the pena}:typrovided by p_a- 23 graph any person who accepts any kickback or 24 illegal payment in connection wi.th any qualified cam- 25 paigql expense of a candidate or his authorized commit- 623 78 i tee shall pay to t'he Secretary for deposit in the m,: _.h-. 2 lng payment a of ,the kickback or payment received.. ,' " 4 .account, an amount equal to 125 per, , ,:,at: REVIEW i_EGULA'IXONS 5 SEC. 409. 6 Code of 1954 7 is araended by ad(ting at the end thereof the following :H,i!:w 8 subsection' 9 10 "(C) (a) OF Section 9009 of the Internal ][{ev,:_r::ae (relating' to reports to Congress; regulati.o:m_) I{EVIEW "(1) The OF REGULATIONS,,- Comptroller General, before 11 lng any rule or regulation 12 transmit a statement with respect to such rule or r,[_l;!;u-. 13 lation to the (,omnntt(.e. on Rules and Administrati(:,:][ of 14 the Senate and to the Committee on House Admini_i;t::ca- I5 tion of the House of Representatives, 16 the provisions of this subsection. Such statement 17 ti,. a forth the proposed rule or regulat}on and shall cont_, ='. 18 detailed 19 :regulation. 20 explanation "(2) under subsection ].)res,i:]:[P- and justification If either such c,onnnittee (b), ,,]la]]."' in accordance 'wifia sha]t _,et of sach rule or does not, thr,:mgh 21 appropriate 22 ulation sst: forth in such statement 23 [legislative days after :receipt ,of such statementl, then :".h,._ : 24 Comptroller 25 lati°n. The ComPtroller General may not prescribe any 624 action, disapprove the proposed nile or rog- General relay prescribe no later than ':"_ ,i) L/ such nile or r:_:::'u- , ',)-- 79 1 rule or regulation which is disapproved by either such 2 committee under this paragraph. 3 "(3) For purposes of this subsection, ,the term 'leg- 4 islative days' does not include any calendar day on which 5 both Houses of the Congress are not in session.". 6 (b) Section 9009 (b) of such Code (relating to regu- 7 lations, etc.) 8 the provisions of subsection 9 ulations". 10 11 is amended by inserting (c)" EFFECTIVE SEC. 410. "ill accordance immediately after "reg- DATES (a) Except as provided by subsection 12 the foregoing provisions 13 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act. 14 (b) The amendments with (b), of this Act shall become effective made by sections 4:03, 404, 405, 15 406, 407, 408, and 409 shall apply with respect to taxable 16 years beginning after ]December 31, 1973. 625 2 =,q'? _S fi JJ 626 '¥ - ¢ _ _ _'._.._.., _ _ _--_= _ '....... "'*" ._ .......... '" _ 'i,_ REPORT TO ACCOMPANY HR. 1690 HOUSE COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION 93d Congress, 2(1 Session FEDERAL - - ELECTION - House Report No. 93-1239 CAMPAIGN AMENDMENTS ACT OF 1974 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE TOGETHER VIEWS, ON HOUSE WITH ADMINISTRATION MINORITY SUPPLEMENTAL VIEWS, VIEWS, VIEWS SEPARATE AND ADDITIONAL TO ACCOMPANY H.R. 16090 I TO IMPOSE OVERALL LIMITATIONS ON CAMPAIGN EX- PENDITURES AND POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS; TO PROVIDE THAT EACH CANDIDATE FOR FEDERAL OFFICE SI:fALL DESIGNATE A PRINCIPAL CAMPAIGN C4)MMITTEE; TO PROVIDE FOR A SINGLE REPORTING RESPONSIBILI_TY WITH RESPECT TO RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURES BY CERTAIN POLITICAL COMMITTEES: TO CHANGE THE TIMES FOR THE FILING OF REPORTS REGARDING CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES AND POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS; TO PROVIDE F'0R PUBLIC FINANCING OF PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATING OONVENTION,S AND PRESIDFZNTIA3_ PRIMARY ELECTIONS; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES JULY 1974.--Committed to the Committee on the State of the Union and ordered 30, U.S. 35-906 O GOVERNMENT WASHINGTON PRINTING of the Whole House to be printed OFFICE : 1974 6:31 COMMI_._TEE O:N HOUSE WAYNE L. HAYS, FRANK THOMPSON, _R., New Jersey JOHN H. DENT, Pennsylva:aia LUCIEN N. NEDZI, M:lchtg_n JOHN BRADEMAS, Irtdiana KENN]_TH J. GRAY, Illinois AUGUSTUS F. HAWKINS, California TOM S. GETTYS, South Carolina BERTRAM L. PODELL, New York FRANK ANNUNZlO, Illinois JOSEPtl M. GAYDOS, Penr sylvania ED JONES, Tennessee ROBI_RT H. MOLLO;FiAN, West Virginia EDWARD I. KOCH, New York DAWSON' MATHIS, Georgia JOHN ADMINIS';I?i]Z,&TIOi]_[ T. Ohio, WALKER, (II) 632 Chairmai*t. WILLIAM L. DIE!:E:I:NSON, Alabama SAMUEL L. DE¥];::_[FI, Ohiio JAMES C. CLE¥ ]_i:IZ,AND, ;!_ew Hampshire ORVAL HANSE;'q, ]:daho PHILIP M. CRA:!q]_., Illin(ds JOHN WARE, Pela ilsylvar ia BILL FRENZEI.,, M;inneso_a CHARLES E. W:i;G(_INS, (._altfornla JAMES F. HASTI:;'..IGS, New York HAROLD V. FR0, I);HLICEI, Wisconsin M. CALDWELL :B_FULER, Virginia Staff Director CONTENTS Purpose of bill .................................................... Committee action .................................................. Background ........................................................ What the bill does .................................................. Definitions ....................................................... Title I--Criminal Code amendments: Contribution limits ........................................ ExpenditUre limits .......................................... Independent expenditures ................................... Title II--Disclosure of Federal campaign funds: Principal campaign committee .............................. RePorting requirements .................................... Enforcement entity ........................................ Advisory opinions .......................................... Congressional review of regulations .......................... Title III-- General provisions: Preemption of State laws ................................. Title IV--Amendments to other laws; effective dates: Political activities by State and local officers and employees ..... Public financing of Presidential elections ....................... General elections ........................................... Nominating conventions ..................................... Presidential primary elections ................................ Public financing limited to Presidential elections ................ Conclusion......................................................... Section-by-section summary of the bill: Short title ............................................ Title I--Criminal Code amendments: Limitations on contributions and expenditures .................. Definitions of political committee, contribution, expenditure, and principal campaign committee .......................... Political funds of corporations or labor organizations ............ Effect on State law ......................................... Title II--Disclosure of Federal campaign funds ....................... Registration of political committees; statements ................ Reports by political committees and candidates ................ Formal requirements for reports and statements ................ Dut;es of the supervisory officer ............................. Definitions of political committee, contribution, expenditure, and supervisory Officer........................................ Board of Supervisory Officers ............................... Advisory opinions ............................... : ........... Title III--General provisions: Effect on State law .......................................... Period of limitations; enforcement ............................ Title IV--Amendments to other laws; effective dates: Political activities by State and local officers and employees ..... Repeal of communications media expenditure limitations ....... Automatic transfers to campaign fund ......................... Entitlements of eligible candidates to payments from Presidential Election Campaign Fund .............................. Certification for payment by Comptroller General ............. Financing of Presidential nominating conventions ............. Tax returns by political committees ........................... Presidential primary matching payment account ............... Effective dates ............................................. Changes in existing law ............................................. Title 18, United States Code ..................................... Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 ............................ Title 5, United States Code ................................ : ..... Internal Revenue Code of 1954 ................................... Page. 1 2 2 4: 4: 5 6 6 7' 7' 8 8 9 10 11 11 12 12 12 13 14: 14 15 19 20 21 21 22 23 24 24 25 27 30 31 31 32 32 32 33 33 33 35 35 40 41 41 54 83 87 (lid 633 2d Session 93D CONORESS } HOUSE 0F REPRESENTATIVES FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN 1974 { No. 93-1239 Rm_oxrr ACT AMENDMENTS OF JULY 30, 1974.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House On the State of the Union and ordered to be printed Mr. HAYS, from the Committee on House Administration, submitted the following REPORT Together with minority views, separate views, Supplemental and additional views [To accompany views, H.R. 16090] The Committee on House Administration, to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 16090) to impose overall limitations on campaign expenditures and political contributions; to provide that each candidate for Federal office shall designate a principal campaign committee; to provide for a single reporting responsibility with respect '_' to receipts and expenditures by certain political committees; to change the times for the filing of reports regarding campaign expenditures and political contributions; to provide for public financing of Presidential nominating conventions and Presidential primary elections; and for other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon without amendment and recommends that the bill do pass. PURPOSE OF THE BILL The purpose of the bill is fourfold: (1) To place limitations on campaign contributions and expenditures; (2) To facilitate the reporting and disclosure of the sources and disposition of campaign funds by centralizing campaign expenditure and contribution reporting; (3) To establish a Board of Supervisory Officers to oversee enforcement of and compliance with Federal campaign laws; and (4) To strengthen the law for public financing of Presidential general elections, and to authorize the use of the dollar checkoff _nd for financing presidential Nominating Conventions and campaigns for nomination to the office of President. (1) 635 2 COMMITTEE ACTION H.R. 16090 was introduced and considered against a backi!!l;_'o'und of dissatisfaction with the recently enacted Federal law regulating campaig_ financing iii elections for Federal office. The Subcommittee on Elections of the Committee on House .:!,. drainistration held public hearings on election 'amendments on October 2, 10, 16, ':25,November It4 and 29, 1973. The full committee mm'].::+dup the bill in public sessions held on March 2_., 27_ April 2, 10, 23 ii_ 5, 30, May 16, 22, June 5, 11..12, 13, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 27, 28 and ,July :1 Chairman Hays and Mr. Thompson of New Jersey, Mr. Derti, Mr. Nedzi_ Mr. Brademas, Mr. Gray', Mr. Hawkins, Mr. Gettys, Mir. Annunzio, Mr. Gaydos, Mr. Mollohan. Mr. Koch, Mr. Clevelm:,_t, Mr. Ware and Mr. Froehlich introduced H.R. 16090 on July 24, 1:?'74. The full committee on July 24, 1974, by a vote of 21 to 2, .m-dered the bill reported to the House without amendment. BACKGROUND Existing Federal law regulating campaign financing is emi::Jodied primarfiy in the Federal Election Campaiiml Act of 1971, chal_l:er 29 of title 18 of the U.S. Code, and the Presidential Election Cal_Bpaign Fund Act. Although most of these cam_paign, finance.. laws ha', . b,mn. recently enacted, some substantive 'md admmmtrat_ve shm'tc,_:..:_mngs already have become apparent. Testl'*mony before the Elections Subcommittee generally supi!:orted the position that the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 _:.,;approved by the 92d Congress, was a good law and a step in t}]_:right directi_,n. Since its enactment, most campaign expenditures a?;:,::lcontributions have been publicly disclosed and there have been nr,, major scandals or serious violations involving Congressional election?,. However, some problems in connection with the administration ,::Jrthe new laws and some problems not dealt with by the new laws ::,i_main. The most serious problems involved campmgn financing of ]!'residential elections. One ,of the problems with the existing law is that it, in efi_;:ct;,requires a multiplicity of campaigm disclosure reports. Since _::?dsti:ng law permits the proliferation of political committees which _',t:l[',p, ort candidates for Federal office, and since each candidate, as Well a:!;each committee supporting each candidate, mu,st file reports, super,,:isory officers have been overwhelmed by the sheer number of the :_t!po:cts filed. Thus, in order to determffte the source and disposition o1' :[:unds spent in a specific campaign a large number of reports must [,e examined, especially with respect to Presidential candidates. Aggravating the problem created by the. sheer number of r._i_qui, red reports is the schedule of reporting dates which impairs the eff,_._,::tive ness of the disclosure provisions. Under ex![sting law, reports m'_,st be filed on the fifteenth day before an election, agm_n on the fifth day ILkfore election, are andcontracted at various well otherin times during the election, year. Si:i::tt:(! majoranexpenses advance of the I::h_,.t)e seeond p,re-election, report serves little p'urpo_e_. Because. the ....... seco_,,': .preelectron report is due so close to the date of the electron, there ]_ prat- 636 tically no opportunity for the news media to examine, evaluate, and report the significant items disclosed in these reports. A further deficiency in the existing .law concerns the issuance, of regulations interpreting statutory provlmons. Under existing law, each of the three supervisory officers issues regulations separately: the Clerk of the House of Representatives for candidates for Represents,tive, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner; the Secretary of the Senate for candidates for Senator; and the Comptroller General for' candidates for President or Vice President. The Comptroller General is;sues all regulations with respect to provisions of the Campaign Communications Reform Act, Title I, of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971. Finally, certain regulations concerning the extension of unsecured credit to candidates for Federal office are issued by the Civil Aeronautics Board, the Federal Communicatiorts Commission, and the Interstate Commerce Commission. This absence of centralized authority results in a lack of uniformity in the regulations issued. Finally, as pointed out by Chairman Hays, some of the regulations already issued have actually changed the substance of the existing statutory requirements. For example, regulations were issued providing that reports due on the fifteenth and fifth days before an election must be completed as of the twenty-second and twelfth days before an election. The original intent behind the requirement for a final preelection report due five days before the election was to require disclosure of last minute contributions and expenditures. Yet, under the existing regulations, any last minute transactions (except contributions over $5,000.00) occurring less than twelve days before the election need not be disclosed prior to the election. Existing law does limit a candidate's use of personal and family funds in connection with his campaign for Federal office. However, the absence of any limits on contributions means that candidates wit[h wealthy or special interest supporters have a decided advantage, in Federal elections. While existing law limits expenditures for campaign use of the communications media, the absence of any limits on overall expenditures has contributed to the alarming rise in the cost of campaigning for Federal office. The unchecked rise in c,_mpaign expenditures, coupled with the absence of limitations on contributions and expend] tures, has increased the dependence of candidates on special interest groups and large contributors. Under the present law the impression persists that a candidate can buy an election by simply spending large sums in a campaign. In view of the disclosure of serious abuses of each contribution in the last Presidential campaign, the prohibition in the bill against cash contributions over $100 is viewed by the committee as a major advance in campaign finance. Such :a system is not only unfair to candidates, in general, but even more so to the electorate. The electorate is entitled to base its judgment on a straightforward presentation'of a candidate's qualifications for public office and his programs for the Nation rather than on a sophisticated advertising program which is encouraged by the infusion of vast amounts of money. 637 4 The there in this of the Committee on Itouse Administration is of the opinion Lhat is a definite need for effective and comprehensive legislation area to _store and strengthen public c,onfidence in the inte_2rity political process. WHAT THE BILL DOES H.R. 16090 incorporates foul' main titles covering crirnina]l ,:ode amendments, disclosure of Federal compai_l funds, general ]?rovisions, and amendments to other laws and effective dates. DEFINITIONS The committee bill amends the definitions of "expenditure" and "contribution" in the criminal code and in the Federal Elections Campaign Act of 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 1;he"Act"). The pri:nc(pal effect of the amendments to the definitions of contributions and expenditure in the criminal code in title I of the bill is to exempt c,_n:"tain limited activities from the contribution and spending limits im]?::,sed by that title. The principal effect of the arnendment to the Act in title II is to exempt similar activities described in the amendments from the reporting requirements of the Act. Section 102(c) of the bill amends section 591(f) of title 18, Un,ted States Code, relating to the definition of expenditure, by adding a new subparagraph (4) to exempt similar activities from the spending limits. Clauses (A), (B), and (C) of subparagraph (40 underscore and reaffirm the principles stated in the amendment to section ¢i:10of title 18, 'United States Code, proposed by Representative Orval ii!lansen, and passed by the Congress as part of the Act. Those clauses make it plain that it is not the intent of the Congress in the present legislation to limit or burden in any way the first amendment fre,_;_doms of the press and of association. Thus, clause (A) assures the unfett._red right of the newspapers, TV networks, and other media to cowperand comment on political campaigns. Clause (B) assures the unfetl:,_red right of organizations to engage in non-partisan registration drives. (See 117 Con. Rec. 43380433811 (Mr. Hansen) for the meaniin.z of "non-partisan" in this context.) And clause (C) assures the unfett;iired right of certain membersnip organizations or corporations to communicate with their members or stockholders with regard to po]!idcal matters. Sections 102(b) and 102(c) would also exempt from the defin:ition of contribution and expenditure the cost of printed slate cards and sample ballots by State and local political party organizations_ The exemption would include the cost of printing such slate cards or sample ballots in newspapers, but would not include costs with respe.,:_tto expenditures on broadcasting stations, magazines, or other similar types of general public political advertising. Sections 206(c) _nd 206(d) of the committee bill include ide:adeal amendments to the Act, relating to the definition of contribution and expenditure. Section 102(c), whic:h amends the definition of expenditure b:l the criminal code, exempts from/he expenditure limits fundraisin_i,; ,::osts of candidates and their principM campaign committees up to ?.5% of the candidates' spending limft. Il; also exempts the fundrMsing 638 5 costs of multi-candidate committees, except for fundraising expenditures of these committees for broadcasting stations, newspapers, magazines, outdoor advertising facilities, and other similar types of ,o:eneral public political advertising. Since these amendments affect only the definitions of expenditure in the Criminal Code, existing law would continue to govern the reporting requirements of these fundraising costs. The remaining clauses relating to the definition of contribution and expenditure in both the Criminal Code and the Act }lave the effecl; of exempting certain limited in-kind contributions and expenditures from the spending and contribution limits and from the disclosure requirements. TITLE I--CRI)fINAL CODE A_IENDMENTS Gontribution limits The bill places strict limits on contributions to candidates for Federal office. Contributions by individuals to candidates are limited in J the aggregate to $1,000 per election. Further, an individual is limited to an aggregate of $'25,000 in contributions within any calendar y_ar. Contributions by State political party organizations and so-called "multi-candidate comnnttees ' " to candidatesare limited in the aggregate to $5,000 per election. These committees include organizations that have been registered under the Federal Elections Campaign Act of 1971 for at least six months, have received contributions from 50 or more persons, and have made contributions to five or more candidates for Federal office. The bill prohibits contributions in the name of another and provides that, for the purposes of limitations and reporting requirements, any contribution by a person which is earmarked or directed through an intermediary or conduit to a candidate shall be treated as a contribution from such person to that candidate. The limits apply separately to each campaign for nominations for election, or election to Federal office, except that the various Presidentim primary elections shall be considered as one election for purpose of the contribution limits. Finally, the bill prohibits contributions by foreign nationals and prohibits any contributions in cash in excess of $100. A question was raised in the committee regarding the possibility of circumventing the limit on contributions by political committees w_Lere a national committee of a political Organization may contribute the maximum allowable amount to a candidate and a State or local sub-unit or subsidiary of that committee mav also contribute to the same candidate. It .is the intent of the con:{mittee to allow the maximum contribution from each level of the organization if the decision or judgment to make such contributions is independently exercised within the separate levels of the organization. However, if the subsidiary or sub-unit organizations are under the control or direction of the. parent organization with respect to their contributions to specific candidates, then the organizations acting in concert would constitute one political committee for the purpose of the contribution limits included in this bill. 639 6 Expe,r_diture limits In response to the problem of spiraling campaign costs and in,:::reaslng campaign expenditures, the committee has adopted sp_ific 5Jnits on the amount a candidate and the committees that support his C_Lndidacy may spend for primary, or primary run-off elections, ai!,d for special and general elections, With respect 'to a Presidential electiion, candidates would be aka!e to spend $20,000,000 for election to. the office .af President; cand:idates for nomination to the office of President would be able to :_i;[:4md $10,000,000. In the case of campaigns for nomination for election, or for elecl!ion, to the office of Senator, the limitation is 5 cents times the popuilaLion of the State, or $75,000, whichever is greater. The expenditure l!inLitation on campaigns for tlhe offices cf Representative, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner is $75,000, al:_,:!{, in the case of a candidate for the office of De]egate from Guam o_vthe Virgin Islands, the limitation is $15,000. The limitations on conoTessional campaigns apply separately to each campaign for nomination for election, cr election, to those ,r::d!iices. And for the purpose of these limitations, any expenditures ma&_ I:,y a principal campaign committee designated by the candidate und,:!:_'t]he provisions of the bill shall be deemed to have been made by the candidate. To assure that expenditm'e limits will be updated annually tc account for increased costs as a result of inflation, the bill provid.;:_il for yearly adjustment of the ]imitations based upon comparison c,f t]he price index for the preceding calendar year and the price ind¢_:: for the base period of 1973. l,ndependent expe_ditures As noted, the bill places strict, limitations on contributions t% _p.d expenditures by, candidates for Federal office and their campai?[:_ of ganizations. The committee recognizes that. if these ]imitatio:m}_ are to be meaningful, campaign-related spending by individuM:!!: _ln,cl groups independent of a candidate must be limited as well. Persons acting independently have in the past publicized supp,::r::{;o._, or opposition to, particular candidates by means of general meal!it:,exposure, the publication of "honor rolls" relative to legislative :_;ues, and the like. If these costs are incurred without the request or consent of a candidate or his a_'ent, they would not be properly charge'abiie _Lo that candidate's spending limits. A contrary result would accc,:myd candidate's supporters undue influence over tim direction of the campaign or, conversely, invite ConstitutionM "prior restraint'" pr&,l:ems in requiring the candidate's advance approval of independent spe:nding in his behalf. While independent expenditures may occur quite a,part from the official campaign effort, they can and often do have a su bst,smtim impact on tlhe outcome. Absent a ]imitation on this activity, -,veilheeled groups and individuals could spend substantiM sums and blms severely compromise the limitations on spending by the sup]l:,::,rted candidate himself. The committee is mindful that an absolute proscription of lindependent campaig_l-related spending may well offend the guaran'l:[_ _s .of 64O 7 the First Amendment and would be poor public policy in inhibiting the free expression of views on vitM issues. However, it is believed that a reasonable limitation on such spending_ in the context of an overall effort to maintain the integrity of the electoral process, is feasible and Constitutionally permissible. Accordingly, the bill would permit independent expenditures advocaring the election or defeat of a "clearly identified candidate" of up to an .aggregate of $1,000 in any calendar year. The candidate would be so identified by name, likeness, or other unambiguous reference. In the case of advertisements referring to more than ()ne candidate, costs would be allocated for purposes of the limitation. Of course, expenditures for the communication of views not advocating the election or defeat of a candidate would be counted neither as independent expenditures nor as direct contributions to any candidate. Nor would any communication by a nonpolitical membership organization or corporation to its members or stockholders, and any news story, comraentary or editorial distributed through the facilities of all media outlets other than those controlled by a political organization or candidate be counted as an "independent expenditure" or as a political expenditure, generally, since these activities are exempted from the definition of "expenditure" in the bill. The committee is convinced that this approach makes possible, the adequate presentation of candidate-related views by independent groups and at the same time safeguards the integrity of the candidate spending limits. In this way, the bill effectively reconciles the interests of Congress in promoting both free speech and the effective regulation of Federal election campaigns. TITLE II--DIscLosvaE or FED_aAL CA3II?AIOlq'FVNDS The committee bill would revise and centralize the reporting and disclosure requirements of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to facilitate the recording and publicity of the sources and disposition of campaign funds. Principal campaign comwittee First, the bill would require that each candidate designate a prJ[ncipal campaign committee to make expenditures on beh,df of the candidate and to file with the appropriate supervisory officer consolidated reports and statements which include the activities of all the committees which support the candidate. Under the bill, with the exception of the "independent expenditure" limitation of $1,000 discussed above, all committee expenditures on behalf of a candidate must be made by the principal campaign committee. All reports and statements of political committees which are not principal campaign committees but which are established to accept contributions on behalf of a candidate would be required to file their statements and reports with the principal campaign committee rather than the supervisory officer. Reporting requirements The bill would facilitate the disclosure of campaign expenditures and contributions by amending existing law with regard to the filing 64.1 8 of reports by political committees and candidates, by deleting th_ requirement of reports 5 or 15 days prior to an election and requi:_:ing instead a single report to be filed ten days before all election. How,_ i_er, a report mailed by regmtered or cemfied mall postmarked no l_tter than the l_th day before an election would be deemed to mee_: t;he filing requirements. The bill would also require a report to be filed within 30 days al!ter an election. It would continue to require quarterly reports but v;,,!live such a quarterly report !if it falls '_ ithin 10 days of any pre.- or p,:_'.s_election report. Nor is a committee or candidate required to file a ?arterly report, other than a report for the last quarter in a non-election year, if contributions or expenditures by the committee or candi(i_Lte do not exceed $1,000 during that quarter. A'nforcement entity The committee bill provides for independent and efficient s,:q?ervision of election laws by establishing a seven-member Board of Supervisory Officers (hereinafter referred to as the "Board"), composed of the Secretary of the Senate, the Clerk of the House, the Comptr,sller General, and four public members--two appo!mted by the Preside, n:::of the Senate from recommendations of the majority and minority lead-. ers of the Senate and two appointed by the Speaker of the House f,:om recommendations of the majority and minority leaders of the H,_:_se. The Speaker and the President of the Senate shall appoint indivi,:_ [Lals of different political parties. None of the public appointees may be employees in the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the i_oveminent (including elected and appointed officials). The Board shall be responsible for supervising the actions o:t!the individual supervisory officers, reviewing the development of :rulE, s' and regulations, and preparing forms to assure they are uniform t:o the extent practicable. The individual supervisory officers are required to refer all app_:t'ent, violations to the Board. The Board is authorized to investigate complaints of: possible violations, hold hearings, and subpoena witr, esses and evidence. Persons accused of possible violations shall be give:a a full opportunity to participate in the investigation and may reql:l_,,:;ta hearing. The Board is authorized to encourage voluntary compli_mce through informal means and refer appropriate apparent violations; to the Justice Department for civil or criminal action. To assure expeditious enforcement by the Justice I)epartmem,, the bill requires the Attorney General to report regularly to the Boxrd on the status of referrals--60 days after the referral and at the close of every 30 day period thereafter. Advisory opinions The bill provides for the rendering of written advisory opill_:i_ns by the Board of Supervisory Oi_Lcers relative to the conformRy of contemplrLted actions to title I or III of the bill, or to section _;()8, 610, .613, 614, 615, or 616 of title 18, United States Code. Such opmmns would be rendered within a reasonable time subsequent to the written request of any FederM officeholder, any candidate for Federal office, or any political committee. Any person to whom '_uch 642 9 opinion is rendered would be presumed to be in compliance with the appropriate statute if such person acted in good faith in reliance upon such opinion. All such requests and advisory opinions shall be made public. Before rendering advisory opinions, the Board would be required to provide interested parties with ample opportunity to transmit comments on such requests. The presumption of compliance for those who rely in good faith on advisory opinions stops short of an outright immunization against civil or criminal penalties. Instead, the bill provides for a presumption of compliance; this presumption would be rebuttable and_ therefore, legal action would not be foreclosed. The overriding purpose of Federal election campaign legislation is to effect full and prompt compliance with its strictures and it is wholly appropriate that all persons affected by that legislation be given every opportunity to so comply. While it may be presumed that all candidates and political committees desire to comply fully with the law, the necessarily complex nature of the legislation may make compliance most difficult even with the most conscientious effort; in this regard. Accordingly, it is desirable that those having doubts as to their legal obligations be afforded the means of h'lving these doubts resolved. The public nature of this process will insure that advisory opinions are rendered in an appropriate, even-handed manner. Congressional review of regulatioq_s To assure that regulations issued by the supervisory officers conform to the campaign finance laws, the bill for requires submitted to congressional committees review.that all regulations be The committee acknowledges that no legislation purporting to regulate election campaign activities can be drawn to fully anticipate every contingency. Each campaign is in some sense unique and differ~ ences may be accentuated by regional and local factors as well. Accordingly_ the . supervisory officers must be entrusted with the. task of promulgating regulatmns implementing the legislation. It is essential of course that such implementation be fully consistent with the intent of the Congress. In view of allegations that the supervisory officers, in implementing the 1971 Federal Election Campaign Act, have departed in some instances from CongressionM intent, it was deemed desirable to provide in the bill a mechanism for improved Congressional monitoring of regulations proposed by the supervisory officers in this area. The bill provides that, before issuing a regulation, the supervisory officer would transmit the text thereof, together with a detailed explanation, to either the Committee on House Administration (w]here the supervisory officer is the Clerk of the House of Representatives) or to the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration (where the supervisory officer is the Secretary of the Senate). Where the supervisory officer is the Comptroller General, such regulation would be submitted to both Committees. Upon submission, the committee involved would have thirty legislative days to disapprove such proposed regulat'on; "legislative days would include only those days in which the appropriate House is :in 64,3 10 session. In the event the Committee (o:c, in the case of the Comptrcdler GenerM_ either Committee) disapproves a proposed regula,tiol:n, t_he supervisory officer would be prohibited from prescribing the regU! _tI:,ion in questkm. The Committee is of the view that, given the expected large m:mtber of non-controversial regulations to be proposed by the super,_:,i_ory officers, il; is unnecessary for the C,ommittees to take affirmative :B_c,.fion on each; it is sufllcient that the Committees disapprove proposed _',_gulations Where the circumstances so warrant. At the same time, the C.ommittee believes that a timely resolution of these matters prechldes consideration by the whole House and Senate and that such consi:d,eration is unnecessary in view of the significant expertise of both Cmnmittees in the area of campaign leg;islation. The establishment of the BoardL of Supervisory Officm_ is ex]i::,_:::ted to improve the already substantial cooperation and consull::at:i,>n among tlmse individuals. It is therefore felt that differences betwe,en House, Senate, and Presidential campaign-related regulations v_'i!l be at a minimum level. TITLE III--G_'::Xm_.IL Plmwsmh's PREE31ZPTION ,OF STATE I,AWS It is the intent of the Committee to preempt all state and locall ]:[ws. The committee bill contahls two separate provisions relating I:,:_the preemption of State laws. One is contained in title III of the bill and amends section 403 of tlhe Federal Election Campaign Act of 1071 to provide that the provisions of thai; Act,, as amended by this legis_,!fil:on, supersede and preempt any provision of Stat.e ]aw with respect t,::'.,i,]ection to Federal office. It is the intent of the cmnmittee to make c,._,'_ain that the Federal law is construed to occupy the field with res[:._,:t; t:o elections to Federal office and that the Federal law will be th,:. sole authority under which such elections will be regulated. Under th,_:_11971 Act, provision was made for filing Federal reports with State ot'!i,:_]als and the supervisory officers were required to cooperate with, _::L:It'o encourage, State officials to accept Federal reports in satisfactic,:t of State reporting requirements. The provisior: requiring filing o_! ![;'e(1eral reports with State officials is retained, but the provision re!zLi::ing to encouraging State officials to accept Federal reports to satisfy _ra.l:e reporting requirements is deleted. Under thi,_ leTislation, Fede_:_; reporting requirements will be the only reporting requirement:_!: and copies of the FederM reports must be filed with appropriate !!!rate officials. The committee also feels that there can be no questior, ,vith respect to preemption of local laws. Since the committee has; prc,¥:ided that the Federal law supersede and preempt any law enacted by a State, the Federal law will also supersede and preempt any law enacted by a political subdivision of a State. The other preemptiml provision was added to title I of the b!i:l_ relating to amendments to the criminal code. This was done to m:d::e it clear that the Federal law is intended to be the sole source of cri:tn:mal sanctions for offenses involving political activities in connection with Federal elections. The committee wants to avoid even the poss!?_:_ity 644 11 of an argument that the preemption provision contained in the 1971 Act referring to "provisions of this Act'! does not include the p.rovisions of title 18 amended by the 1971 Act' and by this legmlataon. This clarification is most important because all of the actual limitations on contributions and expenditures, together with the sanctions for violation of such limitations, are included in tile criminal code provisions of title 18 amended by this legislation. TITLE IV----AMENDMENTS TO OTHER LAWS; EFFECTIVE DA_S Political activities by State and local officers and employees Section 401 is intended to repeal those restrictions on the voluntary partisan political activities of state and local employees contained in Chapter 15, Title 5, U.S.C. The amendments made by section 401 to chapter 15 of title 5, United States Code, relating to political activity by State and local employees, would remove from Federal law the prohibition against vtfiuntary partisan political activity by State and local employees employed in programs funded in whole or in part from Federal loans or gr,mts. Activities such as driving voters to the polls or attending a political convention as a delegate would no longer be prohibited by Federal law. The regulation of political activities of State and local employees would be left largely to the States. Federal law would, however, continue to prohibit a State or local officer or employee from using his official authority or influence to interfere with or affect the result of an election and prohibit him from coercing, commanding, or advising another State or local officer or employee to pay, lend, or contribute anything of value to any person for political purposes. Nothing irt existing law or in the amendment made by this section prevents a State or local officer or employee from_ making a voluntary political contribution. PUBLIC FINANCING OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS Public financing for general elections to the office of President, beginning with tim elections in 1976, was authorized in a law passed by the 92d Congress (P.L. 92-178). This law, as amended in the 93d Congress (P.L. 93-53), allows individuals to designate on their annual tax return that a dollar be paid to the Presidential Election Campaign Fund, or the so-called Dollar_Check-off FUnd. The total amount available to be transferred to eligible candidates is limited to the amount designated by individual taxpayers and may be transferred only after being appropriated by Congress. The current law limits the amount of public funds for candidates of major parties to 15¢ times the voting age population and proportionately smaller amounts for minor party candidates. The committee bill strengthens the Dollar Cheek-off Law and amend it to authorize the use of the Fund for financing presidential nominating conventions and campaigns for the nomination to the office of President. As with the existing law, public financing would be strictly voluntary and would come from the Dollar Cheek-off Fund only. 645 General elections To conform the amount of public funds a presidential candidate may receive to the spending limit imposed in. title I of the bill, t]::t_bill amends the Dollar Check-off Law so that candidates may receive t:q?to $20 million in check-off funds for general elections to the ofi!k'e of President. The committ, ee bill strengthens the existing Dollar Ckeckoff Law by making payments from the Presidential Election C!ampaign Fund automatic to assure that public funds may be used without requiring separate congressional action each year. Nominating conventions Since :1968, Section 976(c) of t;he Internal Revenue Code ha_!;permitted tax deductions for amounts paid for advertising in the cc,n ¢ention program of a political party distributed in connection w!i,;h :its presidential nominating convention. The majority of the funds :J:'aised by the major political parties to defray the costs of their 196_ and 1972 presidential nominating conventions was derived from %_ese sources. Section 406 of the committee bill repeals Section 276 (c) of ti.lc Internal Revenue Code and authorizes instead up to $2 million froJ_::the D°l_?o;1Chxe;ekn°effs.l_ 1_Iqd ,frO;e;_l_nalr::r eP_}lt_lcialtoPa_ 5 _'°derftr oal!a:_l?y smaller amount, based on the ratio of the average of their pelp,.lar votes in the previous presidential election to the average popular _ote of the major parties at such election. Funds can be used to defray the expenses of the presidential _:_ominating c_)nvention (inclUding the payment of deposits) or to repay loans the proceeds of which were used to defray such expenses. ]Pt:Lblic funds may not be used, however, to defray expenses of any can,:iki4ate or delegate participating in the convention. Payments to political parties shall be subject to examinatio:_ mad audi(s by the Comptroller General, and fm_ds not expended b? any party will be transferred to the Presidential k,lection Campaign ]?nnd. political parties would not, be required to use public funds. How_!,ver, neither major nor minor political parties will, under ordinary ci::',:2umstances, be allowed to expend more than a total of $2 million for al 1 ,mnvention expenses from public and private sources. In case of eme:q;;eneies arising from extraordinaw and unforeseen circumstance:_;, t!he Presidential Election Campaign ]Fund Advisory Board may pe:4:mit a party to expend its own funds in excess of the $2 million limit. Presidential primary elections The committee bill provides for limited public financing of primary elections.by authorizing matching federal payments for small c,:mtributions from the Dollar' Check-off Fund. ,v,llar Matching payments would come from tim surplus of t h e ]ii:;. Check-off FUnd only after adequate funds Mve been set aside tc meet .the estimated obligations of public financing of presidential nor:_ha,ttmg conwmtions and presidential general elections. Primary candidates would receive matching payments for thekt-I]rst $9_50or 1,_ssreceived from each individual contributor. Under the bill, matchable contributions would not include loans. The maxmmm amount of such funds a candidate, could receive is one-half the cv,_rall 646 13 expenditure limit for presidential primary candidates. Thus, under the limits provided in the committee bill, no candidate could receive more than $5 million. Candidates could begin collecting contributions eligible for match.ing payments as early as January of the year preceding the year in which the primaries are held; however, Federal matching payments could not be made until January of the election year. Matching payments may be used for legitimate campaign expenses during the pre-nomination period, and stiff criminal penalties are provided for unlawful use of payments, false statements to the Comptroller General, and kickbacks and illegal payments. To eliminate frivolous candidates, the committee bill requires candidates to accumulate at least $5,000 in matchable contributions in each of 20 states. The committee believed this modest threshold requirement is the most reasonable and best practicable test to assure that public funds are provided to serious candidates. By matching only small contributions the threshold provides a means of testing public support of a candidate and encourages a candidate to involve large numbers of voters in his fundraising efforts· The committee does not believe this requirement bars legitimate aspirants fo r public office for it does not affect the right of an individual to become a candidate, qualify for a position on the ballot, or campaign for office. The Supreme Court has· recogmzed has an _interest,· if · . that . a · State not a duty to protect the mtegmty of its pohtmal processes _rom fmvolous or fraudulent candidacies." Bullock v. Carter 405 U.S. 134, 145 (1972). See also Jen_ess v. Fortson 403 U.S. 431,442 (1971). It has also recently recognized the legitimacy of ensuring that pul,lie funds are spent wisely in the political process. In American Party of Texas v. White. 42 U.S.L.W. 4453 (U.S. March 26, 1974) the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a law that provided public financing from state revenue for primaries by major political parties but not for conventions or petition drives of minor parties. In ruling on the challenge, the Court concluded: [W]e cannot agree that the State, simply because it defrays the expenses of party primary elections, must also finance the efforts of every nascent political group seeking to organize itself and unsuccessfully attempting to win a place on the general election ballot. Id., at 4461. Requiring candidates to raise a reasonable threshold amount in small contributions is neutral vis-a-vis particular candidates and therefore a legitimate requirement to be imposed on those seeking public funds to finance their campaigns. Pv,blie financing limited to presidential elections The committee bill limits public financing to all phases of elections to the office of President· The committee believed the greatest potential for abuses by special interest groups and big money is m connection with campaigns to the office of President. The unhappy experiences of the 1972 presidential campaign served to underscore the dangers of spiraling campaign expenditures and the influence of excessive private political contributions. 647 14 The committee bill limits expenditures and private corttril:_Lllions and limits the potential abuse of big money in presidential ek._:tions by allowing for full public financing of presidential general el_c,I ions and presidential nominating conventions and for public fint_nc:ing on a matching basis for ])residential primaries. Although with. manypresidential of the campa?n have occur:l:_!..d:in connection general finance elections, abuses the influence or p,::,tentim influence of big_money is as great in all phases of presid"::xtial elections. For example, major political parties have come to rely heav:ilLv on large corporations and labor unions to pay for advertisements i:ni:onvention programs to meet the exl)enses of nominating convention:!, Primary elections are a critical stage in the candidate selection p:J:o_ess, and the potential for influence and abuse of big money in the pr :[):: :tary elections is as great as in the general elections. Further, with ip';tblic financing of presidential elections bi,_, money in all likelihood would be shiftecl to presidential primary: canciidates] The committee was aware that; there may be some problems '!n a,dministering the public finance laws, lint because presidential el{!:.:,: ions are so visible, public financing should be relatively easy to admi:J: i:;ter. During consideration of the bill, the committee considered a:J::r:L rejected a proposal to provide full public financing of congres,,i;:ional elections., In addition to the considerations rx)ted abow_, some c(:,::l,:.ern was expressed /;hat the. experience in forei:a'n countries wMch ]_ave adopted public financing of political campa!igns suggests that s_'t_ci[al interest groups representing money have been supplanted by _:hose based on regional, religious, or occupational :factors. The prolife:_::;{don of candidates supported by these groups in such countries has J?_ant that fewer votes are needed to achieve plurality and th'uts; the largest minority faction in a particular constituency bet::::,mes firmly entrenched in power. Furthermore, the proliferatic, rl of political parties has promoted, instability in the affair,,; of national governments, since a coalition of parties sufficient to, :;upport: one national program may dissolve when confronted by arJ;_Iklher program where the interests of the parties are differently a]!ii;7:_e_d. Since the object of the committee is to eliminate the influence of Sl,i_cial interests, rather than to substitute one special interest for anoth_,r _,the concept of generalized government financing of political carol:,: gus has not been accepted. CONCLUSION It is the opinion of the committee that the; bill, H.R. the deficiencies in the Federal election laws. SECTION--BY-SECTION SUMMARY SttOiRT The first section provides "Federal Election Campaign 648 OF THE 16090 co :i:c,,cts BILI_ TITLE thai; this legislation Act Amendments may be cited _,_ithe of 1974". 15 TITLE LD/fITATIONS I--CRIlVIINAL CODE ON CONTRIBUTIONS AMENDMENTS AND EXPENDITURES Section 101(a) amends section 608 of title 18, United States Code, relating to limitations on contributions and expenditures, by adding a new subsection (b) through subsection (e). Contvibutio_ limitations The new subsection (b) (1) provides that, except as otherwise provided by the new subsection (b), no pe_son may make contributions exceeding $1,000 to any candidate foi' _ ederal office lin any election. The new subsection (b)(9) provides that no political committee (other than the principal campaign committee of a candidate) may make contributions exceeding $5,000 to any candidate for Federal office in any election. Subsection (b)(2) also defines the term "political committee" mean. for purposes of subsection (b)(2), an organization registered as a political committee under section 303 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (hereinafter in this summary referred to as the "Act") for at least 6 months which has received contributions from more than 50 persons and bas made contributions to at least 5 candidates for Federal office. Subsection (b)(2) also provides that State political party organizations shall not be required to make contributions to at least 5 candidates for Federal office in order to be considered political committees for purposes of subsection (b) (o_). The new subsection (b) (3) provides that no individual may make contributions exceeding $25,000 in any ca]endar year. The new subsection (b) (4) provides that, for purposes of subsection (b), the following rules shall apply: (1) if a contribution is made to a political committee authorized in writing by a candidate to accept contributions on his behalL then such contribution shall be considered to be a contribution to such candidate; and (2) any contribution to the candidate of a political party for the office of Vice President shall be considered to be a contribution to the candidate of such party for the office of President. The new subsection (b)(5) provides that limitations imposed by subsection (b)(1) and subsection (b)(2) shall apply separately to each election. The new subsection (b) (6) provides that all contributions from a person to a particular candidate shall be treated as contributions from such person to such candidate, even if such contributions are made indirectly, are earmarked, or are directed through any intermediary or conduit. It should be noted that the provisions of subsection (b)(6) are not intended to apply to contributions from separate segregate'i funds maintained by corporations or labor organizations, because donors to such funds must relinquish control of their donation to. the corporation or labor organization and such donors may not earmark or direct such donations to any specific candidate or political commit: tee. ' Subsection (b)(6) requires any person acting as an intermediary or conduit to report to the appropriate superviso,'y officer the source 649 16 of the contribution and the intended recipient of the contril:z',u.t:ion. Such person also shall report SUC]lLcontribution to the inlz:_nded recipient. It is the understanding of the committee that the following rule will apply w:ith respect to the application, of the contribution limit_::ions established by subsection (b): if a person exercises any direct a::' in_ direct control over the making of a contribution, then such cor_uitmtion shall count toward the limitation imposed with respect t,'.: such person under subsection (b), but it will not count toward s':t:_h a person's contribution limitation when it is. demonstrated tha't, _uch person exercised no direct or indirect, control over the maklng :_:i!the contribution involved. Uandidates' expenditure limitaticms The new subsection (lc) establishes the following expenditur'_ ]imitations: (1) a candidate for nomination fc.r election to the o_lico of President may not make expenditures exceeding $10,000,000; (!_) a candidate for election to the office of President may not make exi[_enditures exceeding $20,000,000; (3) a candidate for the office of S,ii!yl_;ttor may not make expenditures which exceed the greater of (A) 5 (ants multiplied by the population of the State involved; or (B) $75,,_)00; (4) a candidate for the office of Representative, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner, may not malai_ expenditures exceeding $75,000; and (5) a candidate for the ofl!b:ieof Delegate from Guam or the Virgin Islands may not make ex]:,._nditures exceeding $15,000.. Subsec,tion (c) also provides that, :for pu::poses of such subs_,ci:ion, the fol]owing rules shall appply: (1) any expenditure made 1O' the candidate of a political party for the office of Vice President si:mil be considered to be, an expenditure made by the candidate of such I:,[Irty for the office of President; (2) any expenditure made on beha] :'_of a candidate by his principal campaign committee shall be cleen:_u:tto have been made by such candidate; and (3) the population of ',;_geographical _rea shall be the population according to the most _:-,_u_'ent decennial census. Subsection (c) also provides that :[he exloenditure limitatioa:_ti', applied by subsection (c) to candidates for th_; office of Senator, ]!;:,_presentative, Delegate, and Resident Commissioner, shall apply se:parately to each election. It also provides that, for purposes of t]::_[;$10 million expenditure limit on candidates for nomination to thc: office of President, all Presidential primary elec,tions are considere:d one election. Uost-of diving adjustments The new subsection (d) provides that, at the beginning of eacL calendar year (commencing in 1975), the Secretary of Labor shall certify to the Comptroller Gene_ral the percenl}age difference between the price index for the most recent calendar year an,] the price index f,::!rthe base period. Subsection (d) provides that the expenditure limit:!_l:ions established by subsection (e) shall be increased by such perce,:,:l!:age difference. Subsection (d) also contains definitions of terms used in suc]:: _!mbsection. The term "price index" is defined to mean the average ,::ri; er a 65O 17 calendar year of the Consumer Price Index. The term "base period" is defined to mean the calendar year 1973. 0 ther expenditure limitatio_ The (other new subsection (e) provides thatbynoorperson may make expenditures than expenditures made on behalf of a candidate under the new subsection (c)) relative to a clearly identified candidate exceeding $1_000 in any calendar year. · Subsection (e) also defines the term "clearly identified" to mean (1) the appearance of the name of the candidate; (2) the appearance of a photograp]l oz' drawing of tile candidate; or (3) an unambiguous reference which establishes the identity of the candidate. Under this provision any person can make such expenditures up to $1,000 in any calendar year. Such expenditures would not count against a candidate's expenditure limitation nor against the contributf6n limitation applicable to the person making the expenditure, but it would be a reportable expenditure under section 305 of the disclosure provisions if the aggregate of such expenditures exceeded $100 in the calendar year. Expenditures/ron_ personal fund s Section 101 (b) amends section 608(a)(1) of title 18, United States Code, relating to limitations on contributions and expenditures, to provide that a candidate may not make expenditures fro TM his personal funds or the personal funds of his immediate family, in connection · with any election for Federal office, exceeding $25,000. Section 608 (a) (2) of title 18 defines "immediate family" as the candidate's spouse, and any child, parent, grandparent, brother, or sister of the candidate and the spouses of any of them. Discharge of certain campaign debts Section 101(c) provides that, notwithstanding section 608 (a) (1) of title 18, United States Code, relating to limitations on expenditures from personal funds, an individual may discharge (from his personal funds or the personal funds of his immediate family) any debt. outstanding on the date of the enactment of this legislation which was incurred in connection with any campaign for election to Federal ofrice ending before the close of December 31,1972. Section 101 (c) also contains definitions of terms used in such. subsection. The terms "election", "Federal office", and "political coramittee" are given the meanings given them by section 591 of title 1.8, United States Code. The term "immediate family" has thesame meanlng referred to above under the explanation of section 101 (b), relating to expenditures from the personal funds of a candidate, Contributions by foreign _atiocta_ Section 101(d) amends section 613 of title 18,.'United States C(Xie, relating to contributions by agents of foreign principals, to matte the restrictions established by such section apply directly to foreign nationals. Section 101(d) also adds a new paragraph at the end of section 618 which defines the term "foreign national" to mean (1) a foreign prir_ cipal (as such term is defined by 'section 1 (b) of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938), except that the term ":foreign national'" 65 18 does not include any individual who is a citizen of the United S_:ates; or (2) an. individual who is not a citizen of the United States and. who is not lawfully admitted into the United States for permanent ]'esideuce. Amou_ o/cviwinal fine,s Section 101(e)(1) amends section 608 of title 18, United _!!;tates Code, relating to limitations on contributions and expenditures, i:,::,increase the criminal fine which may be imposed under such section f:'-om $1,000 to $25,000. Section 101(e)(2) amends section 610 of title 18, United Si;ares Code, relating to contributions or expenditures by national b.;tnks, corporations, or labor organizations, to (1) increase the criminal :tine which may be imposed under such ,;ection against corporations or !abor organizations from $5,000 to $25,000; and ('2.) increase the criminal fine which may be imposed under such section against office_:s or directors committing willful violations from $10,000 to $5%000. lit should be noted that. it is the desire of the committee that the incr,:m;_ed penalties of section 610, together with the existing prison penaltit_s of such section, shall be enforced rigorously against officers and dire,::tors of corporations and labor organizations to the extent such officer_,__:md directors are responsible for violations of such section. Section 101(e)(3) amends section 611 of title 18, United Si:at.es Code, relating to contributions by firms or individuals contract!ing with the United States, to increase the criminal fine which may N. ira.posed under such section from $5,000 to $25,000. Section 101 (e) (4) amends section 613 of title 18, United States Code (as amended by section 101(d)), relating to contributions by fortfign nationals, to increase the criminal fine which may be imposed u_:L,:ler such section from $5,000 to $25,000. Uontvibution restrictio_s ; honoravi_ms Section 101(f) amends chapter 9.9 of title :18, United States C!o,:![e, relating to elections and political activities, by adding at the e:_ld thereof a new section 614 through section 616. The new section 614, relating to prohibit:ion of contribution:i; in name of another, is the same as section 310 of the Act (which is deL!_tcd by section 101(f)(4)), except that the criminal fine is incre, ii:!!ed from $1,000 to $25,000. Section 614 provides that no person may make a contribution in the name of another person, and no person :i::t_y knowingly accept a contribution made by one person in the namt!_ of another person. The new' section 615, relating to ]imitation on contributions of _:i_: t'rency_ provides that no person may make contributions of curr_?t _y exceeding $100 to any candidate for Federal office in any electim:_. A violation of section 615 is punishable by a fine oi $25,000 or one yea:_'of imprisonment, ok both. The new section 616, relating to acceptance of excessive hortc_:ariums, provides that any, elected or appointed officer or employe,_z_.::f any branch of the Federal Govermnent who accepts any single t:_:,:,:_:_orarium exceeding $1,000, or who. accepts honorariums exceedi!:rJg $10,000 in. a calendar year, shall be lined not less than $1,000 nor m,:,:_:'e than $5,000. 652 19 Applicability of definitions Section 101(f) also amends section 591 of title 18, .United States Code, relatir_g to definitions, to clarify that the manner m which terms are defined in such section applies to the use of such terms in such section, as well as to the use of such terms in sections 597, 599, 600, 609,, 608, 610, 611, 614, and 615 of such title. DEFfNITIONS OF POLITICAL COI_[I_ITTEE, cOI_TRIBUTI01_ ', EXPENDITURE, AND rRINCIrAL caMrAIGN COM_IXTrr Political committee Section 109(a) amends section 591(d) of title 18, United States Code, relating to the definition of political committee, to provide that such term shall be extended to include any individual, committee, association, or organization which commits act for the purpose of influencing the outcome of any electio n for Federal office, except that such acts Shall not include certain commUniCations which are excluded from the definition of expenditure under section 591(f), discussed below. Such communications include news stories and editorials distributed through the public media facilities (unless such facilities are Owned or controIIed by apoIitical party or committee, or by a candidate); communications by a membership organization to its members (unless it is organized primarily for the purpose of influencing an election t° Federal office), and any other communication which is not made for the purpose of influencing an election to Federal office. Contribution Section 102 (b) amends section 591 (e) of title 18, United States Code, relating to the definition of contribution, to provide that the followlng activities shall not be considered to be contributions: (1) the use of property by an individual who owns or leases such propertv with respect to the rendering of voluntary services by such individual to a candidate, including the cost of invitations and food and bevecages provided on the individual's premises for candidate-related activities, to the extent that the cumulative value of such use does not exceed $500; (2) the sale of food or beverage by a vendor to a candidate at a reduced charge if such charge is at least equal to the cost of such food or beverage to the vendor; (3) the travel expenses of an individual rendering voluntary services to a candidate, to the extent that the cumulative total of'such expenses does not exceed $500; and (4) the pfayment by a State or local committee of a political party of the costs preparation or distribution of any printed slaiie card or other printed of State three or more candidates for public office, who are candidateslisting in the in which such committee is located, but this exclusion not apply of costs for the display such printeddoes listing throughto payment public media facilities (other than ofne_a]}y spapeI_) or on outdoor advertising facilities such as billboards. Expenditure Section 102 (c) amends section 591 (f) of title 18, United States Code, l_lating to the definition of expenditure, to provide that the following activities shall not be considered to be expenditures: (1) any news story, commentary, or editorial of any broadcasting station, newspaper, {f · 20 or other periodical publication, unless such facilities are owned or controlled by a political paz_;y, political committee, or candidate; (2', nonpartisan get-out-the-vote activity; .(3) communications by a membership organization or corporatkm to its members or stockholders, if such merabership orgartization or corporation is not organized primarily to, influefice thee outcome of elections for Federal office; (4), the use of property by an individual who owns or leases such prcp,;_r_y with respect to the rendering of w)luntary services by such individual to a candidate, including the cost of invitation.s and food and 'bever_Lges provided on the individual's premises :for candidate-related activities, to the extent that the cumulative value of such use does not exceed $500.; (5) the travel expenses of an individual rendering volmrtary services to a candidate, to the extent that the cumulative total of! sac.h expenses ,Joes not exceed $500; (6) Communications which are not made to influence the outcome of electkms for Federal office; (7) the Faymerit by a State or local committee of a political party of the c;osts of preparation or distribution of any printed slate card or other printed listing of three or more candidates :_or public office wh,':, s;re candidates in the State in which such committee is located, but this exclusion does not apply to payment of costs for the display oil!any such printed listing through public media facilities (other than _:l.e';vspapers) or on outdoor advertising facilities such as billboards:; (8) the costs of a candidate (including his principal campaign commitrtee) with respect to his solicitation of contributions, except that this exception does not apply to costs which exceed 25 percent of the expendit_._re limitation applicable to such candidate under section 608(c) of title 18; and (9) any costs incurred by a multicandidate committee wihich has been registered under tbs Act as a political committee for at !.,_ast 6 months, has received contributions from at least 50 persons_ ,_nd (except for State political party organizations) has made contri'bu].,,_11tions to at least 5 candidates, in connection with soliciting cont][ , ,";_ tions to itself or to a general political fund controlled by it, but. _Lhis exclusion does not exempt costs of soliciting contribution s thr,::mg]h any public media facilities. Principal campaign co_remittee Section I02(d) amends section 5,91 of title 18_ 'United States C!ode, relating to definitions, by adding a new paragraph (i) whic:h de:l!i:_es the term ';principal campaign committee". The term is defined to mi,an the principal campaign committee designated by a candidate under ,section 302(f) (1) of the Act. POLITICAL _UNDS Or CORPORATIONS OR LA:f_OR ORGANIZATIONS Section 103 amends section 611 of title 18, 'United 'States Code, :r:'e,lating to contributions by firms or individuals contracting with the United States, to provide that such section shall not prohibit the es-. tablishment or maintenance of a separate segregated campaign fund by a corporation or a labor organization unless such establishmer, ll;or maintenance is prohibited, under section 610 of title 18, relating to ,::on-. tributions or expenditures by national banks: corporations, or lab,0,r organizations. A question was raised in the committee during the consideratio;r:J. _[>f the amendment to section 611 as to whether doctors receiving payments under the so-called Medicare and Medicaid programs are pro- 654 21 hibited from making political contributions as Government contractors. The committee is of the opinion that nothing in the existing section 611, nor in the amendment thereto included in the reported bill, would prohibit a doctor from making a political contribution solely because he was receiving payments for medical services rendered to patients under either the Medicare or Medicaid program. Under the Medicare program the basic contractual relationship is between the l_ederal Government and the individual receiving the medical services. The indivdual receiving the medical services may be reimbursed directly by the Federal Government for amounts paid for such services, or he may assign his claim against the Federal Government to the doctor who rendered the services, but in the latter case the doctor merely stands in the shoes of the claimant for payment. This relationship is not altered by the fact that a Federal agency may retain a right to audit the accounts of a medical practitioner to protect the Federal Government against fradulent claims for medical services. Under so-called Medicaid programs, it is true that doctors may have specific contractual agreements to render medical services, [)ut such agreements are with State agencies and not with the Federal Government. Medicaid programs are administered by State agenc!es using Federal funds. The committee does not believe that section 611 prohibiting political contributions by Government contractors has any application to doctors rendering medical services pursuant to a contract with a State agency. A separate question was raised in the committee concerning the application of section 610 of title 18, relating to proMbitions against political contributions by corporations, banks, and labor organizations, as to whether a professional corporation composed of doctors, lawyers, architects, engineers, etc., would be prohibited from making political contributions. Whether or not a professional association is a corporation is a matter determined under State law. If, under State law, such an association is a corporation, it would be prohibited from making a political contribution as a corporation. However, nothing in existing law, nor in the amendments contained in the reported[ bill, prohibit an individual member of any corporation from making a political contribution as an individual. Existing law also permits corporations to establish a separate segregated fund to be utilized for political purposes so long as contributions to such fund are voluntary and not secured by force or job discrimination or financial repris_ds, or threat thereof, or by money obtained in any commercial transaction. EFFrCT oN STATr Law Section 104 provides that chapter 29 of title 18 of the United States Code, relating to criminal sanctions for political activities in COlmection with Federal elections, supersedes and preempts provisions of State law. TITLE II--DISCLOSURE PRINCIPAL OF FEDERAL CAMPAIGN CAMPAIGN FUNDS COMMITTEE Section 201 amends section 302 of the Act, relatin_ to organization of political committees, by striking out subsectionS(f), relating to notices with respect to fund solicitation and annual reports by supper- 65' visory officers, and by inserting _n lieu thereof relating to principal campaign committees. a new subsectior, f), Designation o/ principal cavzpaign commit&_e Subsection (f) (1) requires that candidates :for Federal office (.other than candidates for the office of Vice President) designate a pol:itLcal committee as their principal campaign, commhtee. Subsection (:1[)(1) also provides that no political committee may be designated a.s the principal campaign committee of more than one candidate_ except; lhat the Pres' __entia! candidate of a political party may, after he is ],::,_:Inina_ed, designat e the national committee of kds political party as Ms principal campaign committee. Expenditures on behalf o/ candidate Subsection (f) (2) provides that, except in the case of expendkmres which may be made under section 608(e) of title 18, United SIi:ates Code, rela'ting to expenditures of not more than $1_000 in a cale:m:![ar year made with respect to a clearly identified candidate, only the ];,rincipal campaign committee of a candidate may make expenditur,,:_s on behalf of such candidate. Reports to principal ca,ntpaign committee Subsection (f) (3) provides that political committees receiving contributions on behalf of a, candidate shall report such contributions to the principal campaign committee of such candidate_ instead of to the appropriate supervisory officer. Principal campaign committee reports Subsection (f) (4) provides that the principal campaign comm i[_ee shall compile and file reports which such committee receives :from other political committees supporting the candidate involved, tog_t]_er with its own reports and statements, with the appropriate superv![sory officer. Definition o/political committee Subsection (f) (5) provides that., for purposes of subsection (fi','(1) and subsection (f) (3), the term "political committee" does not inc It_.de political committees supporting more than one candidate, except :for the national committee of a political party designated by a Presi_].e,:ntim candidate. Therefore, a candidate may not designate a mult!ictmdidate political committee as his principal campaign committee and multicandidate political committees shM1 continue to report dir.:?,c_:;l'_ to the appropriate supervisory officer under applicable provisio]:_.s of the Act. REGISTRATIOIN _ OF POLITICAL CO2M[MITTEES; STATEi_IENTS Section 9_02amends section 303 of the Act, relating to registration of political committees and statements, by adding at the end thereof a new subsection (e)'which provides that reports and notificatior, s of political committees (other than principal campaign committees :and multi-candidate political committees) required to be filed under s_etion 303 shall ]Je filed with the appropriate · principal camp,:l.,.t ' ' ','_n connnittee. 656 23 REPORTS BY POLITICAL COS{1KITTEES AND CAI_DIDATES Filing dates Section 203(a) amends section 304(a) of the Act, relating to filing dates for reports of receipts and expenditures by political committees and candidates, to provide for the following new filing requirements: 1. In a calendar year in which an individual is a candidate for 1!ederal office and an election is held for the particular Federal office which such individual is seeking, reports of receipts and expenditures faust be filed 10 days before such election. Such reports shall be complete as of the fifteenth day before such election. Reports filed by registered or certified mail must be postmarked by the twelfth day before such election. In addition, such reports must be filed 30 days after the ,/late of such election and be complete as of the twentieth day after the date of such election. 2. In other calendar years, reports of receipts and expenditures must be filed after the close of the Calendar year and no later tha n January 31 of the following calendar year, and must be complete as of the close of the calendar year for which filed. 3. In addition to reports required to be filed ii1 an election year or in any other calendar year, reports of receipts and expenditures must be filed for any calendar quarter in which the candidate or committee reporting received contributions exceeding $1,000 or made expenditures exceeding $1,000. In any case in which such a quarterly report would coincide with the annual report which is required for nonelection years, the amendment made by section 203 provides that the _uarterly report be filed in accordance with provisions governing the n ling of annual reports. The amendment made by section 203 (a) also provides that when the last day for filing a quarterly report occurs within 10 davs of an election _, then the quarterly report requirement shall be wal_ved and superseded by the required election report. Such amendment also provides that any contribution exceeding $i,000 which is received after the fifteenth day before an election but more than 48 hours before an election, shall be reported no later than 48 hours a/ter its receipt. Such amendment also provides that treasurers of political committees which are not principal campaign committees or multicandidate committees shall file reports required by section 304 of the Act with the appropriate p.rincipal campaign committee, instead of with the appropriate superwsory officer. Additional in[ormation required Section 203(b) amends section 304(b) of the Act, relating to information required to be reported, to provide that, in addition to reporting total receipts and total expenditures, each report must show total receipts less transfers between political committees which support the same candidate and do not support any other candidate and total expenditures less such transfers. In some cases the total receipts and expenditures reported have presented a distorted picture because, under the Act, transfers of funds between committees are counted as contributions and expenditures. This amendment provides that where such transfers occur between single candidate committees supporting 657 24 the same candidate the report transfers and total expenditures i_ORS{AL REQUIREMENTS must also show total less such transfers. FOR REPORTS AND receipts les:!!:such STATEMENTS Section 204 amends sections 306 of the Act, relating to formal requirements respecting reports and statements, by adding at ttlE,i_end thereof a new subsection (e) which provides that if a report or _;tat;ement required to be filed by a candidate or committee relatiiq?; to contributions or expenditures or registration of a committee :is delivered by registered or certified mail, then the United States post:mark stamped'on the envelope containing such report shall be deemed t.:_,be the date .of filing. DUTIES Changes OF THE SUPERVISORY OFFICER i_ duties Section 205(a) amends section 308(a) of the Act in ord,!,' to eliminate the following duties of the supervisory officer: (1 ', t]he duty to compile and maintain a current list of statements relatii':_t_:'to each candidate; (2) the duty to prepare and publish an annual r,i__]:_ort re_ardin F contributions to and expenditures by candidates and ]politl_cal cm_mittees; (3) the duty to prepare special reports coml;_aring totals and categories of contributions and expenditures; (4) the duty to prepare such other reports', as the supervisory officer may deem appropriate, and (5) the duty to assure wide dissemination of _!;t_._;istics, sunnnaries, and reports prepared under the Act. Section 205 (a) also amends section 308(a) of the Act in order to establish the following new duties of the supervisory officer: (1) tlhe compilation and maintenance of a eumulatlve index of reports _nd statements filed withlisting the supervisory officer; and reports (2) the were prepar_tJon of special reports candidates for whom fil_,.d ,as required by title HI of the Act and candidates for whom such rep,)rts were not filed as so required. Section 205 (a) also provides thalt the annuat report which the su'f)ervisory officer is' required to file under section, 308(a)(7) of th._,'Act ',. e1'lmmated ' ' ( whi eh k, by the amendment made by section 205 (a)) saall not be filed with respect to any calendar year beginning after D,i_c_mbet 31, 1972. Review of regulations Section 205 (b) amends section 308 of the Act by striking out su b_ection (b), which required the supervisory officer to develop procedures in cooperation with State election officia'ls to permit filing of Fe_:ilemd eports to comply with State reqmrements, and subsection (c), wh:tch required the Comptroller General to serve as a national clear4nghc, use for information regarding the administration of elections. Section 205 (b) also amends section 308 of the Act by adding _, :l:tew subsection (b), which requires the supervise,ry officer, before he prescribes any rule or regulation under section 808, to transmit a staterdent regarding such rule or regulation to the Committee on Rules and .&dministration of the Senate or the Committee on House Administrat, ion of the House of Representatives, as the case may be. The new subsection 658 25 (b) provides that such statement shall explain and justify the proposed rule or regulation. Subsection (b) also provides that if the supervisory officer involved is the Clerk of the House of Representatives, he shall transmit such statement to the Committee on House Administration. If the supervisory officer involved is the Secretary of the Senate_ he shall transmit such statement to the Committee on Rules and Administration. If the supervisory officer involved is the Comptroller General s he shall transmit such statement to both such committees. If either committee which receives a statement from the supervisory officer involved disapproves the proposed rule or regulation within 30 legislative days after it is received_ then the supervisory officer may not prescribe such rule Or regulation. In the case of the Comptroller General s if only one of the t_ ¥o committees disapproves the proposed rule or regulation_ such disapproval by one committee is sufficient to prevent prescription of the rule or regulation. Subsection (b) also defines the term "legislative days". With respect to statements transmitted to the Committee on Rules and Administration, such term does not include any calendar day on which the Senate is not in session. With respect to statements transmitted to the Committee on House Administrations such term does not include any calendar day on which the House of Representatives is not in sessi[on. With respect to statements transmitted to both committees_ such term does not include any calendar day on which both Houses of the Congress are not in session. It should be noted that it is the intent of the members of the c_)mmittee that the Committee on Rules and Administration of the Senate and the Committee on House Administration of the House of Representatives, in reviewing proposed rules and regulations under section 308(b) of the Act and under sections 9009 (c) and 9039(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 19547 shall strive to achieve uniformity in such rules and regulations. DEFINITIONS OF POLITICAL AND C01_MITTEE_ SUPERVISORY CONTRIBUTION_ OFFICER EXPENDITUP, J_ Techaical amendments Paragraph (1) of section 206(a) makes a technical amendment to section 301 of the Act, relating to definitions, to p.rovide that the terms defined for purposes of the disclosure promsmns of title III of the Act will have the same meanings for purposes of title IV of the Acts relating to general provisions. Under this amendment it will not be necessary to add or retain a specific reference to a definition in section 301 of the Act in order to make clear that terms such as "elec-tion", "Federal office", and "State" have the same meaning when used in title IV of the Act as when used in title III. Paragraphs (2) and (3) of section 206(a) remove from title IV of the Ac_ references to definitions in section 301 of the Act to conform with the amendment discussed above under paragraph (1) of this section. Political committee Section 206(b) amends section 301(d) of the Act, relating to the definition of political committee, in the same manner that section 102 659 26 (a) amends section 591(d) of tifie 18, United States Codes relat:ing to the definition of political committee. This amendment extends the deftnition of political committee to include _ny individuM, comI:,::_i:tee, association, or organization which commits arty act for the purpose of influencing the outcome of any election for Federal office, excepi !;ihat communications which axe excluded from th?lefinition of expend [i;ure un.der section 301(f) (4), discussed below, ar,. excluded. Such communications included news stories and editorials distributed through tlhe public media facilities (.unless such facilities are owned or cont:_:'_u_]led by _ polit;ical party or committee, or by a cardid_te), communica:5ons by a membership organization to its members (unless it is orgarL:ized primarily for the purpose of influencing an election to Federal (:,fi]ce), and any other communication which :is not made for the purp,::',,_,_of influencing an election to Federal office. Contribution Section 206(b) amends section 301(e) (5) of the Act, relating ih_an exception: to the definition of contribution, :in the same manne:_' i:hat section 102(b) amends section 591(e)(5) of title 18, United States Code, relating to an exception to the definition of contribul:[ons. Under this amendment, the fo]lowing activities are not cc,nsid_red contributions: (1) the use of property by an individual who o_vns or leases, such property. . . with respect.. . to the. rendering._ of volunt_try services by such individual to a candidate, including the cost of hLvitations and food and beverages provided on the individuaPs premises for candidate-related activities, to the extent that the cumulative v_due of such use does not exceed $500; (2) the sale of food or beverage.._i;by a vendor to a candidate at a reduced charge if such charge is at i[_ast equal to the cost of such food or beverage to the vendor; (3) the i:;:_:avel expenses of an individual rendering voluntary services to a (.lind[idate, to the extent that the cumulative total of such expenses do{!?,not exceed $500; and (4) the payment by _ State or local committe_ of a political party of the costs of lc,reparation or distribution o:l! [my printed slate card or other printed listing of three or more candiri[_tes for public office who are candidates in the State in which such eoramittee is located, but this exclusion does not apply to payment o:f costs for the display of any such printed listing through public med:][,'tfacilities (other than newspapers) or on outdoor advertising fachl]ties such as billboards. Expenditure Section. 206(c) amends section 301(f) of the Act, relating to the definition of expenditure, in the same mariner that section 1, (c) amends section 591 (f) of title 18, United States Code, relating 1:othe definition of expenditure, except, that the amendment made b? i:his section does not establish an exception for costs incurred b',? a candidate or political committee with respect to the solicitniion of contributions by the c_ndidate or political commSttee. Under this amendment, the following activities are not considlered expenditures: (1) any news story, commentary, or edkorial dii!_.tcibuted throughpublication the facilities of any' or periodical[ (unless suchbroadcasting facilities arestation, owned newspapreferen,:'e for _!omination of persons for election to the office of President cf the United States. 8. The term "political committee" is defined to mean any individual, committee, association, or organization which accepts contributi¢:.ns or incurs qualified campaign expenses for the purpose of influencing the riomination for election of one or more individuals to be Presi&(ni: of the United States. 670 37 9. The term "'qualified campaign expense" is defined to mean a purchase, payment, distribution, loan, advance, deposit, or gift of money or of anything of value incurred by a candidate or his authorized committee in connection with his campaign for nomination for election, neither the incurring nor payment of which violates any trederal or State law. 10. The term "State" is defined to mean each State of the United States and the District of Columbia. Eligibility for payments Section 9033 (a) requires that a candidate seeking to become eligible for payments shall in writin.g (1) furnish to the Comptroller General evidence of qualified campaign expenses; (2) agree to keep and furnish to the Comptroller General records, books, and other information; and (3) agree to an audit and examination by the Comptroller General, and agree to make repayments required under section 9038 (relating to examinations and audits, repayments). Section 9033 (b) requires that a candidate seeking to become eligible for payments shall certify to the Comptroller General that (1) the candidate and his authorized committee will not incur qualified campaign expenses in excess of the limit imposed by section 9035, relating to qualified campaign expense limitation; (2) the candidate is seeking nomination by a political party for election to the office of President of the United States; (3)the candidate and his authorized committee have received contributions which exceed $5,000 from residents of each of at least 20 States; and (4) the aggregate of contributions received from any one such resident does not exceed $250. Entitlement to payments Section 9034(a) provides that every eligible candidate is entitled to payments in an amount equal to contributions received by the candidate and his authorized committee on or after the beginning of the calendar year before the calendar year of the presidential election with respect to which the candidate is seeking nomination. Contributions from any one person will qualify for matching only to the extent that such contributions do not aggregate more than $250. For purposes of section 9033 (b) and section 9034 (a), the term "contribution" is defined to mean a gift of money made by a written instrument which identifies the person making the contribution. Such term does not include a subscription, loan, advance, or deposit of money, or anything described in section 9032 (4) (B), (C), or (D). Section 9034(b) provides that payments under _ction 9034(a) may not exceed 50 percent of the expenditure limitation for presidential primaries established by section 608(c)(1)(A)of title 18, United States Code, relating to limitations on contributions and expenditures. Qualified campaign expense limitatio_ Section 9035 prohibits any candidate from incurring qualified campaign expenses m excess of the expenditure limitation for presidential rimames established by section 608(c)(1)(A) of title 18, United tates Code, relating to limitations on contributions and expenditures. 671 38 Gertifiva_on by Comptroller Ge_u_ral Section 9036(a) provides that, :not later than 10 days after a candidate establishes his eligibility roi' payments, the Comptroller Ge,r_m:al shall certify to the Secretary payment in full to the candidat.[_ of amounts to which he is entitled. Section 9036(b) provides that 1;his ,certification is final and c,:mc]usive, except that it is subject to examination and audit by the Comptroller General, and to judicial review, Payments to eligible candidates Section 9037(a) requires the Secretary to establish in the Pre:!fidenrial Election Campaign Fund a separate account to be known H,sthe Presidential Primary Matching Pay_ient Account (hereinafter :in this summary referred to as the "matching payment account"). The Secretary is .required., to. deposit into the matchJn,gpya ment accou]_t_,i!or use by ehglble candidates, amounts avafiable after the Secretary determines that amounts for payments to candidates in the general[ _lection for the office of President of! the United States and amour_l::sfor payments to national committees of major parties and minor ]?a_:ties for' presidential nominating conventions, are available for suct_ ]my_ ments. ' Section 9037 (b) requires the Secret ary to transfer certified arno unts to candidates during the matching payment period. In making t ra,nsfers to candidates of the same political[ party, the Secretary is requ ].red to seek an equitable distribution, of funds, taking into account the sequence in which certifications are received. Transfers to candidates of the same political party may not exceed[ ,i5 percent of the total amount available in the matching; payment account, and transf,i!,.r,s to any candidate may not exceed 25 percent of the total amount av;t.iiL!tble in the matching payment account. Examinations and auctits / repay,a;_nt,s Section 9038(a) requires the Comptrollel: General to condu,:r_:an examination and audit of the qualified campaign expenses of every candidate, and authorized committee after each matching pa::i.'rl::_ent period. Section 9038(b) provides that if the Comptroller General d:e_termines that a candidate received payments in excess of his entitle:ment, then the candidate shall be requlred to repay the excess amount. Section 9038 (b) also provides that if 'the Con[pti:oiler General determines that a candidate has used payments for any ]purpose other than I:c defray qualified campaign expenses or to repay loans or restore ;['tmds Whlch were used to defray qualified campaig_l expenses, then thai!,candidate shall be required to repay the amount involved. _ Section .9038(b) also provides that payments to a candidate from the matching payment account may be retained to pay qualified cam_halgn expenses for a period not exceedin 6 months after the close of e matching payment period. After a cgandidate has liquidat,_!_d all obligations, that portion of any balance remaining in his acc,:xmnt which bears the same ratio to the total balance as the total amc.unt received JFrom the matching payment account bears to the total oi!!all deposits made into the candidate's account, shall be repaid by th,_i_candidate to the matching payment account. 672 89 Section 9038(c) provides that the Comptroller General may not make a notification of a required repayment with respect to any matchlng payment period more than 3 years after the end of the period. Section 9038(d) requires the Secretary to deposit repayments received by him under section 9038 in the matching payment account. Reports to Congress; regulations Section 9039(a) requires the Comptroller General to transmit a re port to each House of the Congress, after each matching payment period, which sets forth (1) qualified campaign expenses of every candidate and authorized committee; (2) the amount of payments certified by the Comptroller General; and (3) the amount of repayments required from every candidate, and the reason for any repayments. Section 9039 (b) authorizes the Comptroller GenerM to (1) prescribe rules and regulations; (2) conduct examinations and audits, in addition to examinations and audits required by section 9038(a); (3) conduct investigations; and (4) require the keeping and submission of books, records, and information. Section 9039 (c) provides that the Comptroller General, before prescribing any rule or regulation, shall transmit the proposed rule or regulation, together with a detailed explanation and justification, to the Committee on Rules and Administration of the Senate and the Committee on House Administration of the House of Representatives. If either committee does not disapprove the proposed rule or regulation no later than 30 legislative days after receipt of the proposed rule or regulation, then the Comptroller General is authorized to prescribe such rule or regulation. Section 9039 (c) prohibits the prescmption of any rule or regulation which is disapproved by either committee. Section 9039(c) also provides that the term "legislative days" does not include any calendar day on which both Houses of the Congress are not in session. Judicial proceedings Section 9040(a) authorizes the Comptroller Genera! to appear in and defend against any action b_ought under section 9040 of the Code. Section 9040 (b) authorizes the Comptroller General to bring actions in the district courts of the United States for recovery of repayraents required as a result of examinations and audits conducted by the Comptroller General. Section 9040(c) authorizes the Comptroller General to petition the courts of the United States for injunctive relief to implement the provisions of chapter 97 of the Code. Section 9040 (d) authorizes the Comptroller General to appeal any action in which he appears. Judicial review · Section 9041 (a) provides that any agency action of the Comptroller General under chapter 97 of the Code is subject to review by the United States Court of Appeals for the. DistriCt of Columbia Circuit upon petition filed no later than 30 days after the agency action involved. Section 9041(b) provides that chapter 7 of title 5, United States Code_ relating to judicial review, shall apply to any agency action by 673 4O the Comptroller General. The term "agency action" is _!ven the same meaning given it by section 551 (13) of title 5, United _tates Cc,de_. Criminal penalties Section 9042 (a) provides that any person who incurs qualified c_anpa!gu expenses in excess of the expenditure limitation for presid,_r_tiM mmarms established by section 608(c)(1) of title 18, United i!St:[_tes ode, relating to limitations on contributions and expenditures_ skall be fined not more than $25,000 or imprisoned, not more than 5 :!:ears, or both. Section 9042(a) also provides that any officer or membel: of a political committee who knowingly consents to an expenditure ',:_:}dch violates such limitation shall be fined not more than $25,000 ti' imprisoned not more than 5 years, or k_th. Section 9042(b) makes it unlav, ful for any person who rece!i,.:-_?:s a payment from the matching payment account, or to whom a pc['l::ion of such payment is transferred, to use such payment for any pu q)ose other than to defray qualified campaign expenses or to repay lo_Nn_s; or restore funds which were used to defray qualified campaign exp,_,r,ses. Any person who violates this provision shall be fined not more than $10,000 or' imprisoned not more than 5 years, o c both. Section 9042(c) makes it unlawful for any person to reft:l_!;(_: to fm'nish information which may be required under chapter 97 c:l::the Code or to furnish false information. Any person who violate:_; this provision shall be fined not mm_ t.Jhan $10,000 or imprisoned not :t_ore than 5 years, or both. Section 9042(d) makes it unlawful for any person to give c,r accept any kickback or other illegal payment in connection witL ;_;ny qualified campaign expense of a candidate cr authorized conmqittee. Any person who violates this provision ShaE be fined not more _t]:mn $10,000 or imprisoned not more than 5 :years, or both. Section, 9042 (d) also provides that any person who accepts any kickback or other il legal payment shall pay to the Secretary for deposit in the matching p_yment account an amount equal to 195 percent of the kickback or ,::>t}_.er illegal payment received. REVmW OF ar,OVLATm_'S Section 409 amends section 9009 of the Code (relating to repor_;s to Congress, regulations) to establish a procedure for the review of :%relations, by Congressional committees identical to the procedures established by the(which new section 9039(c) the Code, relating to se,:!:t!kon re,ir!}ew of regulations is added bY theo? _amendment made by 408). EFFEC_[_ DATES General effective date Section 410(a) provides that the provisionSvf this legislation (c,ther than amendments to the Code) shall take effect 30 days after the date of the enactment of this legislation. late_aal Revenue Uode amendments Section 410(b) provides that amendments to the Internal Revenue Code made by sections 305, 306, 307, 808, 309, 310, and 311 :i!_hall gpply with respect to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2978. 674 CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE REPORTED BY THE BILL, AS In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, changes i1_existing law made by the bill, as reported .are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed m black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, existing law in Which no change is proposed is shown in roman): TITLE Sec. 591. 592. 593. 594. 595. 596. 597. 598. 599. 600. 601. 602. 603. 604. 605. 606. 607. 608. 609. 610. 611. 612. 613. 61_. 615. 616. Chapter 18, UNITED 29.--ELECTIONS STATES AND POLITICAL CODE ACTIVITIES Definitions. Troops at polls. Interference by armed forces. Intimidation of voters. Interference by administrative employees of Federal, State, or Territorial Governments. Polling armed forces. Expenditures to influence voting. Coercion by means of relief appropriations. Promise of appointment by candidate. Promise of employment or other benefit for political activity. Deprivation of employment or other benefit for politidal activity. Solicitation of political contributions. Place of solicitation. Solicitation from persons on relief. Disclosure of names of persons on relief. Intimidation to secure political contributions. Making political contributions. Limitations on contributions and expenditures. [Repealed. P.L. 92-225.] Contributions or expenditures by national banks, corporations or ].abor organizations. Contributions by Government contractors. Publication or distribution of political statements. Contributions by [agents of foreign principals] foreign nationals. Prohibition of contributions in name of another. Limitation on contributions of currency. Acceptance of excessive honorariums. § 591. Definitions. [When used in sections 597, 599, 600, 602, 608, 610, and 611 of this title--] Except as otherwise specifically provided, when used in this section and in sections 597, 599, 600, 602, 608, 610, 611, 61_, and 615 of this title-- tion of delegates to a national nominating convention of a political party, (4) a primary election held for the expressio n of a (41) 675 42 preference for the nomination of persons for election to the ofii(,.t;; of President, and (5) the election of delegates to a constitutiomi_,L convention for proposing amendments to the; Constitution of th.t;; United States; (b) "candidate" means an individual who seeks nominatio]::L for election, or election, to Federal office, whether or not such individual is elected, and, for purposes of this paragraph, a:l::; individual shall be deemed to seek nomination for election, (:_,t: election, to Federal office, if he has (1) taken the action necessar:y under the law of a State to qualify himseljf for nomination fo:l' election, or election, or (2) received contributions or made ex,.penditures, or has given his consent for s,ny other person 1:.o receive contributions or make expenditures, with a view to bring.lng about; his-nomination for election, or election, to such office!!; (c) "Federal office" means the office o:_ President or Vi('.e President of the United States, or Senator c,r Representative h:'_, or Delegate or Resident Commissioner to, tim Congress of tt:J.e United States; (d) "political committee" means any individual, committe,_;_, associatmn, or organization which accepts con.tributions or make_; expenditures during a calendar year in an aggregate amourbt e:_ceeding $1,000, or which commits any act for the purpose ,::,f influencing, directly or ,indirectly', the nomina,tion for election, ,,.:_:' election, of any person to Federal oB_ce, except that any commun'il.. cation rejerred to in paragraph (fl)(_) of this section which ,is n_'_t included within the definition of the term "expenditure" shall not ,i!_e considered such an act; (e) "contribution" means-(1) a gift, subscription, loan, advance, or deposit ,t:'.J' money or anything of value (except a loan of money 'by :i; national or State bank made in :accordance with the app]i.cable; banking laws and regulations and in the ordinar?? course of business) made for the purpose of influencing tt:l,_ nomination for election, or election, of any person to Feder_i;_l office, for the purpose of influencing the results of a primal:':!!; held for the selection of delegates to a national nominatir:,.li,; convention of a political party ,or for the expression of :_t preference for the nomination of persons for election to the office of President, or for the purpose of influencing the election of delegates to a, constitutional convention fcic proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States; (2) a contract, promise, or agreement, express or implie¥_, whether or not legally enforceable, to make a contributic.:l:t for such purposes; (3) a transfer of funds between politi.cal committees; (4) the payment, by any person other than a candidate (:_:_' political committee, of compensation for the personal services of another person which are rendered to such candidate c:.r' political committee without charge for any such purpos,;:; and 676 4B (5) notwithstanding the foregoing meanings of "contriburion'', the word shall not be construed to include (A) serv_ices provided without compensation by individuals volunteering a portion or all of 'their time on behalf of a candidate or olitical committee, (B) the use of real or personal property an individual owner or lessee in rendering voluntary personal services to any candidate orpolitical committee, including the cost of invitations and food and beverages provided on the individual's premises for candidate-related activities, (C) the sale of any food or beverage by a vendor/or use in a candidate's campaign at a charge less than the normal corr_parablecharge, if such charge for use in a candidate's campaign is at least equal to the cost of such food or beverage to the vendor, (D) any unreimbursed purchase or other payment by any individual for travel expenses with respect to the rendering of voluntary personal serwces by such individual to any candidate or politlical committee, or (E) the payment by a State or local committee of a political party of the costs of preparation, display I or mailing or other distribution incurred by such committee _._th respect to a printed slate card or sample ballot, or other printed listing, of 3 or more candidates for any public o_ce for whic)_ an election is held in the State in which such committee is organized, except that this clause shall not apply in the ca_:e of costs incurred bY such committee with respect to a display, of any such listing made on broadcasting stations, or in magazines or other similar types of general public political advertisinq (other than newspapers): Provided, That the cumulative value of activities by any person on behalf of any candidate under each of clauses (B) or (D) shall not exceed $500 with re,_pect to any election; (f) "expenditure" means-(1) a purchase, payment, distribution, loan, advance, deposit, or gift of money or anything of value (except a loan of money by a national or State bank made in accordance with the applicable banking laws and regulations and in the ordinary course of business), made for the purpose of influencing the nomination for election, or election, of any person to Federal office, for the purpose of influencing the result of a primary held for the selection of delegates to a national nominating convention of a political party or for the expression of a preference for the nomination of persons for election to the office of President, or for the purpose of influencing the election of delegates to a constitutional convention for proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States; (2) a contract, promise, or agreement, express or implie(!, whether, or not legally enforceable, to make any expenditurt; [and] (3) a transfer of funds between political committees; and (_) _otwithstanding theforegoing meanings _f "expenditure," such term does not include (A) any news story, commentary, 677 44 or editorial distributed through thefacilities of any broadcastinq station, newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publicatio._,il, unless such facil_'ities are owned or controlled by-any politic'.rlll party,political committee, or candidate, (B) nonpart_sar_ a,i_tivity designed to encourage individuals to register to vote or i(o vote, (C) any communication by any membership organizatio;,_ or corporation to its members or stockholde_s, if such membersh_i:p organization or corporation is not or.qar_i, zed vrimaril_t for ti'ri,e purpose of influencing the nomivation for election, or'election,.!, of any person to Federal office, (D) the u,se of real or personal property by an individual owner or lessee _n rendering voluntary personal services to any candidate or political committee, i,_i,eluding the cost of invitations and food and beverages provided on the individual's premises for'candidate-related activitie,_:, (E) any unreimbursed purchase or other .payment by any ind.i',vidual for travel expenses with respect to ti_erendering of voluntary personal services by such individuai' to any candidate _v,., political committee, (F) any communication by any perso:_._, which is not made for the purpose of influencing the nomi_mtion for election, or election, of any person to Federal o_ice, (G) the payment by a State or local committee of a political party of t]te costs of preparation, display, or mailing or other clistr_butioi,_ incurred by such committee with respect to a printed slate car_'_ or sample ballot, or other printed listing, of 3 or more candidatei_ for any public o_ce for which an election .is held in the State ii,! whic)_ such committee is orgawized, except that this clause shai'l not apply in the case of costs incurred by such committee wi_:.,l!,_ respect to a display of any such listing made on broadcasti'ri.!'j stations, or in magazines or other similar types of general publ_i:c political advertising (other t/mn newspa_gers), (H) any cos_':,_, ncurred by a candidate (including his principal campaig;_:i, committee) in connection with the solicitation of cont_'ibutions b:i;, such candidate, except that this clause ,,_hall not apply wit/,_, respect.to costs incurred by a candidate (including his principa,!' campatgn committee) in excess of an amount equal to 25 pe:.:_., centum of the expenditure limitation applicable to such candida_,_,, under section 608(c) of this title, or (I) a_y costs incurred by ,'i!. political committee (as such term is defined by section 608(b)(2) of this title) with respect to the solicitatio_ of contributions t,::, such political committee or to any general political fund cor_;..; trolled by such political committee, except that this clause shai. not apply to exempt costs incurred with respect to the solicitation,',, of contributions to any such political co_imittee made throug,lll. broadcasting stations, newspapers, maga.'_ines, outdoor, adve_.... tisingfacilities, and other similar of general public politico:? advertising: Provided, That the types cumulative value of activitie,i: by any person on behalf of any candidate ,,znder each of clausea_ (D) or (lz) shall not exceed $500 with re,,_pectto any election,' (g) "person" and "whoever" mean an individual, partnership:, committee, association, corporation, or any other organization or group of persons; ['and] 678 45 (h) "State" means each State of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any terri-. tory or possession of thee United States['.]; and (i) "principal campaign committee" means the principal e_m.. paign committee designated by a candidate under section 30_(f) (1) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971. § 592. Troops at polls. Whoever, being an officer of the Army or Navy, or other person in the civil, military, or naval service of the United States, orders, brings, keeps, or has under his authority or control any troops or armed men at any place where a general or special election is held, unless such force be necessary to repel armed enemies of the United States, shal_ be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both; and be disqualified from holding any office of honor, profit, or trust under the United States. This section shall not prevent any officer or member of the armed forces of the United States from exercising the right of suffrage in any election district t° which he may belong, if otherwise qualified accordlng to the laws of the State in which he offers to vote. § 593. Interference by armed forces. Whoever, being an officer or member of the Armed Forces of the United States, prescribes or fixes or attempts to prescribe or fix:, whether by proclamation, order or otherwise, the qualifications of voters at any election in any State; or Whoever, being such officer or member, prevents or attempts to prevent by force, threat, intimidation, advice or otherwise any qualified voter of any State from fully exercising the right of suffrage at any general or special election; or Whoever, being such officer or member, orders or compels or attempts to compel any election officer in any State to receive a vote from a person not legally qualified to vote; or Whoever, being such officer or member, imposes or attempts to impose any regulations for conducting any general or special election in a State, different from those prescribedby law; or Whoever, being such officer or member, interferes in any manner with an election officer's discharge of his duties-Shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both; and disqualified from holding any office of honor, profit or trust under the United States. This section shall not prevent any officer or member of the Armed Forces from exercising the right of suffrage in any district to which he may belong, if otherwise qualified according to the laws of the State of such district. § 594. Intimidation of voters. Whoever intimidates, threatens, coerces, or attempts to intimidate, threaten, or coerce, any other person for the purpo_ of interfering with the right of such other person to vote or to vote as he may choose, or of causing such other person to vote for, or not to vote for 1 any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, Presidential 6'79 46 elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Repre:_;entatives, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident. (i!ommissioner, at ally election held solely or in part for the purpo:_,_ of electing such candidate, shall be fined notmore than $1,000 m imprisoned not more than one year, or both. § 595. Interference by administrative or Territorial Governments. Whoever, being a person employed employees of Federal., in any administrative 'J_rote, p,::_sitiLon by the United States, or by any department: or agency thereof _ir by the District of Columbia or any agency or instrumentality t':r}:ere, of, or by any State, Territory, or Possession of the United States, ,::.r'any political subdivision, municipality, or agency thereof, or age:r:_¢yof such political subdivision or municip_dity (including any corp(:,r_L;Jkon owned or controlled by any State, Territory, or Possession of the United States or by any such uolitical subdivision municina]it,, or agency), in connection with any activity which is hnance,t_n' d:i]_aole or m part by loans or grants made by the -United States, or a:l::o_department or agency thereof, uses his official authority for the pul'pose of interfering with, or affecting, t]ae nomination or the election _::,_ any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, Preside:atial elector, Member of the Senate, Men:tber of the House of Rep::e:_;ent_.tives, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident C(:,l:_:,misstoner, shall be fined not more tlhan $1,00C or imprisoned no'l: ,::(rare than one year, or both. This section shall not prohibit or make unlawful any act by any officer or employee of any educational or research institutlkon, ;i._;tab]ishment, agency, or system which i_ supported in whole or il:_part 'by any state or political subdivision thereof, or by the Dist:l':[c; of COlumbia or by any Territory or Possession of the United Sta'!:__;;or bY any :recognized religious, philanthropic or cultural organi:;ml[on. § 596. Polling armed forces. Whoever, within or without the Armed Forces of the United _:'_ :' t :ttes, Polls any member of such forces, either within or without the _iiliS:ted States, either before or after he execuLes any 'ballot under any F_!_¢[eral or State ]taw, with reference to his; choice of ,or his vote for any cs_,adidate, or states, publishes, or releases any result of any purport,i!_d poll taken from or among the members of the Armed Forces of the q[i_:dted States or including within it the statement of choice for such can_:l_date or of such votes cast by any member of the Armed Forces ,:::fthe United States, shall be fined nov more than $1,000 or impI4son_!_d for not more than one year, or both. The word "poll" means any request for information, ver l:_al or written, which by its language or form of expression requires or i:m:fiies 1;he necessity of an answer, where the request is made wi_:h the intent of compiling the result of the answer,s obtained, either :f_::_. the personal use of the person nmki:ug the request, or for the purl:',._t,_,e of reporting the same to any other person, persons, political ]:,s:ci;y, unincorporated association or corporation, or for the purp,_::,;_ of publishing the same orally, by radio, or in written or printed fc:_:_:c_.. 680 47 § 597. Expenditures to influence voting. Whoever makes or offers to make an expenditure to any person, either to vote or withhold his vote, or to vote for or against any candidate; and Whoever solicits, accepts, or receives any such expenditure in consideration of his vote or the withholding of his vote-· Shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if the violation was willful, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both. § 598, Coercion by means of relief appropriations. Whoever uses any part of any appropn_'ation made by Congress roi' work relief, relief, or for increasing employment by providing loans and grants for public-works projects, or exercises or administers any authority conferred by any Appropriation Act for the purpose of interfering with, restral_ning, or coercing any individual in the exercise of his right to vote at any election, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. § 599. Promise of appointment by candidate. Whoever, being a candidate, directly or indirectly promises or pledges the appointment, or the use of his influence or support for the appointment of any person to any public or private position or employment, for the purpose of procuring support in his candidacy shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more tlhan one year, or both; and if the violation was willful, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than two years, or be)th. §600. Promise of employment or other benefit for politiical activity. Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment, position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit, provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such benefit, to any person a,_ consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for: the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party' in connection with any general or special election to any political office, or in connection with any primary election or political conventio_l or caucus held to select candidates for any political office, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. § 601. Deprivation of employment or other benefit for political activity. Whoever, except as required by law, directly or indirectly, deprives, attempts to deprive, or threatens to deprive any person of any employment, position, work, compensation, or other benefit provided for or made possible by any Act of Congress appropriating funds for work relief or relief purposes, on account of race, creed, color, or any political activity, support of, or opposition to any candidate or any political party in any election, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than oneyear, or both. 681 48 § 602. Solicitation of political contributions. Whoever, being a Senator or Representative in, or Delegah_ or Resident Commissioner to, or a candidate for Congress, or individual elected as, Senator, Representative, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner, or an officer or employee of the United States or any department or agency thereof, or a person receiving any salary or compensation for services from money derived from the Treasury of [he lJni.ted States, directly or indirectly solicits, receives, or is m any rnEimner concerned[ in soliciting or receiving, any assessment, subscfipti,:m, or contribut][on for any political purpose whatever, from any other such officer, eraployee, or person, shall be fined not more than $5,£10I) or imprisoned not more than three years or both. §603. Place of solicitation. Whoever, in any room or building occupied in the discharge of official duties by any person mentioned in section 602 of this fi i:le, or in any navy yard, fort, or arsenal, solicits or :receives any contrib u t,ion of money or other thing of value for any political purpose, shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than three ?ars, or both. § 604. Solicitation from persons on relief. Whoever solicits or receives or is in any manner concerrL_d in soliciting or receiving any assessment, subscription, or contributkm for any political purpose from any person known by him to be erl Lifted to, or receiving compensation, employment, or other benefit pr(:,vided for or made possible by any Act .of Congress appropriating funds for work relief or relief purposes, shall be fined not more than $1/'.],(}0or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. § 605. Disclosure of names of persons on relief. Whoever, for political purposes, furnishes or discloses any kist or names of! persons receiving compensation, employment or benefits provided for or made possible by any Act of Congress approprih_ dng, or authorizing the appropriation of funds for work relief or relief purposes, to a political candidate, committee, campaign manati!;m', or to any person for delivery to a political candidate, committee: or campaign manager; and Whoever receives any such list or names for political purp,::_ses-Shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not mor_i':,!:hah one year, or both. § 606. Intimidation to secure political contributions. Whoever, being one of the officers or employees of the United i!!_tates mentioned in section 602 of this title, discharges, or promol:es, or degrades,, or in any manner changes the official rank or compen_!;ation of any other officer or employee, or promises or threatens sc, to ,::]i¢,, :for giving or withholding or neglecting to make any contribution of :l:aoney or other valuable thing for any political purpose, shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. 682 49 § 607. Making political contributions. Whoever, being an officer, clerk, or other person in the service of the United States or any department or agency thereof, directly or indirectly gives or hands over to any other officer, clerk, or person in the service of the United States, or to any Senator or Member of or Delegate to Congress, or Resident Commissioner, any money or other valuable thing on account of or to be applied to the promotion of any political object, shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. § 608. Limitations on contributions and expenditures. (a) (1) No candidate may make expenditures from his personal funds, or the personal funds of his immediate family, in comlection with his campaign for nomination for election, or election, to Federal office in excess of £--'] $25,000. I'(A) $50,000, in the case of a candidate for the office of President or Vice President; r(B) $35,000, in the case of a candidate for the ()ffice of Senator; or [(C) $25,000, in the case of a candidate for the office of Representative, or Delegate or Resident Commissioner to the Congress.] (2) For purposes of this subsection, "immediate family" means a candidate's spouse, and any child, parent, grandparent, brother, or sister of the candidate, and the spouses of such persons. (b)(1) Except as otherwise provided by paragraphs (2) and (3), no person shall make contributions to any candidate with respect to any election/or Federal offce which, in the aggregate, exceed 81,000. (2) No political committee (other than a principal campaign cornmittee) shall make contributions to any candidate with respect to any election for Federal office which, in the aggregate, exceed $5,000. Contributions by the national committee of a political party serving as the principal campaign committee of a candidate for the offwe of Pres_ent of the United States shall no t exceed the limitation imposed by the pre&ding sentence with respect to any other candidate for Federal offwe. For purposes of this paragraph, the term "political committee" means an organization registered as a political committee under section 303 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 for a period of not less than 6 months which has received contributions from more than 50 persons and, except for any State political party organization, has made contributions to 5 or more candidates for Federal office. (3) No individual shall make contributions aggregating more than $25,000 in any calendar year. (_) For purposes of this subsection(A) contributions to a named candidate made to any political committee authorized by such candidate, in writing, to accept con:tributions on his behalf shall be considered to be contributions made to such candidate; and (B) contributions made to or for the benefit of any candidate nominated by a political party for election to the offwe of Vice Presi- 683 5O dent of the United States shall be considered to be contribution.!, made to or for the benefit of the candidate oj such party for election to ;lhe o_ce of President of the United States. (5) The limitations imposed by paragraphs (1) and (2) of this sub.section shall apply separately with respect to each election, except that all el_!_,.!!ions held in a_,y calendar year for the oJ_e of Pre_,_identoj tke United ,:_;!ates (except a general election for such o_ice) sha_l be considered to .!_.eone election. (6) For purposes of the limitations imposed by this section, all co_dributions made by a person, either directly or indirectly., on behalf of _:1: ;particular candidate, including contributions which are tn any way ear.:_arked or otherwise directed through an intermediary or conduit to such candidate, shall be treated as contributions from suck person to such candidat,_!_The intermediary or conduit shall report the original source and the in_!ie_tded recipientof such contribution to the appropriate supervisory o_icer N:_!_d to the intended recipient. (c) (1) No candidate shall make expenditures in excess of(A) $10,000,000 in the case of a candidate for nominati_::_ for election to the qy_iceof President of the United States; (B) $20,000,000, in the case of a candidate for election to the cl;!_ice . of President of the United States; (C) in the case of any campaignj'or nomination for election_ ,:.'for election, by a candidate for the oy_ce of Servitor, the greater of- ..... (i) 5 cents multiplied by the population of the geogra:i.:J,_ical area with respect to which the election is held; or (ii) $75,000; (D) 875,000, in the case of any campaign for nominatio_ joi,' electiorc, or for election, by a candidate for the offwe of Represen,:_.ive, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commiss!;_.,_,er; or (E) $15,000, in the case of' any campaign for nomination fo;, dection, or for election, by a candidate for t,_e off,ce of Delegate J?om Guam, or the Virgin Islands. (2) For purposes of this subsectio_q-(A) expenditures made by or on behalf of any candidate nom.i;,_,:_ted by a political party for election to the off_e of Vice President 2J the Unite_t States shall be considered t6_'be expenditures made by :,r on behalf of the candidate oJ such party for electioa to the o_i;c_',of President of the United States:: (B) .expenditures made on behalf of any candidate by a pri_'i:c?_l campa_.gn committee designated by such candidate under scc_!wn 302(f)(1) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 shal,i' be deemed to have been made by such candidate; and (C) the population of any geographical area shall be the po?ldation according to th_,_most recent decenn_;al census of the Ur_ited States taken under section 1_1 of title 13, United States Code. (3) The limitations imposed by subparagraphs (C), (D), a¢_d (.?i?)of paragraph (1) of this suOsection shall apply _eparately with respd_ctlto each election. (d)(1) At the beginningof each calendar year (commencing in t,¢75), as ,there becomes available necessary data from the Bureau of _i!i._zbor 684 51 Statistics of the Departraent of Labor, the Secretary of Labor el_l ?rtify to the Comptroller General and publish in the Federal Register ._._ per centare di_rence between the price index for the 12 months preeeding tt_e beginning of such calendar year and the price index f_ the base period, Each limitation established by subsection (e) shall be increased by such per centum difference. Each amount so increased shall be the amount in effect for such calendar year. (2) For purposes of paragraph (1)-(A) the term "price index" means the average over a calendar year of the Consumer Price Index (all items--United States city average) published monthly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics; a_d (B) the term "base period" means the calendar year 1973. (e) (1) No person may make any expenditure (other than an expenditure made by or on behalf of a candidate under the provisions _ subsection (c)) relative to a clearly identified candidate during a calendar year which, when added to all other expenditures made by such person during the year advocating the election or defeat of such candidate, exceeds $1,000. (2) For purposes of paragraph (I), the term "clearly identified" meanq-(A) the candidate's name appears; (B) a photograph or drawing of the candidate appears; or ((7) the identity of the candidate is apparent by unambiguous reference. (b)] ([) No candidate or political committee shall knowingly accept any contlqbutlon or authorize any expenditure in violation of the provisions of this section. [(c)] (g) Violation of the provisions of this section is punishable by a fine not to exceed [$1,000,'[ $25,000, imprisonment for not to exceed one year, or both. § 609. [Repealed. P.L. 92-225]. § 610. Contributions or expenditures by national banks, corporations or labor organizations. It is unlawful for any national bank, or any corporation organized by authority of any law of Congress, to make a contribution ,or expenditure in connection with any election to any political office, ,or in connection with any primary election or political convention ,or caucus held to select candidates for any political office, or for any corporation whatever, or any labor organization to make a contribution or expenditure in connection with any election at which ]?residential and Vice Presidential electors or a Senator or Representative in, or a _Delegate or Resident Commissioner to Congress are to be voted for, or in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held t° select candidates for any of the foregoing offices, or for any candidate, political committee, or other person to accept or receive any contribution prohibited by this section. Every corporation or labor organization which makes any contribution or expenditure in violation of this section shall be fined not more than [$5,000 ;'1 $25,000; and every officer or director of any corporatio n , or officer of any labor organization, who consents to any contribution or expenditure by the corporation or labor organiza, · · · . · · ' -- 685 52 tion, as tile case may be, and any person who accepts or receiw!_;_;any contribution, in violation of this section, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if th,! ';riolation was willful, shall be fined not more than [$10,000'1 $50,00.9 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both. For the purposes of this section "labor organization" meam; _my organization of any kind, or any agency' or employee representation committee or plan, in which employees participate and which exist for the purpose, in whole or in part, of dealing with employen_; concerning grievances, labor disputes, wages, rates of pay, ho't:tr_; of employment, or conditions of work. As used in this section, the phrase "contribution or expendil:4_re" shall include any direct or indirect payment, distribution, lean, advance,(except deposit, or of giftmoney of money, any services, anyth!nl!' value a loan by a or national or State orbank ma&i; of in accordance with the applicable banking laws and regulations a:.,':t,:!, in the ordinary course of business) to any candidate, campaign committee or political party or organization, in connection with any election to any of the offices referred to in this section; but shat[ not include communications by a corporation to its stockholders and ttleir families o:r by a labor organization to its members and their fam!tlies on. any subject; nonpartisan registration and get-out-the-vote :ampmgns by a corporation aimed at its stockholders and their far:,i_ies, or by a labor organization aimed at its members and their fandlies; the establishment, administration, and solMtation of contribl:lt!kons to aa separate to be utilized for political by corporationsegregated or labor fund organization: Provided, That it pu?c,ses shall be unlawful for such a fund to make a contribution or expenditu:j:e by utilizing money or anytlhing of wdue secured by physical forc,i!, iob discrimination, financial reprisals, or the threat of force, job disc:,!kmination, or financial reprisal; or by dues, fees, or other monies recl uired as a condition of membership in a labor organization or as a corn:Iii:ion of employment, or by monies obtained in any commercial transac;tion. § 611. Contributions by Government contractors. Whoew_r-(a) entering into any contract 'with the United States olr' any depg. rtment or agency thereof either for the rendition of per!;;onal services or furnishing any material, supplies, or equipment to the United States or any department or agency thereof or for selling any land or building to the United States or any departme:at, ,ar agency thereof, if payment for the performance of such con i:ract or p.a:_;ment for such material, supplies, equipment, land, or builcllng is to be made in whole or :in part from funds appropriate.d by the Congress, at any time between the commencement of nelii',;cr,iations for and the later of (1) the completion of performance c_mter, or (2) the termination of negotiation,; for, such contract ,ar furnishing of material, supplies, equipraent, land or buildir:lgs, directly or indirectly makes any contribution of money or or.her thing of value, or promises expressly or impliedly to mak_i!_arty such contribution, to any political party, committee, or candiida[e for public office or to any person for' any political purpose or u.._!_e: or 686 53 (b) knowingly solicits any such contribution from any Such person for any such purpose during any such period; shall be fined not mor e than [$5,000] $25,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. This section shall not prohibi1 or make unlawful the establishment or administration of, or the solicitation of contributions to, any separate segregated fund by any corporation or labor organization for the purpose of influencing the nomination for election, or election, of any person to Federal o_ce, unless the provisions of section 610 of this title prohibit or make unlawful the establishment or administration of, or the solicitation of contributions to, such fund. For purposes of this section, the term "labor organization" has the meaning given it by section 610 of this title. § 612. Publication or distribution of political statements. Whoever willfully publishes or distributes or causes to be publi[shed or distributed, or for the purpose of publishing or distributing the same, knowingly deposits for mailing or delivery or causes to be deposited mailing or, except ofinthtir c_ases of employees the Postal for Service in or the delivery, official discharge duties, knowinglyof transports or causes to be transported in interstate commerce any card, pamphlet, circular, poster, dodger, advertisement, writing, or other statement relating to or concerning any person who has publicly declared his intention to seek the office of President, or Vice President of the United States, or Senator or Representative itt, or Delegate or Resident Commissioner to Congress, in a primat3r, general, or special election, or convention of a political party, or has caused or permitted hi s intention to do so to be publicly declared, which does not contain the names of the persons, associations, committees, or corporations responsible for the publication or distribution of the same, and the names of the officers of each such association, committee, or corporation, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. § 613. Contributions nationals. by [agents of foreign principals] foreign Whoever, being [an agent of a foreign principal] a foreign national, directly or through any other person [,either for or on behalf of such foreign principal or other_hse in his capacity as agent of such foreign principal,] knowingly makes any contribution of money or other thing of value, or promises expressly or impliedly to make any such contribution, in connection with an election to any political office or in connection with any primary election, convention, or caucus, held to select candidates for any political office; or Whoever knowingly solicits, accepts, or receives any such contribution from any such [agent of a foreign principal or from such foreign principal] foreign national-Shall be fined not more than [$5,000] $25,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both. I'As used in this section_ [(1) The term "foreign principal" has tho same meaning as when used in the Foreign .Agents Registration Act of 1038, as amended, 687 54 except that such term does not include any _person who is a citL_en of the United States. [(2) The term "agent of a foreigxlL principal" means any ]::,_:L'son who acts as an agent, representative, employee, or servant, c,_: any person who acts in any other capacity at the order, request, or ,t_2der the direction or control, of a foreig_l principal or of a perso:l:_ :my substantial portion of whose activities are directly or indi?ectly supervised, directed, or controlled by a fore2gn prinCl'pal.'l As used', in this section, the term '_[oreign national" means--(1) a jforeign principal, as such term is defined by section'! _!(b) of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 (22 U.S.C. 62:! (b)), except that the term ')%reign national" _hall not incl,ude awy individual who is a citizen of the United States; or (2) an individual who is _wt a citizen of the United State? L:_nd who is noi lawfully admitted ,)for permanent residence, as d,_:jiined by section 101(a)(20) of the Immigration and Nationalit? Act (8 U.S.U. 1101(a) (20)). § 614. Prohibition of contributions ia name of another. (a) No person shall make a contribution in the name of another p,_!r.;.on, and no person shall knowingly accept a contribution made by one 2:_s_'_on in' the name oJ another person. (b) Any person who violates this sectio_ shall be fined not more t/tan $25,000 or' imprisoned not more than one year, or both. § 615. Limitation on contributions of currency. (a) No person shall make contributions of currency of the United .,!:i;'t_t,es or currency of any foreign country to or for the benefit of any candidate which, in the aggregate, exceed 8100, with respect to any campaign oj' _,_cch candidate for nomination for election, or election, to Federal o y%ce. (b) Any' persoa who ,_iolates this section shall be fined not more t/_an $25,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. § 616. Acceptance of excessive honorariums. Whoever', while an elected or appointed oj_cer or employee qf ,:_,ny branch of the Federal Government- .... (1) accepts any honorarium of more than $1,000 (excl._.,:rLing amounts accepted for actual travel and subsistence expenses) fo>, c,rt'y appearance, speech, or article; or (2) accepts honorariums (not prohibit,sd by paragraph (/) of this subsection) aggregating more than $10,000 in any calendar ;,_,ea_; shall be fined not less than $10,000 nor more than $5,000. FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT OF AN ACT To promote fair practices in the ¢ondu¢'_ of election Federal political offices, and for other purposes. 1971 c_mpaig:t ?, l!or Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives oJ the Ui,!'i!ed States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may be cit_!d _s the "Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971". 688 55 TITLE I--CAMPAIGN COMMUNICATIONS SHORT TITLE SEC. 101. This title may be cited as the "Campaig n Communications Reform Act". DEFINITIONS SEC. 102. For purposes of this title: [(1) The term "communications media" means broadcasting stations, newspapers, magazines, outdoor advertising facilities, and telephones; but, _th respect to telephones, spending or an expenditure shall be deemed to be spending or an expenditure for the use of communications media only if such spending or expenditure is for the costs of telephones, paid telephonists, and automatic telephone equipment, used by a candidate for Federal elective office to communicate with potential voters (excluding any _:osts of telephones incurred by a volunteer for use of telephones by him). [(2) The term "broadcasting station" has the same meaning as such term has under section 315(f) of the Communications Act of 19a4.] [(3)] (1) The term "Federal elective office" means the office of President of the United States, or of Senator or Representative in, or Resident Commissioner or Delegate to, the Congress of the United States (and for purposes of section 103(b) such terra includes the office of Vice President). [(4)] (2) The term "legally qualified candidate" means any person who (A) mee_s the qualifications prescribed by the apph _cable laws to hold the Federal elective office for which he' is a candidate, and (B) is eligible under applicable State law to be voted for by the electorate directly or by means of delegates or electors. [(5) The term "votP_g age population" means resident population, eighteen years of age and older. [(6) The term "Sts_te" includes the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.] MEDIA RATE AND RELATED REQUIREMENTS SEC. 103. (a) (1) Section 315(b) of the Commmfications is amended to read as follows: Act of 1934 "(b) The charges made for the use of any broadcasting station by any person who is a legally qualified candidate for any public office in connection with his campaign for nomination for election, or election; to such office shall not exceed-"(1) during the forty-five days preceding the date of a priraary or primary runoff election and during the sixty days preceding the date of a general or sJp,ecial election in which such person is a can, didate, the lowest umt charge of the station for the same class, and amount of time for the same period; and "(2) at any other time, the charges made for comparable use of such station-by other users thereof." 689 (2)(A) Section 312(a) of such Act is amended by striking 'q::,r_ at the end of clause (5), striking the period at 'Liheend of 'clause (6) and inserting in lieu thereof a semicolon and "or,, and adding at the ,__ d of such section 312(a) the following new paragraph: "(7) for willful or repeated failure to allow reasonable _.¢cess to or to permit purchase of reasonable amounts of time for t]'_e use of a broadcasting station by a legally qualified candidate for ]i?ederal elective office on behalf of his candidacy.". (B) The second sentence of section 315(a) of such Act is am_!mded by inserting "under this subsection" after "No obligation is hnpc,:_t_d". (b) To the extent that any person sell s space in any newspaper' or magazine to a legally qualified candidate for ]_ederal elective off,': :_ or nomination thereto, in connection with such candidate's campai!i!i:ri:'for nomination for, or election to, such office, the charges made for the use of such space in connection with his campaign shall not exceed the charges lrtade for comparable use of such space for other purpos,!:_. [LImTA?_:ONS Or EXPENmTVRES ton _s_ or COMMVNmATmNS_,r_:mX [SEc. 104. (a)(1) Subject to paragraph (4)? no legally qualified ,:sndidate in an election (other than a primary or primary runoff! elec tion) for a Federal elective office may-[(A) spend for the use of communications media on behi!:d_'of his candidacy in such election a total amount in excess (:,t!_he greater of-[(i) 10 cents multiplied by the voting age population (.as certified under paragrap]h (5)) of the geographical arl!_a in which the election for such office is held, or [(ii) $50,000, or [(B) spend for the use of broadcast stations on behalf .,::,fhis candidacy in such election a tot_fi amount in excess of 6(] per centum of the amount determined under subparagraph (A) wi_bh respect to such election. [(2) No legally qualified candid ate in a primary election for nom:ination to a Federal elective office, ot]her than President, may spemi[-[(A) for the use of communications media, or [(B) for the use of broadcast stations, on behalf of his candidacy in such election a total amount in exct_s:_of the amounts determined under paragraph (1) (A) or (B), re!!;pectively, with respect to the general election for such office. For pur?ses of this subsection a primary runoff election shall be treated as a .!_.e,p_rate primary election. [(3) (A) No person who is a candidate for presidential nomin i!Ll:ion may spend-[(i) for the use in a State of communications media, or [(ii[) for the use in a State of broadcast stations, on behalf of his candidacy for presidential nomination a total an!,qmt in excess ,of the amounts which would have been determined u:inder paragraph (1) (A) or (B), respectively, had he been a candidat,i_ for election for the office of Senator from such State (or for the offis_ of 690 57 Delegate or Resident Commissioner in the ease of the District of Columbia or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico). [(B) For purposes of this paragraph (3), a person is a candidate fol' presidential nomination if he makes (or any other person makes on his behalf) an expenditure for the use of any communications mediumt on behalf of his candidacy for any political party's nomination for election to the office of President. He shall be considered to be such a candidate during the period-[(i) beginning on the date on which h.e (or such other person') first makes such ail expenditure (or, if later, January 1 of the year in which the election for the office of President is held), and _ [(ii) ending on the date on which such political party nominates a candidate for the office of ]?resident. For purposes of this title and of section 315 of the Communications Act of 1934, a candidate for presidential nomination shall be considered a legally qualified candidate for public office. [(C) The Comptroller General shall prescribe regulations under which any expenditure by a candidate for presidential nomination for the use in two or more St_tes of a communications medium shall be attributed to such candid:_te's expenditure limitation in each such State, based on the number of persons in such State who can reasonably be expected to be reached by such communications medium. £(4)(A) For purposes of subparagraph (B): [(i) The term "price index" means the average over a calendar year of the Consumer Price Index (all items--United States city average) published monthly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. [(ii) The term "base period;' means the calendar .year 1970. [(B) At the beginning of each calendar year (commencing in 1972), as there becomes available necessary data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department of Labor, the Secretary of Labor shall certify to the Comptroller General and publish in the Federal Registe r the per centum difference between the price index for the 12 months preceeding the beginning of such calendar year and the price index for the base period. Each amount determined under paragraph (1)(A)(i) and (ii) shall be increased by such per centum difference. Each amount so increased shall be the amount in effect for such calendar year. [(5) Within 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, and during the first week of January in 1973 and every subsequent year, the Secretary of Commerce shall certify to the Comptroller General and publish in the Federal Register an estimate of the voting age population of each State and congressional district for the last calendar year ending before the date of certification. [(6) Amounts spent for l_he use of communications media on behalf of any legally qualified candidate for Federal elective office (or for nomination to such office) shall, for the purposes of this subsection, be deemed to have been spent by such candidate. Amounts spentfor the use of communications media by or on behalf of any legally qualified candidate for the office of Vice President of the-United States shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to have been 69'1 58 spent by the candidate :for the o:[_iceof President of the United ;!5';,ates with whom he is running. [(7) For purposes of this section and section 315(c) of the (ommunications Act of 1934-[(A) spending and charges for the use of communications ;t_edia include not only the direct charges of the media but also _!Lii;,_mts' commissions allowed the agent by the media, and [(B) any expenditure for tile use of any communi(:_!LI;ikons medium by or on behalf of the candidacy of a candidate fo:!:'!!'edoral. elective office (or nomination thereto) shall be c]::La_'ged against the expenditure limitation under this subsection app]ii(:able to the election in which such medium is used. [(b) No person may make any charge for the use by or on be]l_llf of any legally qualified candidate for Federal elective office (or for :;l:>mination to such office) of any newspaper, mag'azine, or outdoor :i_¢ivertising facility, unless such candidate (or a person specifically a_:Ll:horized by such candidate in writing to do so) certifies in writing i:o the person making such charge that the paymen_ of such charge w:il],not violate paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of subsection (a), whiche,,.,,c is applicable. [(c) Section 315 of the Communications Act of 1934 is amen(iod by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (g) and by inserting _;fter subsection (b) the following new subsections: ["(c) ]No station licensee may make any charge for the use oi:':;ach station by or on behalf of any legally qualified candidate for Ir,i!(:oral elective office (or for nomination to such office) unless such candidate (or a person specifically authorized by such candidate in writing L:, do so) certifies to such licensee in writing that the payment of such ,:_i_a.rge will not 'violate any limitation specified in paragraph (1), (2), ,::,] (13) of section 104(a) of the Campaign Communications Reforn_t Act, whichever paragraph is applicable. ["(d) If a State by law and expressly-["(1) has provided that a, primary or other election f(::l' _:ny office of such State o,' of a political subdivision thereof is sml'[:i'ect to this subsection, ["(2) has specified a limitation upon 'botal expenditures J!,::,_ the use of broadcasting stations on behalf of the candidacy o:l!',;_ach legally qualified candidate in such election, ["(3) has provided in any such law an unequivocal expres_ili(:n of intent to be bound by the provisions of this subsection, and ["(4) has stipulated that the amoun_ of such limitatior/ _.hall not exceed the amount which would be determined for :i;ach election under section 104(a) (1) (B) or 104(a) (2)(B) (whieJ},_ver is applicable) of the Campaign Communications Reform A,::..;had such election been an election for a Federal elective; ofI:i_t_or nomination thereto; then no station licensee may make any charge for the use of suc]i_ sl;ation by or on behalf of any legally qualified candidate in such et_,!_( t,ion unless such candidate (or a person specifically authorized b.5: :!;'ach candidate in writing to do so) cerl;ifies to such licensee in writing!i,,;{hat the payment of such charge will not violate such State limitatio:n 692 59 £"(e) Whoever willfully and knowingly violates the provisio_ of subsection ICc)or (d) of this section shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $5,000 or imprisonment fox a period not to exceed five yearn, or both. The provisions of sections 501 through 503 of this Act sh_ll not apply to violations of either such subsection. r"(f) (1) For the purposes of this'section: ["(A) The term 'broadcasting station' includes a community antenna television system. ["(B) The terms 'licensee' and 'station licensee' when used with respect to a community antenna television system, means the operator of such s3_stem. ' ["(C) The term ']_ederal elective office' means the office of President of the United States, or of Senator or Representative in, or Resident Commissioner or Delegate to, the Congress of the United States. ["(2) For purposes of ,mbsections (c) and (d), the term 'le_iaily qualified candidate' means any person who (A) meets the qualifications prescribed by the applicable laws to hold the office for which he is a candidate and (B) is eligible under applicab]e State law to be voted for !by the electorate directly or by means of delegates or electors."] REGULATIONS SEC. [105.] 10._. The ,Comptroller General shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out sections 102[,] and 103(b)[, 104(a), and 104(b)] of this Act. PENALTIES SEC. [106.] 105. Whoever willfully and knowingly violates any provision of section 103 (b) [, 104 (a), or 104 (b)] or any regulation raider section 105 shall be punished by a fine of not more than $5,000 or by imprisonment of not more than five years, or both. TITLE II--CRIMINAL SEC. 201. Section to read as follows: CODE 591 of title 18, United AMENDMENTS States Code, is amended § 591. Definitions. "When used in sections 597,599, 600, 602, 608, 610, and 611 of this title-"(a) 'election' means (1) a general, special, primary, or runoff election, (2) a convention or caucus of a political party held to nominate a candidate, (3) a primary election held for the selection of delegates to a national nominating convention of a poli,_ical party, (4) a primary 'election held for the expression of a preference for the nomination of persons for election to the office of President, and (5) the election of delegates to _ constitutional convention for proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States; 693 6O "(b) 'candidate' means an individual who seeks nomination fo:l" election, or election, to Federal office, whether or not such individ .. ual is elected, and, for purposes of this para_Taph, an individual[ shall be deemed to seek nomination for election, or election, t_::, Federal office, if ihe has (1) taken the action necessary under the ]aw of a State to qualify himself for nomination for election, or election, or (2) received contributions, or msMe expenditures, o:_' has given ihis consent for any other persoh to receive contribution_i!. or make expenditures, With a view to bringing' about his nomina.. tion for election, or election, to such office; "(c) 'Federal officd' means the office of President or Vice Presi .. dent of tile United States, or Senator or Representative in, c,:_: Delegate or Resident Commissionm: to, the Congress of the Unite{:l States; "(d) 'political committee' meahs any individual, committee_. association, or organization which accepts contributions or maket_. expenditures during a calendar year in an aggregate am.ount_ exceeding $1,000; "(e) 'contribution' means-"(1) a gift, subscription, loan, advance, or deposit c:l! money or anything of value (except a ](lan of money by :L national or State bank made in accordance with the applica.. ble banking laws and regulations and in the ordinary cours_: of business), made for the purpose of influencing the nomina.. tion for election, or election, of any person to Federal office. for the purpose of influencing' the results of a primary held fo:i: the selection of delegates to a national nominating conven. tion of a political party or for the expression of a preferenc_', fro' the nomination of persons for election to the office el_ President, or for the purpose of influencing the election o:!' delegates to a constitutional convention for proposing amend... ments to the Constitution of the United .States; "(2:) a contract, promise, or agreement, express or ira. plied, whether or not legally enforceable, to make a contribu.. tion for such purposes; "(3) a transfer of funds between political committees; "(4:) the payment, by any person other than a cand:idat_: or political committee, of compensation for the personal services of another person which are rendered to such cand:i .. date ,or political committee without charge for any such pub. pose; and "(5) notwithstanding the foregoing :meanings of 'eon.. tribution', the word shall not be construed to include services!_ provided without compensation by individuals volunteerin:?,; a portion or all of their time on behalf of a candidate o:' political committee; "(f) 'expenditure' mefms-"(1) a purchase, payment, distribution, loan, advance, deposit, or gift of money or anything of value (except a loa:t::_ of money by a national or State bank :made in accordance with the applicable banking laws and regulations and in th,z_ 694 61 ordinary course of business), made for the purpose of _nfiuencing the nomination for election, or election, of any person to Federal office, for the purpose of influencing the result of a primary held for the selection of delegates to a national nominating convention of a political party or for the expression of a preference for the nomination of persons for election to the office of President, or for the purpose of influencing the election of delegates to a constitutional convention for proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States; "(2) a contract, promise, or agreement, express or implied, whether or not legally enforceable, to make any expenditure; and "(3) a transfer of funds between political committees; "(g) 'person' and 'whoever' mean an individual, partnership, committee, association., corporation, or any other organization or group of persons; and "(h) 'State' means each State of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any territory or possession of the United States.". SEC. 202. Section 600 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows: "§600. Promise of employment or other benefit for political activity. "Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment, position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit, provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress, or any special consideration in. obtaining any such benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party in connection with any general or special election to any political office, or in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office, shall be fined[ not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or botlh.". SEC. 203. Section 608 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows: "§ 608. Limitations on contributions and expenditures. "(a)(1) No candidate may make expenditures from his personal funds, or the personal funds of his immediate family, in connection with his campaign for nomination for election, or election, to Federal office in excess of-"(A) $50,000, in the case of a candidate for the office of Pr'esi.dent or Vice President,; "(B) $35,000, in the case of a candidate for the office of Sen-. ator; or "(C) $25,000, in the case of a candidate for the office of Repre-. sentative, or Delegate or Resident Commissioner to the Congress.. "(2) For purposes of this subsection, 'immediate family' means a candidate's spouse, and any child, parent, grandparent, brother, or' sister of the candidate, and the spouses of such persons. 695 52 "(b) ]No candidate or political committee shall knowingly _tc,::ept any contribution or authorize any expenditure in violation of th_z!_ :_rovisions of this section. "(c) Violation of the provisions of this section is punishable t:y a fine not to exceed $1,000, imprisonment for not to exceed one y_!_,,iL?,,, or both.". S_.c. 204. Section 609 of title 18, United States Code, is repeme [. SEc. 205. Section 610 of title 18, United States Code, relating t,::,::ontributions or expenditures by natiomd banks, corporations, or i[:bor organizations, is amended by addi[ng at the e:nd _thereof the foll ,::. wing paragraph: "As used in this section, the phrase 'con_;ribution or expen(/:it _tre' shall include any direct or indirect payment, distribution, L:m,n, advance, deposit, or gift of money, or any services, or anyth:[:mf of value (except a loan of money by a national or State bank m_de in accordance with the applicable banking laws and regulations m_l in the ordinary course of business) to any candidate, campaign corn nittee, or political party or organization, in connection with any elt_,_ction to any of the offices referred to in this section; but shall not il_: ude communications by a corporation to its stockholders and their fa i:rili[es or by a labor organizat:ion to its members and their families cm any subject; nonpartisan registration and get-out-the-vote campaign_ oy a corporation aimed at its stockholders and their fanfilies, or by a l:_bor organizat:ion aimed at its members and their families; the estabiishment, administration, and solicitation of contributions to a se];:,aLate segregated fund to be utilized for political purposes by a corpo, ai_ion or labor organization: Provided, That it shall be unlawful for suh a fund to make a contribution or expenditure by utilizing money c,:B:' ,my_ thing of value secured by physical force, job discrimination, fin !_.l_cial reprisals, or the threat of force, job discrimination, or fin_.l_cial reprisal; or by dues, fees, or other monies required as a conditi0 :_of membership in a labor organization or as a condition of employm_mt, or by monies obtained in any commercial tra:nsaction.". SF.c. 206. Section 611 of title :18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows: "§ 611. Contributions by Government contractors. "Whoever-"(a) entering into any contract with the United States ,::,rany department or agency thereof either for the rendition of pe_:sonal services or furnishing any material, supplies, or equipment _!(:the United States or any department or agency thereof or for :_,e!ling any land or building to the United States or any departm_!,i: t or agency thereof, if payment for tim performance of suclh con:tact or payment for such material:, supplies, equipment, land, or b fildlng is to be made in whole er in part from funds approprial:._,] by the Congress, at any time between the commencement of n cl_otiations for and the later of (1) the completion of perform_mce under, or (2) the termination of negotial;][ons for, such contract or furnishing of material, supplies_ equipment, land or buiild!ngs, direc, tly or indirectly makes ;any contribution of money m: (ther thing of value, or promises expressly or impliedly to mal,'.,_ any 696 63 such contribution, to any political party, committee, or candidate for public office or to any person for any political purpose or use; or "(b) knowingly solicits any such contribution from any such person for any such purpose during any such period; shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.". SEC. 207. The table of sections for chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by(l) striking out the item relating to section 608 and inserting iii lieu thereof the following: "608. Limitations on contributions and expenditures."; (2) striking out the item relating to section 609 and inserting lieu thereof the following: "609. hi Repealed."; (3) striking out the item relating to section 611 and inserting iii lieu thereof the following: "611. Contributions TITLE by Government III--DISCLOSURE contractors.". OF FEDERAL CAMPAIGN FUNDS DEFINITIONS SEc. 301. When used in this title and in title IV of this Act-(a) "election" means (1) a general, special, primary, or runoff election, (2) a convention or caucus of a political party held to nominate a candidate, (3) a primary election held for the seleclbion of delegates to a nati(_nal nominating convention of a political party, (4) a primary dection held for the expression of a pref.erence for the nomination of persons for election to the office of President, and (5) the election of delegates to a constitutional convention for proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States; (b) "candidate" means an individual who seeks nomination for election, or election, to :Federal office, whether or not such individ-ual is elected, and, for purposes of this paragraph, an individual shall be deemed to seek nomination for election, or election, ii! he has (1) taken the action necessary under the law of a State to qualify himself for nomination for election, or election, to Federal o.ffice, or (2) received contributions or made expenditures, or has · given his consent for any other person to receive contributions or make expenditures, with a view to bringing abou t his nomination for election, or election, to such office; (c) "Federal office" means the office of President or Vice Presi.. dent of the United States; or of Senator or Representative in, or Delegate or Resident Commissioner to, the Congress of the United States; (d) "political committee" means any committee, association, or organization which accepts 'contributions or makes expendi- 695' 64 tures during a calendar year in an aggregate amount exceedk_{i,_ $1,000, or which commits any act for the purpose of infiuencinli,, directly or indirectly, the nomination for- election, or election, of ar,!'!/ person to .Federal offce, except that any communication referred to _,:,_ section 36'1 (f) (4) of this .Act which is not included w_thin the defi_,i;5on of the term "expenditure" shall not be cor,sidered such an ac!:; (e) "contribution" means-(1) a gift, subscription, loan, advance., or deposit of mone_',, or anything of value, made for the purpose of infiuencbi:_ the nomination for election, or election, of any person t:o Federal office or as a presidential or vice-.presidential elector:, or for the purpose of influencing the result of a primary he],:l for the selection of delegates to a national nominating cmLvention of a political party or for the expression of a prefe:__ence for the nomination of persons for election to the offi(:3 of President, or for the purpose of influencing the electic_n of delegates to a constitutional convention for proposin!i; amendments to the Constitution of the United States; (21) a contract, promise, or t_greement, whether or m:,_ legally enforceable, to make a contribution for any sudh purpose; (31)a transfer of funds between political committees; (41) the payment, by an//' person other than a candidal:,3 or political committee, of compensation for the persona] ser,',_ ice,_ of another person which are rendered to such can(tidaI_-_ or committee without charge for any such purpose; and (5) notwithstanding the foregoing meamngs of "contribution'', the word shall not be construed to include (A) ser'_;_,.. ices provided without compensation by individuals voluntee:lng a portion or all of their time on behalf of a candidate _::,r political committee, (B) the use of real or personal property by eI:'_ individual owner or lessee in rendering voluntary person._:{.l services to any candidate or political committee, including t,i_l,e cost ,ofinvitations and food and beverages provided on the ind_i.vidual' s premises for candidate-related activities, ( C) the so:i!e of any food or beverage by a vendor for use in a candidate:'s campaign at a charge less than the normal comp.arable ehargJ% if such charge for use in a candidate's campaign _s at least equ,:_;_ to the cost of such food or beverage to the yes,dot, (D) any unreimbursed purchase or other payment by any individual for trave_ expenses with respect to the rendering of voluntary person,:_t services by such individual to any candidate or political coz_'i._ mittee, or (E) the payment by a State o:, local committee oJ' o. political party of the costs of preparation, display, or mailing _:;_ other distribution incurred by' such committee with respect to o printed slate card or sample ballot, or other printed listing, oj 5' or more candidates.for any public office fi}r which an election 'i'_ _ held in the State in which such committee is organized, excev{: that this clause shall not apply in the case of costs incurred ,!!;,y such committee with respect to a display oJ any such listi%_ 698 65 made on broadcasting stations, or in magazines or other similar types of general public political advertising (other than _..fwspapers): Provided, That the cumulative value of activiti_ by any person on behalf of any candidate under each of claus&,, (B) or (D) shall not exceed $500 with respect to any election; (f) "expenditure" means-(1) a purchase, payment, distribution, loan, adwmce, deposit, or gift of money or anything of value, made for the purpose of influencing the nomination for election, or election, of any person to Federal office, or as a presidential and vice-presidentiM elector, or for the purpose of influencing the result of a primary held for the selection of delegates to a national nominating convention of a political party o:c for the expression of a preference for the nomination of persons for election to the office of President, or for the purpose of influencing the election of delegates to a constitutional convention for proposing _mendments to the Constitution of the United States; (2) a contract, pronlise, or agreement, whether or not legally enforceable, to make an expenditure, [and'] (3) a transfer of funds between political committees; and (4) notwithstanding the foregoing meanings of "expenditure'', such term does n.ot include (A ) any _ews story, commentary, or edito_oial distributed through th e facilities of any broadcasting state,on, newspaper, magazin% or other period, ical publication, unless such facilities are owned or controlled by any political party, political committee_ or candidate, (B ) no_partisan activity designed to encourage individual, s to register to vote or to vote, ( U) a_ty communication by any membership organization or corporation to its mem_bers or stockholders, if such membership organization or corporation is not organized primar_;ly for the purpose of influencing the nomination for election, or election, of any persoq_ to Federal o/rice, (D) the use of real or personal property by a_ individual owner or lessee in rendering voluntary personal ser_ices to any caq_d_'_lateor political committee, including the cost of invitations and food and beverages provided oq_ti_e individual's premises for caqutidate-related activities, (E) any unreimbursed purchase or other payment by any i_tdividual .for travel expenses _t_ith respect to the rendeviq_.g of voluntary services by suc/_ individual to any candidate or political'committee, (F) any communication by any person which is not made for t!_e purpose of infiuen¢4ng the nomination for election, or election, of any person to Federal o._ce, or ( G) the payment by a State or local comen,ittee of apolitical party of t'lte costs of preparation, display, or m aili_g tm other distr_butioe_ incurred by such committee with respect to a printed slate card or sample ballot, or other printed listing, of 3 or more camtidates for any public o_ce for ee,hich an electio_ is held in the State in 'which s_ch comordttee is 699 orga_,ized, except th at th_s clause shall qtot apply in th._ _:_x_e of costs incurred by such committee with respect to a d_..i_7.,ilc W o./any such listing made on broadca_ting stations, or iq, _'_a!7azines or other similar types o/ge_,ral public po3'iticti,i_,::u_.. vertising (other than _wspapers) : Provided, :Tha!: _':_}e cumulatiq)e _:alue o/acti,oirties by an3, person on belial/o_ ',__[y candidate u_cler each clauses (D) or (If) shall not eu:_eed $'500 with respect to any election; (g) "supervisory officer" means the Secretary of the SE?r_ate with respect to candidates for [Senator] the Senate, and co_,_mittees supporting such candidates the Clerk of the Hou_,e, of Representatives with respect to candidates for Represent:!_d:ve lin, or], Delegate [or], and Resident Commissioner £t(:,, i:,he Congress of the United States'l, and committees supportin§ _uch candidates;and the Comptroller General of the Umted _tat_!_ [!in any other case;] with respect ;to candidates for President aha l?_ce President, and committees supporting such candidates. (h) "person" means an individual, partnership, comm!it;ee, assodLation, corporation, labor organization, and any other ::}_'b_nization or group of persons; rand'] (i) "State" means each State of the United States, the Di:_t:_'iet of Columbia, the Commonwe_fith of Puerto Rico, and any J:er"ritory or possession of the United States [.]; (j) "principal campaign c_mmittee" means the principal cam:;,oign committee designated by a candidate under section 302(J)(11); a_.it,;_ (k) "Board" means the Board of Super:,_isory Officers estabi'iis_>ed by section 308(a)(1). ORGANIZATION OF POLITICAL COMMITTEES SEC. 302. (a) Every political committee sha].l have a chairman }:n_{a treasurer. No contribution and no expenditure shall be accept,_d or made by.or on behalf of a political comaiittee at a time when ther _!_ :s a vacancy m the office of dhairman or treasurer thereof. No expend i_tare shall be made for or on behalf of a political committee withou:, _.he authorization of its chairman or treasurer, or their designated a_;e_ts. (b) Every person who receives a contribution in excess of $10 l!%ra political committee shall, on demand of the treasurer, and in any ,uv_rtt within fiw,_days after receipt of such contribution, render to the t_m_surer a detailed account thereof, including the, amount, the nam{_ _::nd address (occupation and the principal place of business, if any) ,cI!¢he person making such contribution, _[nd the date on which receive(!.._ll funds of a political committee sh_ll be segregated from, and ma?, :_:_ot be commingled with, any personal funds of officers, membe:t% or associates of such committee. (c) It shall be the duty of the _reasurer of a political com:mitt,!!_ to keep a detailed and exact account of--(1) all contributions made to or for such committee; (2) the full name and mailing address (occupation anti :he principal place of business, if any) of .every person mak_:r:qi:a contribution in excess of $10, and the d_[te and amount; the]l:'eolf; 700 (;7 (3) all expenditures made by or on behalf of such committee; and (4) the full name and mailing address (occupation and the principal of business, if any) of every thereof person and to whom any expenditureplace is made, the date and amount the nsLme and address of, and office sought by, each candidate on whose behalf such expenditure was made. (d) It shall be the duty of the treasurer to obtain and keep a receipted bill, stating the particulars, for every expenditure made by or on behalf of a political committee in excess of $100 in amount, and fol' any such expenditure in a lesser amount, if the aggregate amount of such expenditures to the same person during a calendar year exceeds $100. The treasurer shall preserve all receipted bills and accounts required to be kept by this section for periods of time to be determined by the supervisoryofficer. (e) Any political committee which solicits or receives contributions or makes expenditures on behalf of any candidate that is;not authoriized in writing by such candidate to do so shall include a notice on the :face or front page of all literature and advertisements published in connection with such candidate's campaign by such committee or on its behalf stating that the committee is not authorized by such candidate and that such candidate is not responsible :for the activities of such committee. [(f)(1) Any political committee shall include on the face or front page of all literature and advertisements soliciting funds the following notice: r"A copy of our report filled with the appropriate supervisory officer is (or will be) available for purchase from the Superintendent of Documents, United States Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402.". r(2)(A) The supervisory officer shall compile and furnish, to the Public Printer, not later than the last day of March of each year, an annual report for each political committee which has filed a report with him under this ti'de during the period from March 10 of the preceding calendar year through January 31 of the year in Which such annual report is made available to the Public Printer. Each such annual report shall contain-I'(i) a copy of the statement of organization of the political committee required under section 303, together with any amendments thereto; and ]'(ii) a copy of each report filed by such committee under section 304 from March 10 of. the preceding year through January 31 of the year in which the annual report is so furnished to the Public Printer. ]'(B) The Public Printer shall make copies of such annual reports available for sale to the public by the Superintendent of Documents as soon as practicable after they are received fi_om the supervisory officer.] (f) (1) Each indityidual who is a candidate for _deral office (other than the office of Vice President of the United States) shall designate a political committee to serve as his principal campaigv_ committee. No political committee may be designated as the principal campaign eom- 701 68 mittee of more than one candidate, except that the candidate for the (!_ice of President of the United States nominated by a political part?/:qmy designate the national committee of such political party as his principal campatgn committee. (2) Except as otherwise provided in section 608(e) of title 18, _i:_i/ited States Code, no political committee other than a principal campaign committee designated by a candidate under paragraph (1) may make expenditures on behalf of such candidate. (3) Notwithstanding other provision of this title, each re2p,_:,_t statement .of contributionsany received by a political committee (other t,l_n or a principal ,campaign committee) which is required to befiled with a ,!i, upervisory oj_cer under this title shall be filed instead with the pri_?eipal campaign committee for the candidate on whose behalf such contrib!_.twns are accepted. (4) It shall be the duty of each principal campaign commi_'l_eeto receive all reports and statements reqmred to be filed with it under :p,l.ragraph (3) of this subsection and to compile and file such report?. _nd statement&, together with its own re_orts and statements, with the es_?ropriate supervisory offt_er in accoraance with ti_e provisions of thi._'rit,fe. (5) For purposes of paragraphs (1) and (3) of this subsectio.i% the term "political committee" does not include any political committee w;_ich supports more than one candidate, except for the national committe_ ,_f a political party designated by a candidate for the o_ce of President ::_]t_e United States under paragraph (1) of this subsection. REOISTRATmN or POLITICAL COmaITTE_S; STATEMENTS SEC. 303. (a) Each political coramittee which anticipates rec&%ng contributions or making expenditures durin_nle _thewith calendar year ]i_ an aggregate amount exceeding $1,000 shall the supervi_ory officer a statement of organization, within ten days after its org_m ization or, ii' later, ten days Mter the date on which it has inform _adon which causes the committee to anticipate it will receive contribu _]ons or make expenditures in excess of $1,000. Each such committe_ in existence at the date of enactment of this Acl; shall file a statem_n; of organization with the supervisory officer at such time as he prescr'ibes. (b) The statement of organization shall include(I) the name and address of the committee; (2) the names, addresses, and relathmships of affiliated or connected organizations; (3) the area, scope, or jurisdiction of the committee; (4) the name, address, and position o1_the custodian of ]::,ooks and accounts; (5) the name, address, an(t position of other principal ofii_cers, including officers and memb¢_rs of the finance committee, if a:ay; (6) the name, address, office sought, and party affiliation c,l!_ (A) each candidate whom the committee is supporting, and (Bi, :_ny other individual, if any, whom the committee is supportim;!; fi)r nomination for election, or election, to any public office what,ii_.¥er; or, if the committee is supporting the entire ticket of any p,_n:'tj, ''_ the name of the party; 702 69 (7) a statement whether the committee is a continuing one; (8) the disposition of residual funds which will be made in the event of dissolution; (9) a listing of all banks, sMety deposit boxes, or other repositories used; (10) a statement of the reports required to be filed by the committee with State or local officers, and, if so, the names, addresses, and positions of such persons; and (11) such other information as shall be required by the supervisory officer. (c) Any change in information previously submitted in a statement. of organization shall be reported to the supervisory officer within a ten-day period following the change. (d) Any_committee which, after having filed one or more statements of organization, disbands or determines it will no longer receive contributions or make expenditures during the calendar year in an aggregate amount exceeding $1,000 shall so notify the supervisory officer. (e) In the case of a political committee which is not a principal campaign committee and which does not support more than one candidate, reports and notiKcations required under this section to be filed with the supervisory dfficer shall be filed instead with the appropriate princ_ipal campaign committee. REPORTS BY POLITICAL COMMITTEES AND CANDIDATES SEC. 304. (a) ['Each] (1) Except as provided by paragraph (2), each, treasurer of a political committee supporting a candidate or candidates for election to Federal office, and each candidate for election to such office, shall file with the appropriate supervisory officer reports of re-. ceipts and expenditures oh forms; to Be prescribed or approved by him. [Such reports shall be filed on the tenth day of March, June, and September, in each year, and on the fifteenth and fifth days next pre-ceding the date on which an election is held, and also by the thirty-first day of January. Such reports shall be complete as of such date as the supervisory officer may prescribe, which shall not be less than five days before the date of filing, except that any contribution of $5,000 or more received after the last report is filed prior to the election slhall be reported within forty-eight hours afte r its receipt.] The reports referred to in the preceding sentence shall befiled as fi)llows: (A) (i) In any calendar year in which an individual is a candidate for Federal o_ce and an election for such Federal office is held in such year, such reports shall be filed not later than the tenth day before the date on which such election is held and shall be complete as o/ the fifteenth day before the date o/such election; except that any such report filed by registered or certified mail must be postmarked not later than the close of the twelfth day before the date of such election. (ii) Such reports shaU be filed not later than the:thirtieth day after the date o/Such election and Shall be complete as of the twen.. tieth day after the date of such election. (B) In any other calendar year in which an individual is a can.. didate for Federal office', such reports shall be filed after December 703 7O 31 of such calendar year, but not later tha_ January $1 oj' the J_b _lowing calendar year and shall be complete ms.of the close of the eiiii_e_,iar year with respect to which the report is filed. ( C) Such reports shall be fikd not later than the tenth day ?_t:lowing the close of any calendar quarter in which the candidate or political committee concerned received contributions in exce.!_s of $1,000, or made e:rpenditures in exces_ of $1,000, and s,i_t,aglbe complete as o] the close of such calendar quarter; except that a_y such report required to befiled after December 3I of any calendar ye._:l:.r with respect to which a report is required to be .filed under subpar_:t.?aph (B) shaU befiled as provided in such subparagraph. (D) When the last day for filing any quarterly report 'requil,,_d by subparagraph (C) occurs witi_in 10 days of an election, th,_ i_ling of such quarterly report shall be waived and superseded by th_' _eport required by subparagraph (A) (i). Any contribution of $1,000 or more received after the .fifteenth d<_ but more than _8 hours, before any election shall be reported within _ii flours after its receipt. (2) Each treasurer ora political committee which is not a pr ?ipal campaign committee and which does not support more than one ca?_d'idate sha_l .file the reports required under this section with the appr_:_,._iiate principal campaign committee. (b) Each report under this section shall disclose-(1) the amount of cash on hand at the beginning of the ::'i_:,ortlng period; (2) the full name and mailing address (occupation m:.d the principal place of business, if any) of each person who ha_ _nade one or more contributions to or for such committee or car,_:tidate (including the purchase of tickets for events such as d nm_rs, luncheons, rallies, and similar fundraising events) witlm:ir_ the calendar year in an aggregate amount or value in excess ol' 1i;100, together with the amount and date of such contributions; (3) the total stun of individual contributions made to eL"for such committee or candidate during th(: reporting period a:_::L(i not reported under paragraph (21); (4) the name and address of each political committee (,r candidate from which the reporting committee or the car_:tldate received, or to which that committee or candidate mad_:, troy transfer of funds, together with the amounts and daces ot' all transfers; (5) each loan to or from any person within the calendar :Ear in an aggregate amount or value in excess of $100, together w:.l:)Lthe full names and mailing addresses (occupations and the pr!inc':ipal places of business, if any) of the lender and endorsers, if ar?? and the ,date and amount of such loans; (6) the total amount of proceeds from (A) the sale of l:i¢:kets to each dinner, luncheon, rally, and other fundraising eye, Ltl (,B) mass collections made at such events; and (C) sales of iten::t_; _;uch as political campaign pins, buttons, badges, flags, emblem:!!, lints, banners, literature, and similar materials; (7) each contribution, rebate, refund, or other receipt in e_;cess of $100 not otherwise listed under paragraphs (2) th routi!;h (16); 704 71 (8) the total sum of all receipts by or for such committee or candidate during the reporting period, together with total receipts less transfers between political committees which support the same candidate and which do not support more than one candidate; (9) the full name and mailing address (occupation and the principal place of business, if any) of each person to whom expenditures have been. made by such committee or on behalf of such committee or candidate within the calendar year in an aggregate amount or value :in excess of $100, the amount, date, and purpose of each such expenditure and the name and address of, and office sought by, each candidate on whose behalf such expenditure was made; (10) the full name and mailing address (occupation and the principal place of business, if any) of each person to whom an expenditure for personal services, salaries, and reimbursed expenses in excess of $100 has been made, and which is not otherwise reported, including the amount, date, and purpose of such expenditure; (11) the total sum of expenditures made by such committee, or candidate during the calendar year, together with total expenditu,res less transfers between political committees which s_pport the same candidate and which do not support more than one candidate; (12) the amount and nature o_ debts and obligations owed by or to the committee, in. such form as the supervisory officer may prescribe and a continuous reporting of their debts and obligations after the election at such periods as the supervisory officer may require until such debts and obligations are extinguished; and (13) such other information as shall be required by the super-. visory officer. (c) The reports required to be filed by subsection (a) shall be cumulative during the calendar year to which they relate, but where there has been no change in an item reported in. a previous report during such year, only the amount need be carried forward. If no contributions or expenditures haw_ been accepted or expended during a calendar year, the treasurer of the political committee or candidate shall file a statement to that effect. REPORTS BY OTHERS THAN POLITICAL CO:_MITTEES S_c. 305. Every person (other than a political committee or candidate) who makes contributions or expenditures, other than by contribution to a political committee or candidate, in an aggregate amount in excess of $100 within a calendar year shall file with the supervisory officer a statement containing the information required by section 304. Statements required by this section shall be filed on tlhe dates on which reports by political committees are fined, but need not be cumulative. FORMAL REQUIREMENTS RESPECTINGREPORTSAND STATEMENTS SEC. 306. (a) A report or statement required by this title to be filed by a treasurer of a political committee, a candidate, or by any other person, shall be verified by the oath or affirmation of the person filing 70S 72 such report or statement, taken before any officer aut,hori;_:_d to. administer oaths. (b) A copy of a report or statement shall be preserved i::,_ '_ the person filling it for a period of time to be designated by the supe!'v [sory officer in a published regulation. (c) Tile supervisory officer mazy, by published regulation of ii?em_ral applicability, relieve any category of political committees of el:re obligation to comply with section 3;04 if such committee (1) pr!i_ arily supports persons seeking State or local office, and does not sl_b_tantially support candidates, and (2) docs not operate in more thi:._l_one State or on a statewide basis. (d) The supervisory officer shall, by published regulations ,:_ii'general applicability, prescribe the manner in which contributiom:_ and expenditures in the nature of debts and other contracts, agree l_:mrs, and pronfises to make contributions or expenditures shall be re_:<,rtcd. Such regulations shall provide that they be reported in se p:a'ate schedules. In deternfining aggregate amounts of contributio_:J:s and expenditures, amounts reported as p:rovided in such regulatior_:_; droll not be considered until actual payment is made. (e) If a report or statement required by sec_ion 303, 304(a)(1)(A)(ii), 304(a)(1)(B), or 304(a)(1)(U) of this title to befiled by a treasure_ of a political committee or by a candidate, or if a report required by sect_;,:_n 305 of this title to befiled by any other person, i_ delivered by regist_'?,_dor certified mail, to the appropriate supervisory officer or principal campaign committeeonwith is required the United Statessuc}, pc _i_t?nark stamped the whom cover ofitthe envelope to or befiled, other container in which _,'vort or statement is so mailed shall be deemed to be the date of.filing. 'REPORTS ON CONVENTION FINANCING Sv.c. 307. Each committee or other organization which-(1) represents a State, or a political subdivision thereof, ::,r any group ox persons, in dealing with officials of a national p._A:itica] party with respectsubdivision to matters toinvolving heldth.,; ii:)linch State or political nominate a aconvention candidate for _:_,ffice of President or Vice President, or (2) represents a national political party in making ar['angeraents for the Convention of such party held to nominate a c_mdidate for the office of President or Vice ]?resident, shall, within sixty days following the end of the convention (bll: not later than twenty days prior to the date on which presidenti:d and vice-presidential chosen), file with financial the Comptroller ,General of the Unitedelectors States are a full and complete statem._ ne, in such form and detail as he may prescribe, of the sources from which it derived its funds, and the purposes for which such fund:_ ,e_ere expended. _OaRD or svrrRrzsoRr oJ_.rlm_Rs SEe. 308. (a)(1) There is hereby established the Board of Supe;_'vi:sory Officers, which shall be composed oJ'7 members asJollows: (A) the Secretary o/the Senate; (B) the Clerk oJ the House of Representatives; 706 73 (C) the Comptroller General of the United States; (D) two individuals appointed by the President of the Senate, upon the recommendations of the majority leader of the Senate and the minority leader' of the Senate; and (E) two individuals appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, upon the recommendations of the majority leader of the House and the minority leader of the HoUse. Of each class of two members appointed under subparagraphs (D) and (E), not more than one shall be appointed from the same political party. An individual appointed to fill a vacancy occurring other than by the expiration of a term of office shall be appointed only for the unexpired term for the member he succeeds. Any vacancy occurring in the membership of the Board shall be filled in the same manner as in the case of the original appointment. Members of the Board ap-. pointed under subparagraphs (D) and (E)-(i) shall be chosen from among individuals who are not officers or employees in the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States (including elected :_nd. appointed officials); (ii) shall be chosen on the basis of their maturity, experience:. integrity, impartiality, and good judgment; (iii) shall serve for terms of 4 years, except that, of the members first appointed under subparagraph (D), one shall be appointed for a term of one year and one shall be appointed for a term of 3 years and, of the members first appointed under subparagraph (E), one shall be appointed for a term of 2 years; and (iv) shall receive compensation equivalent to the compensal_ion paid at level IV of the Federal Executive Salary Schedule (5 U.S.C. 5315), prorated on a daily basis for each day spent in the work of the Board, shall be paid actual travel expenses, and per diem in lieu of subsistence expenses when away from their usual place of residence, in _ccordance with section 5703(b) of title 5, United States Code. (2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, it shall be the duty of the Board to supervise the administration of, seek to obtain compliance with., and formulate overall policy with respect to, this title, title I of this Act, and sections 608, 610_ 611, 613, 61_, 615, and 616 of title 18, United States Code. (b) Members of the Board shall alternate in serving as Chairma_a of the Board. The term of each Chairman shall be one year. (c) All decisions of the Board with respect to the exercise of its d_lties and powers under the provisions of this title shall be made by majority vote of the members of the Board. A member of the Board may not delegate to any person his vote or any decisionmaking authority or duty w'.sted in the Board by the provisions oj this title. (d) The Board shall meet at the call of any member of the Board, e_cept that it shall meet at least once each month. (e) The Board shall prepare written rules]or the conduct of its activities. (f) (1) The Board shall have a Staff Director and a General Counsel who shall be appointed by the Board. The Staff Director shall be paid at a rate not to exceed the rate of basie pay in effect for level IV of the Exec.,_tive 707 74 Schedule (5 U.S.C. 5315). The General Counsei! shall be paid ,_:l:_ a rate not to exceed the rate of basic pay i_ effect 'for level V of the ti'/x_cutive Schedule (5 U.S.C. 5316). With the approval of the Board, _:i_,e,Staff' Director may appoint and fix the pay of suc.h additional personnel!: as he considers desirable. Not less than 30 per centum of the additional _rsonn_l appointed by the Staff .Director shall be selected as follows: (A) one-half from among individuals :,ecommended by the i;,_;i norit!:7 leader of the Senate; and (B) one-half from among individuals recommended by the ._i,_,i_qgrity leader of the House of Representatives. (2) With the approval of the Board, the Staff Director may :?'ocur_ temporary and intermittent services to the same extent as is autha_zed by section 3109(b) of title 5, United ,States Code, bullat rates for ind_ivi:dual_ not to exceed the daily equivalent of the ann_al rate of basic pay i;_ effect for grade GS-15 of the General Schedule (5 tV.S.C. 5332). POWERS OF THE BOARD Sro. 309. (a) The Board shall have the power-(1) to formulate general policy and to review visory oy_cers with respect to the adminietration this Act, and sections 603, 6.10, 611, 613, 61_, 18, United States Code; (2) to oversee the develotm_ent of prescribed 311(a)(1); actions of t/_: ,_'_perof this title, 'i,i',teI of 615, and 61_!?:_ftitl,_ forms under _iectio,_: (3) to review rules and regulations prescribed under section.! !'0_ o_: this Act or under this title to assure their consistency with ?.t_,elau and', to assure that such rules and reg_,lations are uniform, _!oth,_ extent practicable; (:4) to render advisory opinions under sect.gon313; (5) to expeditiously conduct i T_vestigations and hearings _o encourage voluntary compliance, and to report apparent viola_'_;,:;,ns to the ,?propriate Saw enforcement authorities; (o) to administer oaths or a_irmations; (7) to require by subpena, signed by the Chairman, the att,__:&tnce and testimony of witnesses and the production of document,:;!,r:!/ evi.dence relevant to any investigation or hearing conducted by th,_:_iS'oard under section 311 (c); and (8) to pay witnesses the same fees and mileage as are paid iJ_,like circumstances in the courts of the United States. (b) Any district court of the United State_, within the jurisdi_:_'_on o/ which any inquiry is carried on, may, upon petition by the t:_'oard, in ease _ refusal to obey a subpena of the Board issued under subs_ction (a)(7), issue an order' requiring compliance with s_ch subper_::t,Ami failure to obey the order of such' district court may be punis,hed %, sue/_ district court as a contempt thereof. REPORTS SEc. 310. The Board shall transmit reports to the President of the ii:_nited States and to each House of the Congress no i:aterthan March 31 ,:_:c each year. Each such report shall contain a detailed statement with resp_:,_:'i _!othe 708 75 activities of the Board in carrying out its duties under this title, together with recommendations for such legislative or other action as the Board considers appropriate. DIJTIES OF THE SUPERVISORY OFFICER; 1NVESTIGAVlO3r .BY THE BOA2?D SEC. [.308.] 311. (a) It shall be the duty of the supervisory officer-(1) to develop and :furnish to the person required by the provisions of this Act prescribed making the title; reports and statements required to beforms filed for withthehim under ofthis (2) to prepare, publish, and furnish to the person required to file such reports and statements a manual setting forth recommended uniform methods of bookkeeping and reporting; (3) to develop a filing, coding, and cross-indexing system consonant with the purposes of this title; (4) to make the reports and statements filed with him available for public inspection _md copying, commencing as soon as practicable but not later than the end of the second d_y following; the day during which it was received, and to permit copying of any such report or statement by hand or by duplicating machine, as requested by any person, at the expense of such person: Provided, That any information copied from such reports and statements shall not be sold or utilized by any person for the purpose of soliciting contribution,_ or for any commercial purpose; (5) to preserve such reports and statements for a period of ten years from date of receipt, except that reports and Statements relating solely to candidates for the House of Representatives shall be preserved for only five years from the (late of receipt; [.(6) to compile and maintain a current list of all statements or parts of statements pertaining to each candidate; [.'(7) to prepare and publish an annual report including compilations of (A) total reported contributions and exp6nditures _ for all candidates, political committees, and other persons during the year; (B) total amounts expended according to such categomes as he shall determine and broken down into candidate, party, and nonpa!%y expenditures on the National, State, and local levels; (C) total amounts expended for influencing nominations and elections stated separately; (D) total amounts contributed according to such categories of amounts as he shall determine and broken down into contributions on the national, State, and local levels for candidates and political committees; and (E) aggregate amounts contributed by any contributor shown to have con.tributed in excess of $100; [..(8) to prepare and publish from time to time special reports comparing the various totals and categories of contributions and expenditures made with respect to preceding elections; ['(9) to prepare and publish such other reports as he may deem appropriate; [,(10) to assure wide dissemination of statistics, _,mmmaries, and reports prepared under this title;] 709 76 (6) to compile and maintain a cumulative index of rep_i,t,i' an_ · ' · ' · -'t_'_ statements .filed w_th h_m, which shall be published m the ,f,:ld_rai Register at regular intervals and which st,_allbe available for p_'_?vi_as,_ directly or by mail ]or a reasonable price; (7) to prepare and publish from time to time special revort,_;i!istin_ those cand_cZatesfor whom reports were j_led as required by _,?i_ t_tl,_ an_ those candidates for whom such reports were not file,:! _ sc required; [11] (8) to make from time to time audits and field in_:e_tiga tions with respect to reports and statements filed un,:le_' the provisions of this title, and with respect to alleged fail.ires tc file any report or statement require([ under the provis.:ic:_l,_of this title; [112] (9) to report apparent violations of law to the II'.i_.:ppropriate law enforcement authorities] Board_ pursuant to sui!_sectio_ (c) (1) (B); and [13] (10) to prescribe suitable rules and regulations t_::,carry out the provisions of this title, in acco_dance with the prow_.!_i:ms oj subsection (b). [(b) 'The supervisory officer ,_hall encourage, and cooperat,_:_ w_th, the election officials in the several States to develop procedure,s; which will eliminate the necessity of multiple filings by permitting tl:_,_,filin_ of copies of Federal reports to satisfy the State requirements.:tli (b) (1) The supervisory oy_cer, b_ore prescr_;bingany rule or rwu!:atio_ under this section, shall transmit a statement with respect t.o svc,_, rule or regulation to the Committee on Rules and Administration of the _ii_enate or the Gommittee on House Administration of the House of Rep:re_!_entatires, as the case may be, in accordance with, the provisions of t,_i_?subsection· Such statement shall set forth the proj_osed rule or regulat iO_._ an_ shall contain a detailed explanation and justification of such r_de o_ regulation. (2) If the committee of the Congress which _,eceives a statement J:,_cmthe supervisory o_icer under this subsection does not, through app_,_oi_:,riate action, disapprove the proposed rv,le or regulation set forth in su_:/.__._',atement no later than 30 legislative days after receipt of such stateme,,, i!he_ the supervisory o_icer may prescribe such ruile or regulation· In ;!!h,_ case of any rule or regulation proposed by the Comptroller Generai! ,:_fthe United States, both the Committee on Rules and Administration: _.f the Senate and the Committee on Hbuse Admirdstration of the t]_:_se oj Representatives shall have the power to disapprove such proposed :_,_leo_ regulation, and the Comptroller General ma_' not prescribe any r de o;_ regulation which has been disapproved by either such commit_le._:.Ne supervisory oj_icer may prescribe any rule or regulation which i._ disapproved under this paragraph. (3) If the supervisory o_icer proposing to prescribe any rule or req._i,atio_ under this section is the Secreta_! of the Senate, he shall trans_;,_i!isuc)t statement to the Committee on Rules and Administration oJ the ,S'enate. If thetransmit supervisory is thetoClerk of the t.!buse'of Represental!i_;e_,he shall suchoy%er statement the C'_nmitt_.e on House Admini,?t;,'atio_ of the H_use of Representatives. If the supervi_ory officer is the Comp !!rolle:_ 710 77 General of the United States, he shall transmit such' statement to each such committee. (4) For purposes of this subsection, the term "legislative days" does not include, with respect to statements transmitted to the Committee on Rules and Administration of the Senate, any calendar day on which the Senate is not in session, with respect to statements transmitted to the Committee on House Administration of the House of Representatives, any calendar day on which the House of Representatives is not in session, and with respect to statements transmitted to both such committees, any calendar day on which both Houses o/the Congress are not in session. [(c) It shall be the duty of the Comptroller General to serve as a national clearinghouse for information in respect to the administration of elections. In carrying out his duties under this subsection, the Comptroller General shall enter into contracts for the purpose of conducting independent stuc_ies of the administration of elections. Such studies shall include, but shall not be limited to, studies of-[(1) the method of selection of, and the type of duties assigned to, officials and personnel working on boards of elections; [(2) practices relating to the registration of voters; and [(3) voting and counting methods. Studies made under this subsection shall be published by the Comptroller General and copies thereof shall be made available to the general public upon the payment of the cost thereof. Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to authorize the Comptroller General to require the inclusion of any comment or recommendation of the Comptroller General in arty such study. [(d)(1)] (c)(1)(A) [Any person who believes a violation of this title has occurred may file a complaint with the supervisory otticer. If the supervisory officer determines there is substantial reason to believe such a violation has occurred, he shall expeditiously make _,n investigation, which shall[ also include an investigation of reports and statements filed by t]he complainant if he is a candidate, of the matter complained of. Wt}enever in the judgment of the supervisory officer, after affording duc notice and an opportunity for a hearing, any person has engaged or is about to engage in any acts or practices which constitute or will constitute a violation of any provision of this title or any regulation or order issued thereunder, the Attorney General on behalf of the United States shall institute a civil action for relief, including a permanent or temporary injun(.tion, restraining order, or any other appropriate order in the district court of the United States for the district in which the person is found, resides, or transacts business. Upon a proper showing that such person has engaged or is about to engage in such acts or practices, a permanent or temporary injunction, restraining order, or other order shaU be granted without bond by such court.] Any person who believes a loiolation of this title, title I of this Act, or section 608, 610, 611,613, 614, 615, or 616 of title 18, United States Code, has occurred may fde a c_aplaint with the Board. (B) Any supervisory oj_'er who has reason to believe a violation o[ this title, title I of this Act, or section 608, 610, 611,613, 6i4, 615, or 616 of 711 78 title 18, United States Code, h(_: occurred shal! refer suc)_ al::p:_irent violation to the Board. (C) TJ_e Board, upon receiving any complaint under subpar_:i!_oraph (A) or referral under subparagraph (B), or if it has reason to belicv_ that any person has committed a violation of any _mchprovision, shall :roz',ify the person involved of such apparent violation and shall-(i) report such apparent violation to the Attorney Gene;,_ai!;or (i_) make an investigation of such apparent violation. eD) Any investigation under subparagraph (C) (ii) shall be co_!._;_::_cted expeditiously and shall gnclude an investiagtion of reports and stmi_'ments filed by any complainant with respect to the apparent violation ir,_!;ctved, if such complainant is a candidate. Any notification or investigatio,.,'imade under subparagraph (C) shall not be made public by the BoarO: _:,_by any other person without the written consent of the person receiviz_17_uch notification or the person with respect to whom such investigation i__:_i:ade. (E) The Board shall, at the request of any person who receives _r.o_iice of an apparent violation under subparagraph (C), conduct a heari_i17with respect to such apparent violation. (F) If the Board shall determine, after any investigation und_:i" s_bparagrapJ_ (C)(ii), that :thereis reason to bel_:evethat there has b_'e,'i:an apparent violation of this title, title I of this Act,, or section 608, 61_), 611, 613, 61_, 615, or 616 of title 13, United States Code, the Boar_:_!: _!_4,,_all endeavor to correct any such apparent violation by informal met)io,Js of conference, conciliation, and perx_asion. (G) The Board shall refer a2parent violations tlo the appropricmi!_law enforcement authorities _f the Board is unable to correct suct_ ap?(.:.rent violations, or if the Board determines that any such referral is appro _:_ilate. eH) l_henever in the judgment of the Board, after affording due'__qotice and an opportunity for a hearing, any person has engaged or is ai!_.o ;_,_', to engage tn any acts or practices which constitute or will constit_tte (__iolation of any provision of this title, title I of this Act, or section 608, 61 _?,6I 1, 613, 614, 615, or 616 of title 13, United States Code, the Attorney (i:_?_;;_eral on behalf of the United '_tates shal,l institute a civil action for rel_i_!J'including a permanent or temporary inj_nction_ restraining order, :_"any other appropriate order in the district court of the United States /0: the district in, which the person is found, resides, o:, transacts business_ i[;_ipon a proper showing that such person has engaged or is about to eno,?e in such acts or practices, a permanent: or temporary injunction, restr_:_,i_,;,_ing order, or ,other order shall be granted without bond by such court. (2) In any action brought under paragrwph (1) of this subs_ e:Aon, subpenas for witnesses who are required to attend a United :i!;t_tes district court may run into any other district. (3) Any party aggrieved by an order granted under paragral::_: (1) of this subsection may, at any time w_thin sixty days after the Clw:e of entry thereof, file a petition with the United States court of ail::,t:,e_ls for the circuit in which such person is found, resides, or tr_i_:L_u_ts business, for judicial review of such order. (4) The judgment of the court of appeals :_fflrming or setting :_.:_!ide, in whole ,or in part, _ny such order of the di,_trict court shall be :_mal, subject to review by the Supreme Court of the United States upon certiorari or certification, as provided in section 12',54of title 28, li:_ited States Code. 71:2 79 (5) Any action brought; under this subsection shall be advanced on the docket of the court in which filed, and put ahead of all other actions (other than other actions brought under this subsection). (d) In any case in which the Board refers an apparent violation to the Attorney General, the Attorney General shall respond by report ;Io the Board with respect to any action taken by the Attorney General regarding such apparent violation. Each such report shall be transmitted no later than 60 days a/teE the date the Board refers any apparent violation, and at the close of every 30-day period thereafter until there is final disposit_ion of such apparent violation. The Board may from time to time prepare and publish reports on the status of such referrals. STATEMENTS FILED WITH STATE OFFICERS SEC. [309.] 312. (a) A copy of each statement required to be filed with a supervisory officer by this title shall be filed with the Secretary of State (or, if there is no office of Secretary of State, the equivalent State officer) of the appropriate State. For purposes of this subsection, the term "appropriate State" means(l) for reports relating to expenditures and contributions in connection with the campaign for nomination for election, or' election, of a candidate to the office of President or Vice President of the United States, each State in which an expenditure is made by him or on his behalf, and (2) for reports relating to expenditures and contributions in connection with the campaign for nomination for election, or election, of a candidate to the office of Senator or Representative in, or Delegate or Resident Oommissioner to, the Congress of the United States, the State in which he seeks election. (b) It shall be the duty of the Secretary of State, or the equivalent State officer, under subsection (a)-(1) to receive and maintain in an orderly manner all reports and statements required by this title to be filed with him; (2) to preserve such reports and statements for a period of ten years from date of receipt, except that reports and statements relating solely to candidates for the House of Representatives shall be preserved for only five years from the date of receipt; (3) to make the reports and statements fi]ed with him available for public inspection and copying during regular office hours, commencing as soon as practicable but not later than the end of the day during which it was received, and to permit copying of any such report or statement by hand or by duplicating machine, requested by any person, at the expense of such person; and (4) to compile and maintain a current list of all statements or parts of statements pertaining to each candidate. [PROHIBITION OF CONTRIBUTIONS IN NAME OF ANOTHER [SEc. 310. No person shall make a contribution in the name of another person, and no person shall knowingly accept a contribution made by one person in the name of another person.] '713 8O xovIsom_' OPINIONS SEc. 313. (a) Upon _mitten request to the Board by any 'indi?;_/ual holding Federal o_ce, any candidate for Federal oy_ce, or any pa_ii'_iical committee, the Board shall render an advisory o:pinion, in writi,ng, v:!i?hin a reasonable time with respect to whether any specific transacti_:_i or activity by such individual, candidate, or political committee ,_:,_:_uld constitute a violation of !his title, title 1 of this Act, or section 608 t:?lO, 611,613, 61_, 615, or 616 of title 13, _:%ited States Code. (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any person _'.gth respect to whom an advisory opinion is rendered under subsectio?_. (a) who acts in good faith in accordance with the provisions and fndin!_ _ of such advisory opinion shall be presumed to be in compliance wi!/?, t_e provision oJ this title, title I of this Act, or sectioa 603, 610, 611,613 _il4, 615, or 616 of title 13, United States Code, with respect to which _,_teh advisory opinion is rendered. (c) Any request made under subsection (a) sl,_alllie made public i!,yh_e Board. Tt_e Board shall, be{ore rendering ar_ advisory opinio_ with respect to such request, prowide any interested party with an oppor_:,'c_:ity to transmit written comments to the Board with respect to such requ,_._r_ PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS Ssc. ['311.] 31_. (a) Any person who violates any of the prov:i_!_ions of this title shall be fined not more than $;[,00() or imprisone4:[ m)t more th_n one year, or both. (b) In c_se of any conviction under this title, wlhere the punish:_ _mt inflicted does not include imprisonment, such conviction shell[ be deemed a misdemeanor conviction only. JUDICIA.Z, REVIEW S_c. 315. (a) The Board, the supervisory oy_cers, the national co_:,!_,'i, it_ tee of any political party, and any i_dividual eligible to vote i_ ,;!ny election for the ojy_ceof President _y'the United States are aut,_ori::,_'._il :to institute such actions in the appropriate district court!of the United _;_'o:_es, including ,_tions for declaratory judgment or injunctive relief, as 7;my be appropriate to implement or construe any provision of this title, _l_t/eI of this Act, or section 608, 610, 611, 613, 614, 615, or 616 of tit,!:,._ :!3, United States Code. The district court immediately shall certi/:i, all questions of constitutionality of thi_,:title, title .I of this Act, or s,:.t ion 608, 610, 611, 613, 61_, 615, or 616 of title 13, United States Co :i',e,_o the United States court of appeals .for the circuit 'involved, wMch ._;iiall hear the _m_ttersitting en bane. (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any decision _:,_ !a matter cert?_ed under subsection (a) ,shall be rewiewable by appeal di:"e_:_tty to the Supreme Court of the United States. Such appeal shall be br ;,._!_i_t no later than 20 days after the decision of the court of appeals. (c) It shall be the duty of the court of appeals ,?nd of the Supreme (:curt of the..United States to advance on the·docket,ana, to expedite to the gr_, .... a_est posstble extent the disposition of any matter certified under subscct:ion (a). 714 81 Av_'no_Iza_rloN or _rPROPmATIOSS Sac. 316. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, there are authorized to be appropriated to each of the supervisory o_cers and to the Board such sums as may be necessary to enable each, s_wh s_tpervisory o_cer and the Board to carry out their duties under this Act. TITLE IV--GENERAL PROVISIONS EXTENSION OF CREmT nY REaULATED INDUSTRIES SEC. 401. The Civil Aeronautics Board, the Federal Commurfications Commission, and the Interstate Commerce Commission shall each promulg_te, within ninety days after the date of enactment of this Act, its own regulations with respect to the extension of credit, without security, by any person regulated by such Board or Commis-. sion to any candidate for Federal office [(as such term is defined in section 301(c) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971)1, or to any person on behalf of suct_ a candidate, for goods furnished or services rendered in connection with the campaign of such candidate for nomination for election, or election, to such office. PROHIBITION AGAINST USE OF CERTAIN ACTIVITIES FEDERAL FUNDS FOR ELECTION SEC. 402. No part of any funds approprmted to carry out the _2conomic Opportunity Act of 1964 shall be used to finance, directlf or indirectly, any activity designed to influence the outcome of any election to Federal office, or any voter registration activity, or to pay the salary of any officer or employee of the Office of Economic Opportunity who, in his official capacity as such an officer or employee, engages in any such activity. [As used in this section, the term "election" has the same meaning given such term by section 301(a) of the Federal Election Campaign. Act of 1971, and the term "Federal office" has the same meaning given such term by section 301(c) of such Act.] ['EFFECT ON STATE LAW ['SEc. 403. (a) Nothing in this Act shall be deemed to invalidate or make inapplicable any provision of any State law, except where compliance with such provision of law would result in a violation of a provision of this Act. ['(b) Notwithstanding subsection (a), no provision of State Law shall be construed to prohibit any person from taking any _i_ction authorized by this Act or from making any expenditure (as such term is defined in section 301(f) of this Act) which he could lawfully make under this Act.] rrrroT ON STXTr Law SEC. _03. The provisions oJ this Act, and of rules prescribed _mder this Act, supersede and preempt any provision of State law with respect to election to Federal offu_e. 715 82 PARTIAL INVALIDITY SEC. ,i04. If any provision of this Act, or the application l;)lereo! to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the validity ,_f the remainder of the Act and the application Of such provision t_:'_other persons and circumstances shall not be affected thereby. REPEALING SEc. 405. The Federal 256), is repealed. Corrupt .PEJ?IOD CLATJSE Practices Act, 1925 (2 U.S.(i;. 241- O.F LIi_ITATION$ SEC..306. (a) No person shall be proseeute_l, tried, or punished ;t_brany violation of title I of this Act, title III of this Act, or section 608, 6_i! O. 611, 613, 61_, 615, or 616 of title 13, united State_ Code, unless the ind'i;e;¢ment is found or the information is instituted witkin 3 years after the ,._:zteoJ the violation. (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law-' 5,, . (1) respect theperiod of limitatio_ referred (a) [_ha'"'?'Pls! C°_""_,_tte°!t°_nsubseetwn with to violations referred to inSUC'k SubSeCtio, before, on, or after the effective date of thie section; and (2) no person shall be prosecuted, tried, or punished for ani!,,c_etor omission which was a violation of any provision of title I ,:,_ this* Act, title III of this Act, or section 603, 6'10, 611, or 613 of _!i';_ie 13, United States Code, as in effect on the clay before the effective .,;!ateof' the Federal Election Campaign Act Amev_dments of 197J, if _!_.ci_act or omission does not constitute a violation of any such provie;!'_,_,as amended by the Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments e/i!874. Nothing 'in this subsectio, shall affect any proceeding pending ;(_ any court of the United States on the eJ]'ectivedate of this section. ENFORCEMENT SEc. J07. (a) In any case in wkieh the Board of Supervisory C!_i;cers, after notice and opportunity for a hearing on tt,,erecord in accorda_c _ with section 55J of title 5, United States Code, makes a finding that a p._rso_ who, while a candidate for Federal o_ice, failed tofile a report requii,_!:clby title III of this Act, and such finding is made before the expiratio_i ? the time within which the failure to file such report may be proseeuteci, as a violation o] such title IIl', such person shall be disqualified from be.::'_ngng a candida_ in any future electio_ for Federal oay_cefor a period ,_ r tgme beginning on the date of such findinq a_d ending one year after the _x;:._iration of the term of the Federal o2_ice]or which such person was a can :;ii_i:ilate. (b) Any finding by the Board under subsection (a) shall be _!:_,,.!'Ject to judicial review in accordance with the provisions of chapter 7 of !:i_:te5, United ,States Code. F, FFECTIVE DATE SEC. ['.106.] _08. Except as provided for in section 401 of thii!!_Act, the provisions of this Act shall become effective on December 31, 1971, or sixty ,days after the date of enactment of this Act, whiche,7 !r is later. 716 83 TITLE CHAPTER SEc. 1501. 1502. 1503. 1504. 1505. 1506. 1507. 1508. 5, UNITED STATES CODE 15--POLITICAL ACTIVITY OF CERTAIN AND LOCAl, EMPLOYEES Definitions. Influencing elections; taking part in political campaigns; exceptions. Nonpartisan ['political activity]candidacies permitted. Investigations; notice of hearing. Hearings; adjudications; notice of determinations. Orders; withholding loans or grants; limitations.. Subpenas and depositions. Judicial review. STATE prohibitions; § 1501. Definitions For the purpose of this chapter-(1) "State" means a State or territory or possession of the United States; (2) "State or local agency" means the executive branch of a State, municipality, or other political subdivision of a State, or an agency or department thereof; (3) "Federal agency" means an Executive agency or other agency of the United States, but does not include a member bank of the Federal Reserve System; and (4) "State or local officer or employee" means an individmfi employed by a State or local agency whose principal employment is in connection with an activity which is financed in whole or in part by loans or grants made by the United States or a Feder_fi agency, but does not include-(A) an individual who exercises no functions in connection with that activity; or (B) an individual employed by an educational or research institution, establishment, agency, or system which is supported in whole or in part by a State or political subdivision thereof, or by a recognized religious, philanthropic, or cultural organization[; and]. [(5) the phrase "an active part in political management or in political campaigns" means those acts of political management or political campaigning which were prohibited on the part of employees in the competitive service before July 19, 1940, by determinations of the Civil Service Commission under the rules prescribed by the President.] § 1502. Influencing elections; taking part in political campaigns; prohibitions; exceptions (a) A State or local officer or employee may not-(1) use his official authority or influence for the purpose of interferring with or affecting the result of an election or a nomination for office; (2) directly or indirectly coerce, attempt to coerce, command, or advise a State or local officer or employee to pay, lend, or contribute anything of value to a party, committe_e, organization, agency, or person for political purposes; or 717 84 [('.3) take an active part in political management or in pc,tifical campaigns.] (3) be a candidate lbr elective o/flee. (b) A State or local officer or employee re_tains the right to v,:)i:eas he chooses and to express his opinions on political subject_; and candidates. (c) Subsection (a)(3) of this section does not apply to-(1'.) the Governor or Lieutenant Governor of a State _,.:,:_ an individual authorized by law to act as Governor; (2) the mayor of a city; (31) a duly elected head of an executive department of a :_:rate or municipality who is not classified under a State or mu]C,_![t)al merit or civil service system; or (4) an individual[ holding elective office. §1503 Nonpartisan political activilty permitted. [Section 1502(a)(3) of this title does not prohibit political acl:i_,4ty in connection with-[(1) an election and the preceding campaign if none ,::,:fthe candidates is to be nominated, or elected at that election as :t'ep]:esenting a party any of whose candidates for presidential (l_c'.tor received votes in the last preceding election at which presicl,[_c:Ltial electors were selected; or [(:2) a question which is not specifically identified v:.!ilh a National or State political party. For the purpose of this section, questions relating to constituti,::,nal amendments, referendums, approval of municipal ordinances, and others of a similar character, are deemed not specifically idel:_:ified with a National or State political[ party] § 1503. Nonpartisan candidacies permitted Section 1502(a)(3) of this title does not prohibit any State or ,!ocal o/flcer or employee .from being a candidate in any election if r_one o5 the candidate,,_is to be nominated or elected,at szteh election as repre&_:_ _i_g a party any of whose candidates .for Presideatial elector receivec! !,o;_es in the last preceding election at which Presidential electors were se,!:e_ted. § 1504. Investigations; notice of hearing When a Federal agency charged with the duty of making a l(:_a!:_, or grant of funds of the United States for use in an activity by a St_i_.l.[_ or local officer or employee has reason to believe that the officer o1: employee has violated section 1502 of this title, it shall report the matter to the Civil Service Commission. On receipt of the report, or ,:m receipt of other information which seems to the Commission to w_:,:!':_'ant an investigation, the Commission shall-(1) fix a time and place for a hearing; and (2) send, by registered or certified mail, to the officer or emi>[,r:,:yee charged with the violation and to the State or local agenc? c_mploying him a notice setting forth a summal3r of the alleged violation and giving the time and place of the hearing. The hearing may not be held earlier than 10 days after the m_fi!Ling of the notice. 718 85 § 1505. Hearings; adjudications; notice of determinations Either the State or local officer or employee or the State or local agency employing him, or both, are entitled to appear with counsel at the hearing under section 1504 of this title, andbe heard After t_ds hearing, the Civil Service Commission shall-(1) determine whether a violation of section 1502 of this title has occurred; (2) determine whether the violation warrants the removal of the officer or employee from his office or employment; and (3) notify the officer or employee and the agency of the deterruination by registered or certified mail. § 1506. Orders; withholding loans or grants; limitations (a) When the Civil Service Commission finds-(1) that a State or local officer or employee has not been removed from his office or employment within 30 days after notice of a determination by the Commission that he has violated section 1502 of this title and that the violation warrants removal; or (2) that the State or local officer or employee has been removed and has been appointed within lS months after his removal to an office or employment in the same State in a State or local agency which does not receive loans or grants from a Federal agency; the Commission shall make and certify to the appropriate Federal agency an order requiring that agency to withhold from its loans or grants to the State or local agency to which notice was given an amount equal to 2 years' pay at the rate the officer or employee was receiving at the time of the violation. When the State or local agency to which appointment within 18 months after removal has been made is one that receives loans or grants from a Federal agency, the Commission order shall direct that the withholding be made from that Stt;te or local agency. (b) Notice of the order shall be sent by registered or certified mail to the State or local agency from which the amount is ordered to be withheld. After the order becomes final, the Federal agency to which the order is certified shall withhold the amount in accordance with the terms of the order. Except as provided by section 1508 of this title, a determination or order of the Commission becomes final at the end of 30 days after mailing the notice of the determination or order. (c) The Commission may not require an amount to be withheld from a loan or grant pledged by a State or local agency as security for its bonds or notes if the withholding of that; amount would jeopardize the payment of the principal or interest on the bonds or notes. § 1507. Subpenas and depositions (a) The Civil Service Commission may require by subpena the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of documentary evidence relating to any matter before it as a result of this ch_a.pter. Any member of the Commission may sign subpenas, and members of the Commission and its examiners when authorized by the Commission may administer oaths, examine witnesses, and receive evidence. The /1 9 86 attendance of witnesses and the production of documentary evid:_!nce may be required from any place iii the United States at tho desig::i,t_ted place of hearing. In case of disobedience to a :mbpena the Commi[s_;s&,n may invoke the aid of a court of the United States in requiring t]_;, attendance and testimony of witnesses and the :production of _ocri:i:i:_en,tary evidence. In case of contumacy or refusal to obey a subpena i.::,s_ed to a person, the United States District -Court ,_ithin whose _urisd:iii:i(':iilcln the inquiry is carried on may issue an order requiring him to aili:,l:;e_r before the Commission, or to produce documentary evidence i:t ,;o ordered, or to give evidence concerning the matter in question: _md any failure to obey the order of the court may be punished by the o(:art as a contempt thereof. (b) The Commission may order testimony to be taken by depo._;:il:ion at any st_,.ge of a proceeding or investigation before it as a rest:ii i: of this chapter. Depositions may be l;aken before an individual desig]::_l_ed by the Commission and having the power to administer oaths. Tt!,stimony shall be reduced to writing by the indi_fidual taking the d((j?osition, or under his direction, and shall be subscribed by the (tepo:_!,nt. Any person may be compelled to appear and depose and to pr(:_d_:tce documentary evidence before the Commission as provided b_' :]his section. (c) A person may not be excused from attending and testifyi:/::_f;or from prod'acing documentary evidence or in obedience to a subpe_:_:iion the ground that the testimony or evidence, documentary or othe:v_:'ise required of him may tend to incriminate him or subject him l;:_ a penalty or forfeiture for or on account; of any transaction, niatt_!_:r or thing concerning which he is compel]ed to testify, or produce evid,!!r c,_, documentary or otherwise, before the Commission in obedience L:_,a subpena issued by it. A person so testifying is not exempt from pro:_,:!c;ution and punishment for perjury committed i:n.so testifying. § 1508. Judicial review A party aggrieved by a determination or order of the Civil Se_r"_ i.(',e Commission under section 1504, 15,05, or 1506 of this title may, _'iil:l:tin 30 days after the mailing of notice of the determination or order, i:::t _titute proceedings for re¥iew thereof by filing a petition in the U:_im:ed States District Court for the district in which the State or local o:!:l!ir:',er or employee resides. The institution of the proceedings does not op_::r_;_te as a stay of the determination or order unless-(I) the court specifically orders a st'_y; and (2) the officer or employee is suspended from his offi_,!_ or employment while the proceedings are pending. A copy of the petition shall immediately be served on the Commis._i!:i_:m, and thereupon the Commission shall cerdfy and. file in the court a I:,nmscript of the record on which the determination or order was made _i'he court shall review the entire record including questions of fact _:nd questions of law. If application is made to the c,ourt for leave to ad:t ice additional evidence, and it is shown to the satisfaction of the court i;)iat the additional evidence may materially affect the result of the prone _dings and that there were reasonable grounds for failure to adduce, l:ittis evidence in the hearing before the Commission, the court m_y d:il:_ct that the additional evidence be taken before the Commission ir_ !he manner and on the terms and conditions fixed by the court. The (',_:_?:n- 720 87 mission may findings of its with determination or modiorder in view of the modify additionalits evidence andfact shallorfile the court the fied findings, determination, or order; and the modified findings of fact, supported by substantial or order, evidence, conclusive.determination The court shall if affirm the determination or thearemodifi_,d or order, if the :court determines that it is in accordance with law. If the court determines that the determination or order, or the modified determination or order, is not in accordance with law, the court shall remand the proceeding to the Commission with directions either to make a determination or order determined by the court to be ]awful or to take such further proceedings as, in the opinion of the court, the law requires. The judgment and decree of the court are final, subject to review by the appropriate United States Court of Appeals as in other cases, and the judgment and decree of the court of appeals are final, subject to review by the Supreme Court of the United States on certiorari or certification as provided by section 1254 of title 28. If a provision of this section is held to be invalid as applied to a party by a determination or order of the Commission, the determination or order becomes final and effective as to that party as if the provision had not been enacted. $ · $ INTERNAL $ REVENUE INTERNAL SUBTITLE A. SVBTITLEB. SVBTITLEC. SUBTITLE D. SUBTITLEE. SUrTITLE F. SUBTITLE G. SVBTITLEII. $ CHAPTER $ $ $ CODE OF 1954 REVENUE TITLE Income taxes. Estate and gift taxes. Employment taxes. Miscellaneous excise taxes. Alcohol, tobacco, and certain other excise taxes. Procedure and administration. The Joint Committee on Internal Revenue Taxation. Financing of presidential election campaigns. Subtitle $ $ * Subchapter $ $ $ $ A--Income $ 1--NORMAL $ $ TAXES $ B--Computation * PART IX--ITEMS $ Taxes $ AND $ SURTAXES $ of Taxable $ $ $ $ $ Income $ $ $ $ NOT DEDUCTIBLE $ $ SEC. 276. CERTAIN INDIRECT CONTRIBUTIONS TO POLrrICA£ PARTIES. (a) DmALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTmNS._No deduction otherwis_ allowable under this chapter shall be allowed for any amount paid or incurred for-- 72 88 (1) advertising in a convention program of a political l::,,_:_"ty, or in any other publication i! any part of the proceeds oi! ,i;uch publication directly or indire((tly inures (or is intended to iin_lre) to or' for the use of a political party or a political candidate, (2) admission to any dinner or program, if any part (:_fthe proceeds of such dinner or program directly or indirectly inares (or is intended to inure) to or for the use of a political pa:%y or a political candidate, or (3) admission to an inaugural ball, inaugural gala, inau:li_ural parade, or inaugural concert, or to any similar event which, is identified with a political party or a political candidate. (b) DEFINITIONS.--For purposes of this section-(1) POLITICAL PARTY.--The term "political party" mean_!;..... (A) a political party; (B) a National, State, or local .committee of a political party; or (C) a committee, association, or organization, wb_i:her incorporated or not, which directly or indirectly acc,.(pts contributions (as defined in section 271(b)(2)) or make expenditures (as defined in section 271(b)(3)) for the pur]:_ose of influencing or attempting to influence the selection, n_cmination, or election of any individual to any Federal, Sta, te. or local elective public office, or the election of presid_!mtiai and vice-presidential electors, whether or not such indi%,:!ual or electors are selected, nominated, or elected. (2) PROCEEDS INURING TO OR FOR THE USE OF POLIIi?]CAL shall be treated as inuring to or f(:_r1;he use of a pohtical candidate only if(A) such proceeds mav be used directly or indirectilv' for the purpose of furthering: his candidacy for selection, r[cmination, or election to any elective public office, and (B) such proceeds are not received by such can dida::,,_ i[n the ordinary course of a trade or business (other thal:L the txade or business of holding elective public office). CANDIDATES.--Proceeds Ir(c) ADVERTISING IN A CONVENTION PROGRAM OF A NATiiO/:q[AL POLITICAL CONVENTION.--Subsection (a) shall not apply tc my amount paid or incurred for advertising in a convention program _:)fa political party distributed in connection with a convention he;d for the purpose of nominating candid_tes for the offices of President: md Vice President of the United Statm;, if the proceeds from such prc,!_;::'arn are used solely to defray the costs of conducting such convention ti'_:,r a subsequent convention of such party held for such purpose) and the amount paid or incurred for such advertising; is reasonable in ligh i: of the business the taxpayer may expect to receive-[(1) directly as a result of such advertising, or [(2) as a result of the convention being held in an ar,i!;_lin which the taxpayer has a principal place of business,] [(d)](c) CRoss REFERENCE.--.For disallowance of certain entertainment, etc., expenses see section 274. 722 89 Subtitle $ * CHAPTER · * F--Procedure * * * * * A--Returns * PART II--TAX · * * 61--INFORMATION Subchapter · and Administration * RETURNS * * $ lit AND RETURNS * * 4: * $: and Records * OR STATEMENTS * * $: Subpart B---Income Tax Returns SEC. 6012. PERSONS REQUIRED TO MAKE RETURNS OF INCOME. (a) GENERALRvLE.--Returns with respect to income taxes under subtitle A shall be made by the following: (1)(A) Every individual ha_fng for tile taxable year a gross income of $750 or more, except that a return shall not be required of an individual (other than an individual referred to in section 142(b))-(i) who has not married (determined by applying section 143(a)) and for the taxable year has a gross income of less than $2,050, or (ii) who is entitled to make a joint return under section 6013 and whose gross income, when combined with the gross income of his spouse, is, for the taxable year, less than $2,800 but only if such individual and his spouse, at the close of the taxable year, had the same household as their home. Clause (ii) shall not apply if for the taxable year such spouse makes a separate return or any other taxpayer is entitled to an exemption for such spouse under section 151(e). (B) The $2,050 amount specified in subparagraph (A)(i) shall be increased to $2,800 in the ease of an indiv][dual entitled to an additional personal exemption under section 151(c) (1), and the $2,800 amount specified in subparagraph (A) (ii) shall be increased by $750 for each additional personal exemption to which the individual or his spouse is entitled under section 151(c); (C) Every individual having for the taxable year a gro_ income of $750 or more and to whom section 141(e) (relating to limitations in case of certain dependent taxpayers) applies; (2) Every corporation subject to taxation under subtitle A; (3). Every estate the gross income of which for the ta_cable year _s $600 or more; (4) Every trust having for the taxable year any taxable income, or having gross income of $600 or over, regardless of the amount of taxable income;and 723 (5) Every estate or trust of which any beneficiary is a :_,:onresident alien; except that subject to :such conditions, limitations, and excet:_ ti :ms and under' such regulations as may be prescribed by the Secrete J? or his delegate, nonresident alien individuals su'bjec_ to the tax ims, o_;ed by section 871 and foreign corporations subject to the tax im]:<,_;ed by section 881 may be exempted from the :requirement of m_;,]_:irtg returns under this section. The Secretary or his delegate sha?g, by regulation, exempt from the requirement of making returns undo? :his section any political committee (as defined in section 301 (d) ,,f the F,!_,:l_ral Election Campaign Act ,J 1971) having no gross income for t;%etax,::_ble year. Subtitle CHARTER95. CHAPTER96. Chapter 97. CHAPTER Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. [Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. 9001. 9002. 9003. 9004. 9005. 9006. 9007. 9008. 9008. 9009. 9010. 9011. 9012. 9013. H--Financing of Presidential Campaigns EleclLior Presidential Election Campaign Fund. Presidential F,lection Campaign Fund .Advisory Board. Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account. 95--PRESIDENT][AL FUND ELECTION Short title. Definitions. Condition for eligibility for payments. Entitlement of eligible candidates to payments. Certification by Comptroller General. Payments to eligible candldates. Examinations and audits; repayments. Information on proposed e_:penses.] Payments for presidential nominating conventions. Reports to Congress; regulations, Participation by Comptroller General in judicial Judicial review. Criminal penalties. Effective date of chapter. CAMPAIC_._,' _ c proceedings. SEC. 9001. SHORT TITLE. This chapter Fund Act." SEC. 9002. may be cited as the "Presidential Election Camt:a gn ]DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this chapter-(1) The term "authorized committee" means, with respe[::ll to the candidates of a political party for President and Vice Pres:id rm_t, of the United States, [any political committee which is autho::'i:?ed in writing by such candidates; to incur expenses to further: _]he election of such candidates. Such authorization shall be addr,!_s_;.ed to the chairman of such political committee, and a copy of s;t:mclh authorization shall be filed by' such candidates with the C_:_:_::tptroller General. Any withdrawal of any authorization shall _[so be in writing and shall be addressed and filed in the same me mmr 724 91 as the authorizationl the political committee designated under section 302(J) (1) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 by the candidate of a political party for President of the United States a,_ his principal campaign committee. (2) The term "candidate" means, with respect to any presidential election, an individual who (A) has been nominated for election to the office of President of the United States or the office of Vice President of the United States by a major party, or (B) has qualified to have his name on the election ballot (or to have the names of electors pledged to him on the election ballot) as the candidate of a political party for election to either such office ill 10 or more States. For purposes of paragraphs (6) and (7) of this section and purposes of section 9004(a)(2), the term "candidate" means, with respect to any preceding presidential election:, all individual who received popular votes for the office of President in such election. (3) The term "Comptroller General" means tlhe Comptroller General of the United States. (4) The term "eligible candidates" means the candidates of a political party for President and Vice President o£ the United States w] o have met all applicable conditions for eligibility to receive payments under this chapter set forth in section 9003. (5) The term "fund" means the Presidential Election Campaign Fund established by section 9006(a). (6) The term "major party" means, with respect to any presidential election, a political party whose candidate for the office of President in the preceding presidential election received, as the candidate of such party, 25 percent or more of the total number of popular votes received by all candidates for such office. (7) The term "minor party" means with respect to any presidential election, a political party whose candidate for the office of President in the preceding presidential election received, as the candidate of such party, 5 percent or more but less than 25 percent of the total number of popular votes received by all candidates for such office. (8) The term "new party" means, with respect to any presidential election, a political party which is neither a major party nor a minor party. (9) q;he term "political committee" means any committee, association, or organization (whether or not incorporated) w!hich accepts contributions or makes expenditures for the purpose of influencing, or attempting to influence the nomination or election of one or more individuals to Federal, State, or local elective public office. (10) The term "presidential election '' means the election of presidential and vice-presidential electors. (11) The term "qualified campaign expense" means an expense(A) incurred (i) by the candidate of a political party' for the office of President to further his election to such office or to further the election of the candidate of such poli'._ical 725 92 party for the office of Vice President, or both (ii) b,, the candidate of a political party for the office of Vice Pre,ii, lent to further his election to such office or to further the el,!:.::fion of the candidate of such polRical party for the offi,:,: of President, or both, or (ih) by [an] the au,;hori-_ed cornmil !;,e of the candidates ,of a political party for the offices of Pre ;]dent and Vice President to further the election of either or loth of such candidates to such offices, (B) incurred within the expenditure report period:{ (as defined in paragraph (12)), or incurred before the begi:ll dng of such period to the e.xtent such ,expense is for pre, l:,_rt.y services, or facilities used during such period, and (C) neither the incurring nor payment of which c:n s[itutes a violation of any' law of the United States or ,,i! tlhe State in which :such expense is incurred or paid. An expense shall be ,considered. as !incurred[ by a candidate or [:m] h/s authorized committee, if il; is incurred, by'a person auth,:,nzed by such candidate or such committee, as the case may t:_, _o incur on behalf of suchofcandidate or suchofco:mm:i_[ tee. If [an'lsuchtheexpense authorized comnfittee the candidates a poi:it:leal party for President and Vice Pre_fident of the United State _ :t,lso recurs expenses to further the election of one or more oher individuals to Federal, State, or local elective public ,::,[!k..e, expenses incurred by such cocmnittee wh:[eh are not specifical]: to further the election of such ol;her individual or individuals !i;:mll be considered as incurred to further the election of such ,:::J.:_didates for President and Vice President in such proportion :._ the Comptroller General prescribes by rules or regulations. (121) The term "expenditure report period" with respecl to any presidential election means-(A) in the case of a major [,arty, tlhe period beginninb, ,;,Sth the first day of September before the election, or if e_;r"_ier, with the date on which such major party at its nali,r:nal convention nominated its candidate for election to the <;,:!lice of President of the United States, and ending 30 days _:[!'ter tlhe date of the presidential election; and (B) in the case of a p_rty which is not a major part_,: the same period as the expenditure report period of a _rr; jor party which has the shortest expenditure report peric,_:! for such presidential election, under subparagraph (A). SEC. 9003.CONDITION FOR ELIGIBILITY FOR PAYMENTS. (a) I_ GENF_aXL.--In order to be eligible to receive any payr:[._nts under section 9006, the candidates of a political party in a presid _:_tim election shall, in writing--(1) agree to obtain and furnish to the Comptroller Gen_ral such evidence as he may request of the qualified eampaig_ expenses [with respect to which payment is sought] of ,'iitch candidates, (2) agree to keep and furnish to the Comptroller General _;:lch records._ books, and other information as; he may request, e[::_i: f 726 93 (3)' agree to an audit and examination by the Comptroller General under section 9007 and to pay any amounts required to bepaid under such section [', and]. [(4) agree to furnish statements of qualified campaign expenses and proposed qualified campaign expenses requiredunde r section 9oos.] (b) MAJOR PART_ES.--In order to be eligible to receive any pay.. ments under section 9006, the candidates of a major party in a presi.. dential election shall certify to the Comptroller General, under pemdty of perjury, that-(1) such candidates and their authorized [committees] com-. mittee will not incur qualified campaign expenses in excess of the aggregate payments to which they will be entitled under section 9004, and (2) been no contributions to defray cami_aign expenses have or will be accepted by qualified such candidat(_s or [any of] their authorized [committees] committee except to the extent necessary to make up any deficiency in payments received out of the fund on account of the application of section 9006 (d), and no contributions to defray expenses which would be qualified campaign expenses but for subparagraph (C) of section 9002(11) have been or will be accepted by such candidates or [any of] their authorized [committees] committee. Such certification shall be made within such time prior to the day oil the presidential election as the Comptroller General shall prescl_be by rules or reguIations. (c) MINOR ANI) NEW PARTIES.---In order to be eligible to receive any payments under section 9006, the candidates of a minor or new party m a presidential election shall certify to the Comptroller General, under penalty of perjury, that(i) such candidates and their authorized [committees] com,. mittee will not incur qualified campaign expenses in excess of the aggregate payments to which the eligible candidates of a major party are entitled under section 9004, and (2) such candidates and their authorized [committees] com-. mittee will accept and expend or retain contributions to defray qualified campaign expenses only to the extent that the qualified campaign expenses incurred by such Candidates and their authorized [committees] committee certified to under paragraph (1) exceed the aggregate payments received by such candidates out of the fund pursuant to section 9006. Such certification shall be made within such tim e prior to the day of the presidential election as the Comptroller General shall presci_be by rules or regulations. SEC, 9004, ENTITLEMENT OF ELIGIBLE CANDIDATES TO PAYMENTS. (a) IN GENERAL.--Subject to the provisions of this chapter(l) The eligible candidates of Iai each major party inca presidential election shall be entitled to equal payments under section 9006 [equal in the aggregate to 15 cents multiplied by the total number of residents within the United States who have 727 O4 attained the age of t8, as determined by !;he Bureau of the C_r: _;us, as of the first day of June of the year preceding the year :,,,:i _ tlhe presidential election] in an amount which, in the aggregate_ _;hall not exceed $20,000,000. (2) (A) The eligible candidates of a minor party in a presid _!_:L t!ial election shall be entitled to payments under section 9006 ,_,_Lual in the aggregate to an amount which bears the same ratio I_[,tlhe amount [computed] allowed under paragraph (1) for a ;:ri:t_jor party as the number of popular votes received by the cami]i,_late for President of the minor party, as suelh candidate, in thai!; ::,receding presidential election bears to the average number of poll i;tlar votes received by the candidal;es for President of the major I_,!_:_ ties in the preceding presidential election. (B) If the candidate of one or more political parties (not il:LCudlng a major party) for the office, of President was a ean(l!i:late for such office in the preceding presidential ,election and rec_i red 5 percent or more but less than 25 percent of the total num ii_,:rof popular votes received by all candidates for such office, such _.i..a :Ldidate and his running mate for the office of Vice President, _;_pon compliance with the provisions of section 9003(a) ami (c), shall be treated as eligible candidates entitled to payments n::LdLer section 9006 in an amount computed as provided in subpara¢l aph (A) by taking into account all the popular votes received b_ _uch candidate for the office of President in the preceding presidolLtial election. If eligible candidates of a minor party are entit[e_l to payments under this subparagraph, such entitlemen_ sh._Lllbe reduced by the amount of the entitlement allowed n::Lder subparagraph (A). (31) The eligible candidates of a minor party or a new pardi? ]n a presidential election whose mmdidate for President in sucl:t ,_.lection receives, as such candidate, 5 per¢..ent or more of the total number of popular votes cast for the office of President h _uch election shall be entitled to payments under section 9006 _.qual in the aggregate to an amount which be.ars the same ratio _c the amount [computed] allowed under paragraph (1) for a ,z:_:a_ior party as the number of popular votes received by such can_:[,]k}_te in such election bears to the average number of popular _;otes received in such election by the candidates for President :ri the major parties. In tlhe case of eligible candidates entitled t_ ;)ayments under paragraph (2), the amount allowable undel: t]his paragraph shall be limited to the amount, if any, by whic.]:_the entitlement under the preceding sentence exceeds the a]:,:_,mnt of the entitlement under paragraph (2). (b) LimTXTmNs.--The aggreg_te payments to which the elililible candidates of a political party shall be entitled under subset!; ons (a) (2) and (3) with respect to a presidential election shall not e',.::,: eed an amount equal to the lower of-(1) the amount of qualified campaign expenses ineurr_d t_y such eligible candidates and their authorized [commit i_!_s,] committee, reduced qualified campaign 728 by the amount contributions expenses received ofand (_xpended ortore ,li_!!¥ay i;JLzned 95 by such eligible candidates and such [committees,] committee, or (2) the aggregate payments to which the eligible candidates of a major party are entitled under subsection (a)(1), reduced by the amount of contributions described in paragraph (1) of this subsection. (c) RESTRICTIONs.--The eligible candidates of a political party shall be entitled to payments under subsection (a) only(l) to defray qualified campaign expenses incurred by such eligible candidates or their authorized [committees,] committee, or (2) to repay loans the proceeds of which were used to defray such qualified campaign expenses, or otherwise to restore funds (other than contributions to defray qualified campaign expenses received and expended by suctq candidates or such [committees] committee), used to defray such qualified campaign expenses. SEC. 9095. CERTIFICATION BY COMPTROLLER GENERAL. [(a) INITIAL CERTIFICATIONS.--On the basis of the evidence, books, records, and information furnished by the eligible candidates of a political party and prior to examination and audit under section 9007, the Comptroller General shall certify from time to time to the Secretary for payment to such candidates under section 9006 the payments to which such candidates are entitled under section 9004.] (a) LvzTr_4L CERrI_rC.4T_O:Vs.--Not later than 10 (lays after the candidates of a political party for President and Vice President of the United States have met all applicable conditions for eligibility to receive payments under this chapter set forth in section 9003, the Comptroller General shall certify to the Secretary for payment to such eligible candidates under section 9006 payment in full of amounts to which such candidates are entitled under section 900J. (b) FINALTY OF CERTIFICATIONS AND DETERmNATIONS.--Initial certifications by the Comptroller General under subsection (a), and all determinations made by him under this chapter, shall be final and conclusive, except to the extert that they are subject to examination and audit by the Comptroller General under section 9007 and judicial review under section 9011. SEC. 9006. PAYMENTS TO ELIGIBLE CANDIDATES. (a) ESTABLISHMENTOF CAMPAIaN FvND.--There is hereby established on the books of the Treasury of the United States a special fund to be known as the "Presidential[ Election Campaign Fund," The Secretary shall, [as provided by appropriation acts] from time to time, transfer to the fund an amount not in excess of the sum of the amounts designated (subsequent to the previous Presidential election) to the fund by individuals under section 6096. There is appropriated to ;the fund for eachfiscal year, out of amounts in the general fund of the Treas,_ry not otherwise appropriated, an amount equal to the amounts so desigrm_d during each fiscal year, which shall remain available to the fund without fiscal year limitation. (b) TRANSFER TO THE GENERAL FUND. If, after a presidential election and after all eligible candidates have been paid the amount 729 96 which t.hey.are entitled to receive under this chapter, there are l:_,:,:neys remaimng m the fund, the Secretary shall transfer the moIzLe:s so remaining to the general fund of the Treasury. (c) PAYMENTSFRO_I ThE FVND.---Upon receipt of a certiJ!i,:'._tion from the Comptroller General under section 9005 for payment t:, the eligible candidates of a political party, the Secretary shall :_ly to such candidates out of the fund tlhe amount certified by the CmZil]i:;trol -. ler General. Amounts paid to any such candidates shall be un_::]le,r the control of such candidates. (d) I_ISUFmC_E_T AMOUNTS I_ FU_D.--If at the time of a c_rtification by the Comptroller General[ under section 9005 for payn:Le:::Ltto the eligible candidates of a political party, the Secretary or his d,i_,_gate determhles that the moneys in the fund are not, or may l::_:_L be_ sufficient to satisfy the full entitlements of the eligible candid_:t E_sof all political parties, he shall withhold from such pa.sqnent such t_mount as he determines to be necessary to assure that the eligible candi:_ates of each political party will receive their pro rata share of th_!5_'full entitlement. Amounts withheld by reason of the preceding se:n_;ence shall be paid when the Secretary or his delegate determines thsiL ;here are sufficient moneys in the fund to pay such amounts, or port,ions thereof, to all eligible candidates from whom amounts hawt!_ been withheld:, but, if there are not sufficient moneys in the fund to s:ihsfy the full entitlement of the eligible candidates of all political ]:l,_trties, the amounts so withheld shall be paid in such manner that the ¢l:_l_ible candidates of each political party receive their pro rata share _:,J!I;heir full entitlement. SEC. 9007.EXAMINATIONS AND AUDITS; REPAYMENTS. (a) E:xamNaTXo_s Z,_D AvmTs.---After each presidential el._,:_tion, the Comptroller General shall conduct a thorough examinati_::,r and audit of the qualified campaign expenses of the candidates of ea_:h political party for President and Vice President. (ID) ]REPAYMENTS.-(1) If the Comptroller General determines that any porlLim of the payments made to the eligible candidates of a polittic a party under section 9006 was in excess of the aggregate paym_mts to which candidates were entitled under section 9004, he Sb:_l] so notfly such candidates, and such candidates shall pay i,,_ the Secretary an amount equal to such portion. (2) If the Comptroller General determines that the ;_dig!ible candidates of a political party and their authorized [comrft:ili t:ees]] cammittee incurred qualified campaign expenses in excess c_' the aggregate payments to which the eligible candidates of _;_. lnajor party were entitled under section 9004, he shall notify such candidates of the amount of such excess and such can,::[iJates shall pay to the Secretary an amount equal to such amount (:.3) If the Comptroller General de%ermines that the ;_lgible candidates of a major party or [any]] the authorized cor;Lmittee of .such candidates accepted contributions (other than _.:;ontribut,ions to make up deficiencies in payments out of the ial:_d on account of the application of section 9006(d)) to defray q _ lifted 730 97 campaign expenses (other than qualified campaign expenses with respect to which payment is required under paragrap_ (2)), he shall notify such candidates of the amount of the contributions so accepted, and such candidates shall pay to the Secretary an amount equal to such amount. (4) If the Comptroller General determines that any amount of any payment made to the eligible candidates of a political party under section 9006 was used for any purpose other than(A) to defray the qualified campaign expenses with respect to which such payment was made, or (B) to repay loans the proceeds of which were used, or otherwise to restore funds (other than contributions to defray qualified campaign expenses which were received and expended) which were used, to defray such qualified campalgn expenses, he shall notify such candidates of the amount so used, and such candidates shall pay to the Secretary an amount equal to such amount. (5) No payment shall be required from the eligible candidates of a political party under this subsection to the extent that :such payment, when added to other payments required from such candidates under this subsection exceeds the amount of payments received by such candidates under section 9006. (c) NOTIFICATION.--No notification shall be made by the Comptroller General under subsection (b) with respect to a presidential election more than 3 years after the day of such election. (d) DEPOStT OF REPAYMENTS.--All payments received by the Secretary under subsection (b) shall be deposited by him in the general fund of the Treasury. [SEC. 9008. INFORMATION ON PROPOSED EXPENSES. r(a) REPORTS BY CANmDATEs.---The candidates of a political party for President and Vice President in a presidential election slhall, from time to time as the Comptroller General may require, furnislh to the Comptroller General a detailed statement, in such form as the Comptroller General may prescribe, of-r(1) the qualified campaign expenses incurred by them and their authorized committees prior to the date of such statement (whether or not evidence of such expenses has been furnished for purposes of section 9005), and £(2) the qualified campaign expenses which they and their authorized committees propose to recur on or after the date of such statement. The Comptroller General shall require a statement under this subsection from such candidates of eaclh political party at least once each week during the second, third, and fourth weeks preceding the day of the presidential election and at least twice during the week preceding such day. [(b) PUBLICA.TION.--The Comptroller General shall, as soon as possible after he receives each statement under subsection (a), prepare and publish a summary of such statement, together with any 731 9_ ¸ other data or information which he deems advisable, in the Fe_:Eral Register. Such summary shall not include any information v,_]ich identifies any individual who made a designation under section 6(19,],.] SEC. 9008.PAYMENTSFORPRESID_WTIALNOMINATINGCONVENTfOVS. (a) ESTABLISHMENTOF ACCOUNTS. The ;_ecretary shall mat_,:,_,_,m in the fu_!, in addition to any account which he maintains under sect i,on 9006(a), a separate account for the national committee of each major :i_, _.rt:y and minor party. The Secretary shall deposit in each such accow_!: an amount eq_ml to the amount which eG_h such committee may receive _ _t,_r subsection (b). Such deposits shall be dra_m from amounts designat_ ° _,y individuals under section 6096 and shall be mc_te before any trans:?_:'is made to any account for any eligible candidate under section 9006(al. (b) ENTn'LrMrN_ TOP.4r_:w's _o_ _'_ FmvD.-(1) MAJot_ P.4R_m_s.--Subj_t to the provi_ions of this se_&on, the national committee of a major party shall be entitled to pay:,,_.,nts under paragraph (3), with respect to any presidential nomin::_,ring convention, in amounts which, in the aggregate, shall not e:_',reed $2,000,000. (2) MINot_ pAR_'_rs.--Subject to the provi_ions of this se _,)n, the national committee of a minor party shall be entitled to pay_,,_.,nts under paragraph (3), with res:pect to any presidential nomt_::_ing convention, in amounts which, in the aggregate, shall not exee_'_l!an amount which bears the same ratio to the amount the national c._m_mittee of a major party is entitled to receive under paragraph ( :!) as the number of popular votes rec.eived by the candidate for Pre_i:i,:ent of the minor party, as such ca_didate, in _:hepreceding presid_ !iai election bears to the average number of popular votes received b'__t]_e candidates for President o/the major parties in the preceding ;!,,,_:sidential election. (3) P._Y_r:v_s.--_)pon rece_t o/certificationfi'om the Comp _der General under subsection (g), the Secretcry shall make payv;_._:ats from the appropriate account maintained _:nder subsection (a) ':_:ti_e national committee of a major party or m,inor party which ele_:_t_, to receive its entitlement under this subsection. Such payments sh,:_J',be available for use by such committee ,in accordance with the prow.?ikms of subsection (c). (_) L_,AT_o:v.--Paymen_s to the national committee :;, a major' party or minor party under this subseciion from the ac::;_: unt designated for such committee si_all be limit:ed to the amounts i_ _iitch account at the time of payment. (c) Usr or Fmwos.---No part of any payment made under s_!,!li:ection (b) sh_ll be used to deft'ay the expenses of _,ny cand_ate or de,_mte who is participating in any presidential nominating convention. !iluch payments shall be used only-(1) to defray expenses incurred with respect to a presid_.r_i!iial nomi_mting-convent_on (including the pay_nent of deposits) by :::_,on behalf of the national committee receiving such payments; or (2) to repay loans the proceeds o.fwhich were used to defray, _u_h expenses, or otherwise to restore funds (other than contributi(:_?l_:to defray such expenses received by such committee) used to _i_,:: ray such expenses. f* 732 99 (d) L1MITATIO_Or EXPENDr_'URI_S.--: (1) MAJOR PARTXZS.--Except a_pr,r_gded by paragraph (3), tl_e national committee of a major party may not make expenditures with respect to a presidential nominating convention which, ifa the aggregate, exceed the amount of payments to which such committee .is entitled under subsection (b) (1). (2) Mx_voR PAR_frs.--Except as provided by paragraph (3), t]_e national committee of a minor paxty may not make expenditures with respect to a presidential nominating convention which, in tt_e aggregate, exceed the amount of the entitlement of the national committee of a major party under subsection (b) (1). (3) ExcrP_7o_v.--The Presidential Election Campaign Fu_l Advisory Board may authorize the national committee of a major party or minor party to make expenditures which, in the aggregate, exceed the limitation established by paragraph (1) or paragrapi_ (2) of this subsection. S_ch authorization shall be based upon a determination by such Board that, due to extraordinary and unforeseen circumstances, such expenditures are necessary, to assure the effective operation of the presidential nommatzng convention by such committee. (e) AV.4IZABIZITY OF PAYmENts.---The national committee of a major party or minor party may receive payments under subsection (b) (3) beginning on July I of the calendar year immediately preceding the calendar year in which a presidential nominating convention of the political party involved is held. (f) TR.4NSrrR TO 7'zt_ FuND.---If, after the close of a presidential nominating convention and after the national committee of the political party involved has been paid the amount which it is entitled to receive under this section, there are moneys remaining in the account of such national committee, the Secretary shall transfer the moneys so remaining to the fund. (g) CE.e_,iFxc.aT'xo:vBY COMPS'ROLLER GE:vERAL.--Any major party or minor party may file a statement witt_ the Comptroller General in such form and manner and at such times as he may require, designating the national committee of such party. Such statement shall include the information required by section 303(b) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, together with such additional information as the Comptroller General may require. Upon receipt of a statemenLfiled under the preceding sentences, the Comptroller General promptly shall verify such statement according to such procedures and criteria as he may establish and _,:hall certify to the Secretary for payment in full to any such committee of amounts to which such committee may be entitled under subsection (b). Such certifications shall be subject to an examination and audit which the Comptroller General shall conduct no later than December 31 o_c the calendar year in which the presidential nominating convention involved is held. (h) RrPAY_rNTs.--The Comptroller General shall have the same authority to require repayments from the national committee of a major party or minor party as he has with respect to repayments from any eligible candidate under section 9007(b). The provisions of section 9007(c) and section 9007(d) shall apply with respect to any repayment required by the Comptroller General under this subsection. 72;3 100 SEC. 9009. REPORTS TO CONGRESS; REGULATIONS. (a) REPORTs.--The Comptroller General shall, as soon as pract:i,:_,ble after each presidential election, submit a full report to the Senat_!_ md House of Representatives setting forth-(1) the qualified campaign expenses (shown in such detail _s the Comptroller General determines necessary) incurred by the ca. _didates of each political party' and their authorized colnmi_:;t:_es; (2) the amounts certified by him under section 9005 for pa_n: ent to (3) the the eligible candidates of eachif politim_! party; from ['and]such (':a:_diamount of payments, any, r,_quired dates under section 9007, and the reasons for each pay:_l_.ent required[.]; and (4) the expenses incurred by the national committee oj'a ?_;!:l_jor party or minor party with respect to a presidential nomi_.:oling convention; (5) the amounts certified by him under section 9008(g)fo_ _ i,ayment to each such committee; and (6) the amount of payments, if any, required from such com_Ji_i_tees under section 9008(h), and the reasons for each such paymen? Each report submitted pursuant to this section shall be printed :.s a Senate document. (b) REGULATIONS,ETc.--The Comptroller General is authorize,[ to prescribe such rules and :regulations in accordance with the provisiN:,;s of subsection (c), to conduct such examinations and audits (in add_iikon to the examinations and audits required by section 9007(a)), to conduct such investigations, and to require the keeping and submi[_;;sion of such books, records, and information, as he deems necessary to :::_t:rry out the functions and duties imposed on him by this chapter. (c) Rrg_rw or REouz._'xoNs.-(1) The under Comptroller General, ansmitasatemn_' thbef°retrPrescr_bmgtanYer_/tm°r regulation subsection (b), shall respect to such rule or regulation to the Committee on Rule_;' :;md Administration of the Senate and to the Committee on tIous_ Admini_tration of the House of Representatives, in accordance ,_ith the provisions oj this subsection. Such statement shall set for/h the proposed rule or regulation and shall contain a detailed explana:?ion and justification of such rule or regulation. (2) Ij either such committee does not, through appropriate ac;!ion, disapprove the proposed rule or reoulation .setJorth in such stal:_r_ent no later than 30 legislative days after rece_iptoj such statement., ,_en the Cbmptroller General may prescribe such rule or regulatio_ The Comptroller General may not prescribe any rule or regulation !v_.ich is d_:approved by either such committee _nder this paragrapk (3) For purposes of this subsection, the term "legislative ,;i!_tys" does not include any calendar day on which both Houses 2/'t.he Con_ress are not in session. SEC. 9010,PARTICIPATION BY COMPTROLLER GENERAL IN JUDI[CIAL PROCEEDINGS. (a) APPEARANCE BY CouNsm,---The Comptroller General i'i; authorized to appear in and defend against any action filed _,mder 734 101 section 9011, either by attorneys employed in his office or by counsel whom he may appoint without regard to the provisions of title 5, United States Code, governing appointments in the competitive service, and whose compensation he may fix without regard to the provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of such title. (b) RECOVERY OF CERTATNPAY._{ENTS.--The Comptroller General is authorized through attorneys and counsel described in subsection (a) to appear in the district courts of the United States to seek recovery of any amounts determined to be payable to the Secretary as a result of examination and audit made pursuant to section 9007. (C) DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF.--The Comptroller General is authorized through attorneys and counsel described in subsection (a) to petition the courts of the United States for dec]aratory or injunctive relief concerning any civil matter covered by the provisions of this subtitle or section 6096. Upon application of the Comptroller General, an action brought pursuant to this subsection shall be heard and determined by a court of three judges in accordance with the provisions of section 2284 of title 28, United States Code, and any appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court. It shall be the duty of the judges designated to hear the case to assign the case for hearing at the earliest practicable date, to participate in the hearing and determination thereof, and to cause the case to be in every way expedited. (d) APPEAL.--The Comptroller General is authorized on behalf of the United States to appeal from, and to petition the Supreme Court for certiorari to review, judgments or decrees entered with respect to actions in which he appears pursuant to the authority provided in this section. SEC. 9011. JUDICIAL REVIEW. (a) REWEW OF CERTIFICATmN, DETERmNATmN, OR OTHER Ac'finN BY THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL.--Any certification, deterrnination, or other action by the Comptroller General made or taken pursuant to the provisions of this chapter shall be subject to review by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upon peti. tion filed in such Court by any interested person. Any petition filed pursuant to this section shall be filed within thirty days after the certification, determination, or other action by the Comptroller Genera'[ for which review is sought. (b) SWTS To IMrLEMENT CaAPTER.-(1) The Comptroller General, the national committee of any political party, and individuals eligible to vote for President are authorized to institute such actions, including actions for declaratory judgment or injunctive relief, as may be appropriate to implement or construe any provision of this chapter. (2) The district courts of the United States shall have jurisdiction of proceedings instituted pursuant to this subsection and shall exercme the same without regard to whether a person asserting rights under provisions of this subsection shall have exhau:stec! any administrative or other remedies that may be _)rovided at la_. Such proceedings shall be heard and determinec by a court of 735 ]i02 three judges in accordance with the provisionsof of title 28,Court. UnitedIt States Supreme shall beCcde, the hear the case to assign the case cable date, to participate in thereof, and to cause the case to SEC. 9012. ORIMINAL (a) Excrss section :',:284 and of anytheappeal lie I:,::J, duty judges shall designal:,c, ]the to for hearing at the earliest ]?:ctcfithe hearing and determir_L:.ion be in every 'way expedited. PENALTIES. ]'CiMrim. N] Exr_:_s_s_-- (1) It shah be unlawful for an eligible candidate of a po ?ieal party for President and Vice President in a presidential el,,_:,; :;ion or [any of his authorized committees'] his authorized com_,/_ !;ttee knowingly willfully payments to incur to qualified campaign _ in excess of theandaggregate which the eligible expen_!',e cand:iA:_,tes of a major party are entitled under section 9004 with :cesp_!:c:,to such election. It s]_ll be unl_;wful for the national committee !/ a major party or minor party knowingly a,nd ,ugllfully to inc_.,!z'expenses with respect to a presidential nominating convention in _'_:_ess of the expenditure limitation applicable with respect to such com;,_,t, ittee under section 9008(d), unless the incurr'gng of such expen,!_e_ is authorized by the Presidential Election Campatgn Fund Ad_!:,';i.:vry Board under section 9008(d) (3). (2) Any person who violates paragraph (1) shall be finec[ not more than $5,000, or imprisoned not more than one year or i:_:th. In tho case of a vioh_tion by an authorized committee, any t,:l:[cer or member of such comnfittee who knowingly and willfully c :resents to such violation shall be fined not more than $5,0C,ii1,or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. (b) CONTRIBUTIONS.--(1) It shall be unlawful for an eligibi[e candidate of a r::L_jor party in a presidential election or [any of his authorized t::,i:mmittees] his authorized committee knowingly[and willfully to acc _pt any contribution to defray qt[alified excep_ :r4:t_ the extent necessary to mak_ up anycampaign deficiencyexpenses, in paymenl!,i_:_ ceived out of the fund on account of the application of se_::_Lon 9006 (d), or to defray' expenses which would be qualified (_am];:m [gn expenses but for subparagraph (C) of section 9002 (11). (2) It shall be unlawful for an eligible candidate of a poli_::ical party (other than a rnajor partly) in a presidential election or 11'[_ :ay of his authorized committees] his authorized committee know:_n_ly and willfully to accept and expend or retain contributim-_ to defray qualified campaign expenses in an amount which ex,::',__ds the qualified campaign expenses incurred with respect to ,,;_:_ ,ch electi(m by such eligible candidate and his authorized commil:i:,_es. (3) Any person who violates paragraph (1) or (2) shall be ii:h: ed not more than $5,000, or imprisoned not more than one ye_.l?:,or both.. In the case of a violation by an am:horized committee: _ny officer or member of such conunittee who knowingly and will5: lly consents to such violation shsdl be fined not more than $50)0, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. 736 103 (C) UNLAWFUL USE OF PAYMENTS.--- (1) It shall be unlawful for any person who receives any payment under section 9006, or to whom any portion of any payment received under such section is transferred, knowingly and willfully to use, or autlhorize the use of, such payment or such portion for any purpose other than(A) to defray the qualified campaign expenses with respect to which such payment was made, or (B) to repay loans the proceeds of which were used, or otherwise to restore funds (other than contributions to defray qualified campaign expenses which were received and expended) which were used, to defray such qualified campmgn expenses. (2) It shall be unlawful for the national committee of a major party or minor party which receives any payment under section 9008(b)(3) to use, or authorize the use o)f , such payment for any purpose other than a purpose a_thorized by section 9003(c). [(2)'1 (3) Any person who violates paragraph (1) shall be iined not more than $10,000, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. (d)FALSE STATEMENTS, ETC.--(1) It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly and willfully-(A) to furnish any false, fictitious, or fraudulent evidence, books, or information to the Comptroller General under this subtitle, or to include in. any evidence, books, or information so furnished any misrepresentation of a material fact, or to falsify or conceal any evidence, books, or ilfformation relevant to a certification by the Comptroller General or an examination and audit by the Comptroller General under this chapter; or (B) to fail to furnish to the Comptroller General any records, books, or information requested by him for purposes of this chapter. (2) Any person who violates paragraph (1) shall be fined not more than $10,000, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. (e) KICKBACKS AND ILLEGAL (1) It shall be unlawful PAYMENTS.- for any person knowingly and willfully to give or accept any kickback or any illegal payment in connection with any qualified campaign expense of eligible candidates or their authorized committees. It shall be unlawjul /or the national committee of a major party or minor party knowingly and willfully to give or accept any kickback or any illegal payment in connection with any expense incurred by such committee with respect to a presidential nominating convention. (2) Any person who violates paragraph (1) shall be fined not more than $10,000, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. 737 104 (3) In addition to the penalty provided by paragrapt: (2), any who accepts any kickback illegal payme:_l in conni,person ction with any qualified campaign or expense of el:i_Lble candidates or theh' authorized committees, or in connectio_ (!:,ith any expense incurred by the national committee of a major pa,'t / or minor party with respect to a presidential nominating conve?'_tion, shall pay to the Secretary, for deposit in the general fund, t' the Treasury, an amount equal 'Lo 125 percent of the kickbacl or payment received. (f) UNAUTHORIZED EXPENDITI_B;ES AND CONTRIBUTIONS.--- (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unJliv,_qul for any political committee which is not an authorized comr_::,i:,tee with respect to the eli_ble candidates of a political par_:i:_rfor President and Vice President in a presidential election know U:Lgly and willfully to incur expenditures to further the election o:t _lreh candidates, which would constitute qualified campaign ex]:,e:l.ses if incurred by an authorized committee of such candidates, h. an aggregate amount exceeding $1,000. (2) This subsection shall not apply to (A) expenditures t:S a broadcaster regulated by the Federal Communications Co_:n:ilission, or by a periodical publication, in reporting the news c_I' in taking editorial positions, or (B) expenditures by any orgar_zation described in section 501(c) which is exempt from tax _i]Lder section 501(a) in communicatiing to its members the views c:[ hat organization. (3) Any political committee which violates paragraph (1) _tmll be fined not more than $5,000, and any officer or member o[' .,:uch committee who knowingly and willfully consents to such vioa 5on and any other individual who knowingly and willfully vk:_lid;es paragraph (1) shall be fined not more than $5,000, or imprJs;(ned not more than one year, or both. (g) UNAUTHORIZEDDISCLOSURE OF INFOR2_ATION.-(1) It shall be unlawful for any individual to disclos_;_ any information obtained under tlhe provisions of this chapter ,!_x_ept as may be required by law. (2) Any person who violates paragraph (1) shall be fim_,:l not more than $5,000, o:r imprisoned not more than one year, or b :d;h. SEC. 9013. EFFECTIVE The provisions CHAPTER DATE OF CHAPTER. of this chapter Shall take effect on January 96--PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION FUND ADVISORY BOARD SEC. 9021. ESTABLISHMENT OF ADVISORY 1, :!!'73. CAM]PAIG !_ BOARD. (a) ESTABLISHMENT OF BoAsr,.--Ihere _s hereby establish _ .an advisory board to be known as the Presidential Election Can:?,)_lgn Fund Advisory Board (hereinafter in this section referred to ,!s the "Board"). It shall be the duty and function of the Board to c_::_t :asel and assist the Comptroller General of the United States i_ the performance of the duties and functions imposed on him und_!,:r the Presidential Election Campaign Fund Act. 738 105 (b) COMPOSI?IO_ OF BoAaD.--The Board shall be composed of the following members: (1) the majority leader and minority leader of the Senate and the Speaker and minority leader of the House of Representati[ves, who shall serve ex officio; (2) two members representing each political party which is a major party (as defined in section 9002(6)), which members shall be appointed by the Comptroller General from recomraendations submitted by such political party; and (3) three members representing the general public, which members shall be selected by the members described in paragraphs (1) and (2). The terms of the first members of the Board described in paragraphs (2) and (3) shall expire on the sixtieth day after the date of the first presidential election following January 1, 1073_ and the terms of subsequent members described in paragraphs (2) and (3) shall begin on the sixty-first day after the date of a presidential election and expire on the sixtieth day following the date of the subsequent presidential election. The Board shall elect a Chairman from its members. (c) COMPENSATmN.--Members of the Board (other than members described in subsection (b)(1)) shall receive compensation at the rate of $75 a day for each day they are engaged in performing duties ami functions as such members, including traveltime, and, while away from their homes or regular places of business, shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by law for persons in the Government service employed intermittently. (d) STx?Us.--Service by an individual as a member of the Board shall not, for purposes of any other law of the United States be considered as service as an officer or employee of the United States. CHAPTER Sec. See. Sec. Sec. See. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. Sec. See. 9031. 903_. 9033. 903_. 9035. 9036. 9037. 9038. 9039. 90_0. 90_I. 9042. 97--PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY PAYMENT ACCOUNT MATCHING Short title. Definitions. Eligibility for payment. Entitlement of eligible candidates to payments. Qualified campaign expense limitation. Certification by Comptroller General. Payments to eligible candidates. Examinations and audits; repayments. Reports to Congress; regulations. ParticiPation of Comptroller General in judicial proceedings. Judicial review. Criminal penalties. SEC. 9031. SHORT TITLE. This chapter may be cited as the "Presidential Payment Account Act." Primary Matci_ing SEC. 9032. DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this chapter-(1) The term "authorized committee" means, with respect to the candidates of a political party for President and Vice PresCient 739 106 oJ the United States, the political committee designated under s.ecti(_n 302(J)(1) of the Federal Election Campaign, Act of 1971 ·by t,I . candidate of a political party for President of the United States ,:_ his principal campaign committee. (2) The term "candidate" means an individual who seeks nomin_:rtion for election to be President of the United States. For purposes ,?;f this para4.1raph,an indiwidual shall be considered to seek nominati_;n for election:_if. he (A) takes the act_h_n.necessa'"Y'under the law oJ _'_ State to qualify himself for nominatwn .for election, (B) receiwt!s contributions or incurs qualified campaign expenses, or (C) gives his consent for any other person to receive contributions or to inc_ ? qualified campaign expenses on his behalf. (3) The term "Comptroller General" means the Comptrolb_!' General of the United States. (4) Except as provided by section 903 4 (a) , the term "contribution" .... (AL)means a gift, subscription, loan, advance, or deposit ,:,f money, or anything of value, the payment of which was marital _ on oi, after the beginning of the calendar year immediately pr,_!_ ceding the calendar year of the presidential election with respi_ct to which such gift, subscription, loan, advance, or deposit _i'/ money, or anything of value, is made, for the purpose of i:_i:flue_ing the result ora primary election, (B) means a contract, promise, or agreement, whether or n z:,t legally enforceable, to make a contribution for any such purpo_:_, (g_ means a transfer of funds between political committe_% and (D) means the payment by any person other than a candidal_, or h'_ authorizedcommittee, of compensation for the person_L;!,l services of another person which are rendered to the candida!'e or committee without charge, but (E) does not include(i) except a_ provided in subparagraph (D), the val'!ie o/. personal services rendered to or for the benefit: o/. .!_ candidate by an individual who receives no compensati_:_n .for rendering such service to or for the benefit o/. the candiidate, or (ii) payments under section 9037. (5) The term "matching payment account" means the Presidenti,L;i;l Primary Matching Payment Account established under secti_:_n 9037(a). (6) The term "matching payment period" means the period _ginning with the beginning of the calendar year in which a gener_:i_l electionfor the o_ce of President of the United States will be held a,_,d ending nomination on the datea on which the national convention 02: the)or rpar_ly whose candidate seeks nominates its candidate ti_i,e o_c( e of President of the United States. 7) The term "primary election" means an election, including !t runoff election or a nominating ,convention or caucus held by _l political party,/.or the selection o/.delegates to a national nomi'natin¢ convention o/. a political party, or ¢!or the expression o/. a prej_ren_:**e /.or the nomination of persons/.or election to the o_ice of President _:!:1 the United States. '740 107 (8) The term "political committee" means any .individual, eommittee, association, or organization (whether or not incorporated) which accepts contributions or incurs qualified campaign expenses for the purpose of influencing, or attempting to influence, the nomination of any person for election to the oy_ce of President of the United States. (9) The term "qualified campaign expense" means a purci_ase, payment, distribution, loan, advance, deposit, or gift of money or of anything of value(A) incurred by a candidate, or by his authorized committee, in connection with his campaign for nomination for election, and (B) neither the incurring nor payment of which constitutes a violation of any law of the United States or of the State in which the expense is incurred or paid. For purposes of this paragraph, an expense is incurred by a candid_ate or by an authorized committee if it is incurred by a person specifically authorized in writing by the candidate or committee, as the case may be, _, incur such expense on behalf of the candidate or the committee. (10) The term "State" means each State of the United States and the District of Columbia. SEC. 9033. ELIGIBILITY FOR PAYMENTS. (a) CoNDiTioNs.--To be eligible to receive payments under section 9037, a candidate shall, in writing-(1) agree to obtain and furni, sh to the ComptroUer General any evidence he may request of qualified campaign expenses, (2) agree to keep and furnish to the Comptroller General any records, books, and other information he may request, and (3) agree to an audit and examination by the Comptroller General under section 9038 and to pay any amounts required to be paid under such section. (b) EXPENSE LIMITATION; DECLARATIONOr INTENT; MINIME_I CONTRISUTIONs.--To be eligible to receive payments under section 9037, a candidate shall certify to the Comptroller General that-(1) the candidate and his authorized committee will not incur quali_ed campaign expenses in excess of the limitation on such expenses under section 9035, (2) the candidate is seeking nomination by a political party for election to the off-weof President of the United States, (3) the candidate has received contributions which, in the aggregate, exceed $5,000 in contributions from residents (_ each of at least 20 States, and (_) the aggregate of contributions received from any person under paragraph (3) does not exceed $250. SEC. 9034. ENTITLEMENT OF ELIGIBLE CANDIDATES TO PAYMENTS. (a) IN GrNrRAL.--Every candidate who is eligible to receive payments under section 9033 is entitled to payments under section 9037 in an amount equal to the amount of each contribution received by such candidate on or after the beginning of the calendar year immediately preceding the calendar year of the presidential election with respect to which ,such candidate is seeking nomination, or by his authorized committee, disre- 741 108 garding any amount oj vontributions from any person to the exte.ii_it ti_at the total oJthe amounts Contributed by s_tchperson on or after the beg_i_?:ng of such preceding calendar year e_eeds $250. For purposes of th_5_subsection and section 9033(b), the term "contribution" means a ,!i,'i:_to/ money made by a written instrument which identifies the person r,,_aI'_;ng the contribution by.full name and mailing address, but does not inci!, de a subscription, loan, advaTwe, or deposit oj money, or anything de_c,_ilbed in subparagraph (B), (C), or (D) oj section 9032(_). (b) LXMZT.4T_O_VS.--The total amount of payments to which a ca_i,_:_ date is entitled under subsection (a) shall not exceed 50 percent of the e:_;!_r_diture limitation established by sectio_ 608(c)(1)(A) of title 13, il;5!ited States Code. SEC. 9055,,QUALIFIED CAMPAIGNEXPENSE LIMITATION. No candidate shall knowingly incur qualified campaign expe_,,:,__:in excess oJ the expenditure limitation established by section 608 (c) (1)(. !l)of title 18, United States Code. SEC. 9036,,CERTIFICATIONBY COMPTROLLERGENERAL. (a) I_rlTIAL C_R_'_rzcAa'ioNs.---Not later than .tOdays after a _:xadidate establishes his eligibility under section 9033 to receive payments i__der section 9037, the Comptroller General shall certify to the Secretar! for payment to such candidate under section 9037 payment in full of a_,_:i cunts to which such candidate is entitled under section 903J. (b) P_r.4rla'Y or D:_TrRmrNA,rlo:vs.--lnitial certifications _._ the Comptroller General under subsection (a), an,:l all determinatione _xrde by him under this chapter, are fi_ml and conclusive, except to the _':tent that they are subject to examination and audit by the Comptroller 61t__eral under sect,ion 9038 and judicial review under section 904I. SEC. 9037. PAYMENTS TO ELIGIBLE CANDIDATES. (a) Es_'_as_s_t_ryT or AccomvT.--The Secretary shall ma:_i!ain in the P'residential Election Campaign Fund established by _:_'t_ion 9006 (a) _in addition to any account which he maintains under such s_!_c :i_m, a separate account to be known as the Presixlential Primary MeNtion;rig Payment Account. The Secretary shall deposit into the matching p_ y nent account, for use by the candidate of:any political party who is eliti_'iit: le to recewe payments under section 903& the amount available ajfi',_ the Secretary determines that amounts .for payments under section 9i)( 6(c) and for payments under section 9007(b) (3) are available/or such paym _nts. (b) PAIrMr3r_'S F_o_ _'nr MA:_cH_o P.4Y_r_w' Accorr_rT.--_'ipon receipt oj'a certification from the Comptroller General under ,!i,2,_:t_ion 9036, but not before the beginning of the ma_hing payment perio:i _he Secretary or his delegate shall pr(rraptly transfer the amount cert_i_ii:e ;! by the Comptroller General/rom the matching payment account to th,_ i:andidate. In making such transfers to candi&_tes of the same pc_,i:i_ical arty, the Secretary or his delegate shall seek to achieve an eq_;i_able istribution of .funds available u,_xter subsection (a), and the Sec l'elary or his delegate shall take into account, in seek_ingto achieve an eq_,i:__ble distribution, thc sequence in which such certifications are rece ved. Transfers to candidates of the same political party may not excee( : an amount which is equal to _5 percent of the to_l amount available _: _:,he matching payment account, and transfers to any candi_late maliJ not 742 109 exceed an amount which is equal to 25 percent of the total amount available in the matching pa_Iment account. SEC. $038. EXAMINATIONSAND AUDITS; REPAYMENTS. (a) EXA_r:VATrO_VS.4N_ AuDr_'s.--After each matching payment period, the Comptroller General shall conduct a thorough examiwation and audit of the qualified campaign expenses of every candidate and his authorized committee who received payments under section 9037. (b) RrvAr_rNvs.-(1) If the Comptroller General determines that any portion of the payments made to a candidate from the matching payment account was tn excess of the aggregate amount of payments to which such candidate was entitled under section 903_, he shall notify the candidate, and the candidate shall pay to the Secretary or his delegate an amount equal to the amount of excess payments. (2) If the Comptroller General determines that any amount of any payment made to a candidate from the matching payment account was used for any purpose other than-(A) to defray the qualified campaign expenses with respect to which such payment was made, or .(B) to repay loans the proceeds of which were used, or otherwtse to.restore funds (other than contributions to defray qualified campatgn expenses which were received and expended) which were used, to defray qualified campaign expenses, he .shall notify such candidate of the amount so used, and the candidate shall pay to the Secretary or his delegate an amount equal to such amount. (3) Amounts received by a candidate from the matching payment account may be retained for the liquidation of all obligations to pay qualified campaign expenses incurred for a period not exceeding 6 months after the end of the matching payment period. After all obligations have been liquidated,, that_portion o_f yanunexpended balance remaining in the candtdate's accounts which bears the came ratio to the total unexpended balance as the total amount received from the matching payment account bears to the total of all deposits made into the candidate's accounts shall be promptly repaid to the matching payment account. (c) No_,Irr&_TIo:v.--No notification shall be made by the Comptroller General under subsection (b) with respect to a matching payment period more than 3 years after the end of such period. (d) DrPomv or R_PAY__E_w's.--All payments received by the Secretary or his delegate under subsection (b) shall be deposited by him in the matching payment account. SEC. 9039,REPORTS TO CONGRESS; REGULATIONS. (a) RrPo._Ts.--The Comptroller General shall, as soon as practicable after each matching payment period, submit a full report to the Senate and House of Representatives setting forth(I) the qualified campaign expenses (shown in such detail as the Comptroller General determines necessary) incurred by the candidates of each political party and their authorized committees, (2) the amounts certified by him under section 9036 for payment to each eligible candidate, and 74:3 110 (3) the amount of'payments, ,if anY, required from ean,.Ji ;k_tes un_q' section 9038, and the reason_ for each payment required. Each report submitted pursuant to this section shall be p_.int_ti _, a Senate d_eumentu (b) RrOEL,4TIONS, E_rc_--The ,Comptroller General is author:izod to prescribe rules and regulations in accordance with the provisions _,:fsubsection (c), to conduct examinations and audits (in addition to i?__ examinatioa_s and audits reqttired by section 9038 (a) ), to conduct _:_,i,,estigations, and to require the keeping and submit'sion of any books, r_!'c:.rds, and information, which he determines to be r_,ecessaryto carry ,::,i_ !:his responsibilities under this chapter. (c) REVIEWor RrGtrl;ATIO_rS.--(1) The Comptroller General, before prescribing any i i._,e or regulation under subsection (b), shall i',ransmit a stateme_i_:: _ with respect to such rule or regulation to the Committee on Rui_ and Administration of the Senate and to the Committee on Ho_i_ Administration of the House (_ Represen_gtives, in accordant,? with the provisions of this subsection. Such si!atement shall set fc,t '_,the pro]_,osedrule or regulation a_d shall con,in a detailed explc!i_ _tion anajustiftcation of such rule or regulation. (2) Ifeither such committee does not, through appropriate ':!,_ l',ion, disapprove the proposed rule or regulation set forth in suc); ,taremeat no later than 30 legislative days after receipt of such stai,_: ,_ent, then the Comptroller General may prescribe such rule or reg_:_!_t:ion. The Comptroller General may not prescribe any rule or reg:,,_l_,tion which is disapproved by eithe__such committee under this par_qj'aph. (3) For purposes' of this s_,_bsection,the term "legislative _ _ys" does not include any calendar day on which both Houses of th,._?ongress are not in sesswn. SEC. 9040,,PARTICIPATION BY COMPTROLLE,RGENERAL IN JU]'Iqi:'IAL PROCEEDINGS. (a) Ar_,_A_A;VC__ Cot;Ns_L.--The Comptroller General ,i_autism( re;zed to appear in and defend against any action instituted under this ,_._._!ion, either by attorneys employed in his office or by counsel whom i_,_may appoint without regard to the provisio_r_sof title 5, United State,_ 7ode, governing appointments in the corr[petitive service_ and whose con_2 :nsation he may fix witho_tt regard to the provisions of chapter 51 a_;_l st_bchapter III of chapter 5,3 of such title. (b) Rrcov_r or C_,;_T_zx PAY_E,v_s.--The Comptroller Ge_i:,_',ira_l is authorized, thro,zgh attorneys and co_tnsel described in subsecti,::,_ (ia), to institute actions in the district courts qf the United States to s,?e : recovery of any amourtts determined to be payable to the Secretary _)_his delegate as a result qf an examination and audit made pursuant to ?e:'tion 9038. (c) I_JtrNc_zv_ R_;_'.--The Comptroller General is auth_:,_i,z, ed, through attorneys and counsel described in sttbsection (a), to petit i',:_'_,the courts of the United States for injunctive relief as is appropriate to _'i_plemeat any' provision .of this chapter. (d) zLrP_AZ.--The Comptroller General is authorized on be,ii!,5:!foj the United States to appeal .from, and to petit:ion the Supreme Cc _,;t for certiorari to review, j_tdgments, o_"dec_'ees entered with respect to _:_,( eions in which he appears pursuant to _,heattthority provided in t.his _,_:_ _!_ion. 744 111 SEC. 9041.JUDICIAL REVIEW. (a) Rrwrw or AarNcY Ac_'xoN _Y _nr CO_FTROLLERGENErAL.--Any agency action by the Comptroller General made _nder the provisions of thischapter shall be subject to review by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, Circuit upon petition filed in such court within 30 days after the agency action by the Comptroller General for which review is sought. (b) Rrr_rw PRocrDuRrs.--The provisions of chapter 7 of title 5, United States Code, apply to judicial review of any agency action, as defined in section 551 (13) of title 5, United States Code, by the Comptroller General. SEC. 9042. CRIMINAL PENALTIES. (a) ExcEss C_aMP,4ra:vEx_vr:vsrs.--Any person who violate_ the provisions of section 9035 shall befined not more than $25,000, or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both. Any officer or member of; any political committee who knowingly consents to any expenditure in violation of the provisions of section 9035 shall befined not more than $25,000, or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both. (b) U_ZAWrVZUsE or PArMrN_,S.-(1) It is _tnlawful for any person who receives any payment under section 9037, or to whom any portion of any such payment is transferred, knowingly and willfully to use, or authorize the use of, such payment or such portion for any purp.ose other than(A) to defray qualified campaign expenses, or (B) to repay loans the proceeds of which were used, or otherwise to restorefunds (other than contributions to defray qualified campaign expenses which were received and expended) which were used, to defray qualified zamp.a.ign expenses. (2) Any person who violates the prowswns of paragraph (1) shall befined not more than $10,000, or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both. (c) FAzsr STAtECrafTS, ETc.-(1) It is unlawful for any person knowingly and willfully-(A) to furnish any false, fictitious, or fraudulent evi°!enee, books, or information to the Comptroller General under' this chapter, or to include in any evidence, books, or information so furnished any misrepresentation of a material .fact, or to falsify or conceal any evidence, books, or information relevant to a certification by the Comptroller General or an examination and audit by the Comptroller General under this chapter, or (B) to fail tofurnish to the Comptroller General any records, books, or information requested by him for purposes o3: this chapter. (2) Any person who violates the provisions of paragraph (1) shall befined not more than $10,000, or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both. (d) KICKBACKS AND ILLEGAL PAYMENTS.(1) It is unlawful for any person knowingly and willfully to give or accept any kickback or any illegal payment in connection with any qualified campaign expense of a candidate, or his authorized committee, who receives ;payments under section 9037. (2) Any person who violates the provisions of paragraph (1) shall 745 1.12 beJir_ednot more thaw $10,000, or {mprisoned not more tha_ 5 _e _rs, or both. (8) In addition to the penalty provided by paragraph (2), my erso_who accepts any kickbowk or illegal payment in connec:ion th any qualified campaign expense of a ea;ndidate or his auth,z_,r',,,,ed committee shall pay to the Secretary for deposit in the ma!!cling payment account, an amount equal to 125 percent of the kic'.:t_:_k or pa_nent receive& COMMUNICATIONS TITLE III--PaovIsro_rs ACT OF 1934 RELATII',rGTO RADIO FACrLtTIES FOR CArqDrDATESFOR PUBLXCOFFICr Src. 315. (a) If any licensee shall permit any person who is a h_l_?Ll]iy qualified candidate for any public office to use a broadcasting stl:_._!on, he shall afford equal opportunities to all other such candidatE?;:_;_for at officE, in the use of such broadcasting station: Provided, T::tat such licensee shall have no power of censorship over the ma_:.e:ial broadcast under the provisions of this section. No obligati::_,r is imposed under this subsection upon any licensee to allow the lis, of its station, by any such candidate. Appearance by a legally qu_,!liled candidate on any(l) bona fide newscast, (2) bona fide news interview, (3) bona fide news docmnentary (if the appearance o:! !:,he candidate is incidental to the presentation of the subject ors :d_jects ,covered by the news documentary): or (4) on-the-spot coverage of bona fide news events (incl,:id irLg but not limited to political conventions and activities incid [!,lt:_l therelLo), shall not be deemed to be use of a broadcasting station withi?[ the meaning of this subsection. Nothing in the foregoing sentence s'_m,ll be construed as relieving broadcasters, in connection with the pres_!:i ration of newscasts, news !interviews, news d6cumentaries, and or[.4 hespot coverage of news events, from the obligation imposed upon i:i_em under this chapter to operate in the public interest and to afford ] easonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views on i.!__acs of public importance. (b) The charges made for the use of any broadcasting s_ation by any person who is a legally qualified candidate for any public offi.c, _in connection with his campaign for nomination for election, or elec:J mL to such ot]_ce shall not exceed(l) during the forty-five days preceding the date of a prim _ry r primary runoff election and during the sixty days precedinl;_ l_he ate of a general or special election in which such person is a',_ m- 746 113 didate, the lowest unit charge of the station for the same class and amount of time for the same period; and (2) at any other time, the charges made for comparable use of such station by other users thereof. Itc) No station licensee may make any charge for the use of such station or on of any legally qualified candidate Fed_.ral" elective by (;ffice (or behalf for nomination to sucJh office) unless such?r candidate (or a person specifically authorized by such candidate in writing to do so) certifies to such licensee in writing tlhat the payment of such charge will not violate any limitation specified in paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 104(a) of the Campaign Communications Reform Act, whichever paragraph is applicable. [(d) If a State by law and expressly-[(1) has provided that a primary or other election for any office of such State or of a political subdivision thereof is subject to this subsection, [(2) has specified a limitation upon total expenditures for the use of broadcasting stations on behalf of the candidacy of each legally qualified candidate in such election, [(3) has provided in any such law an unequivocal expression of intent to be bound by the provisions of this subsection, anti [(4) has stipulated that the amount of such limitation shall not exceed the amount which would be determined for such election under section 104(al(il(B) or 104(a)(2) (B) (whichever is applicable) of the Campaign Communications Reform Act had such election been an election for a Federal elective office or nomination thereto; then no station licensee may make any charge for the use of such station by or on behalf of any legally qualified candidate in such election unless such candidate (or a person specifically authorized by '_uch candidate in writing to do so) Certifies; to such licensee in writing that the payment of such charge will not violate such State limitation. [(e) Whoever willfully and knowingly violates the provisions of subsection (c) or (d) of this section shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $5,000 or imprisonment for a period not to exceed five years, or both. The provisions of sections 501 through 503 of this Act shall not apply to violations of either such sub,_ection. [(f) (1) For the purposes of this section: [(A) The term "broadcasting station" includes a community antenna television system. [(B) The terms "licensee" and "station licensee" when used with respect to a community antenna television system, means the operator of such system. ItC) The term "Federal elective office" means the office of President of the United States, or of Senator or Representative in, or Resident Commissioner or Delegate to, the Congress of the United States. [(2) For purposes of subsections (c) and (d), the term "legally qualified candidate" means any person who (Al meets the quah'fications prescribed by the applicable laws to hold the oi_ice for which he 747 114 is a candidate and (B) is eligible under applicable State law :c be voted for by the electorate directly or by means of delegH,t:_s or electors.] (c) For purposes of this section-(I) the term "broadcasting station J' includes a cov_._as_i_y antenna television system; and (2) the terms "licensee" and "station licensee" when us,zd with respect to a community antenna television system, mean _'.hec i?,rator of such system. [gl (id) The Commission shall prescribe appropriate rul,!:_i;and regulations to carry out the provisions of 1;his section. 748 MINORITY VIEWS The House Administration Committee has labored at length to re-. form th e present system of campaign financing. Committee members worked hard to pass a bill that would answer what some consider to be a public clamor for election reform. While the Committee bill probably is too late to apply to the 1974 elections, it should provide a basis roi' reform in the 1.976 and fu'ture elections. A bill could have been passed in time to be effective for the 1974 elections; the Committee can be justifiably criticized for :_aillng to expeditiously bring a bill to the floor by commencing mark up sessions too late. rosrrrw: rr_Tuaes While the Committee bill does have loopholes and a few glaring defects, it accomplishes some good. The bill limits contributions to $1,000 per person and $5,000 for broad-based political committees. Individuals can contribute no more than $25,000 to all candidates and committees in a calendar year. This provision may be the most significant reform in the Committee bill. Contribution limitations should restore public confidence by eliminating or reducing public suspicion that candidates are b_ing "bought" or influenced by large campaign contributions. While tlhese limitations may pose constitutlonal questions and could be difficult to enforce, they would prevent any individual or group from having a disproportionate impact on any campaign and would encourage .candidates to raise more small contributions. The Committee bill wisely prohibits the laundering and secretive earmarking of funds. Unlike the 1972 campaign, in future years the original source of all earmarked funds will have to 1_' disclosed. Full disclosure of all earmarking will make it much easier to enforce contribution limitations. Limits are placed on the amount of expenditures a candidate may make: $10 million for nomination for President, $'20 million in a general election for President, 5¢ times the population of the geographical area or $75,000 for the Senate (whichever is greater) and $75,000 for House races. A cost of living escalator clause is included so that these limitations will not become outdated. In order to alleviate the constitutional problems posed by spending limitations, the Committee bill allows independent expenditures by individuals and political committees of up to $1,000. Under the 1971 Act, expend._tures of this type of over $100 have to be disclosed. While Minority members disagree as to what level spending limits should be set there is basic agreement that some sort of limit must be set, to rectify some of the abuses that became apparent in the 1979. campaign. (llS) 7,49 116 Several other impo_ant changes were made in the criminal code section: contributions by foreign nationals are prohibited, me:_!_ry penalties; are increaSed, cash contributions over $100 are banne_, _Jontributions made in the name of another are_ prohibited, honorar:[ums in excel,, of $1,000 per engagement or $10,000 per year are proh:[[_[ted. The Committee bill requires al! candidates to designate a prha,:.ipa! or central campaign committee, the reports of all other ¢;ommii_t.ees supporting that candidate must be filed with the principal comm[ _,tee, which in turn compiles these reports and sends them to the apprep:iate supervisory officer. All expenditures made on behalf of a'can,!_i iiate must be made through the principal campaigll committee. A principal campaign committee would increase accountabi]!it _,; a series of local committees all financially accountable to a centr_idzed_ single committee focus_ responsibility by having a single pc:irt of control. Reporting procedures would be simplified. A bill requires reports to be filed 10 days before the election, ii_fi_y days after the election, on January 31, quarterly in an electior _ear, and quarterly in a non-election year if contributions or expendit ares of $1,000 or more are made. By reducing the number of reporls, the Committee bill should help reduce the burden on candidates, _hile actually furthering the goals of disclosure. The large number ,:)_:reports that are presently filed make it most difficult for public ii_t_rest groups, the press and other monitoring agencies to fully inform the public of the sources of funds. The sheer volume of reports imp_:_des the goal of full disclosure. With fewer, more timely report!:_, the public should actually know more about candidates' sources of :t!U!:Lds. In addition, the Committee bill, by requiring the supervisory cl_qcers to publish a list of those who did file and those who did not file, si_ uld help foster compliance with the law. By preempting state law, the Committee bill will alleviate (a:_didates from the requirements that they comply with several s,?t:_ of rules and regulations. This provision should streamline electio:iI_law and assure greater compliance with federal law. The bill opens the political process by allowing state and l,,cal employees to participate in political campaigns. Greater citizer l,articipation in the political process will be encouraged. The Committee bill repeals the media lim:itations in the 197] l_w, thereby allowing the candidate to decide how he will apportic:_ Ms funds wit]Mn the overall spending limitations. DEFICIEI_'OIES The bill has several important Parties shortcomings: Instead of strengthening the role of the parties in the po]:it:c]fi process, the Committee [)ill, by treating political' parties the same _Ls all other political committees, would significantly weaken and c(mr :ribute to the demise of the two party system. Section 101 (b) (2) of the bill pi[aces a limitation of $5,000 ol:iLi:he contributions of political committees to candidates for Federal ,::.fice. 750 117 The definition of political committee clearly encompasses the national and state committees of the major parties, thus limiting them to $5,000 in contributions. It would also apply to both direct cash transfers and services provided to or for the benefit of candidates, many of which are presently performed without the candidates' full knowledge. The minority strongly believes that; the national and state com:rrfitte_s of the major parties should be excluded from the definition of political committee for the purposes of contribution limitation. The national and state committees have been traditionally the policy raaklng bodies of the major parties and are cornerstones of our political system. The definition in the bill presently treats these important committees equally with alt other committees, even small sp_mial interest committees. The national and state committees must be permitted the ability to assist candidates as the need arises so that a strong and dynamic party system ca n be maintained. The governments of many counVries throughout the world are going through a period of extreme instability. The'United States can best avoid this phenomenon by furtlhering the development of a strong party system. If major parties are weakened or destroyed by a series of legislative shackels placed on them in the name of reform, our constitutional form of government will be seriously lmdermined. In their haste to reform the funding of political campaigns, the Committee has severely limited the function of the. parties. Ii! the national and state committees have no control over their candidates, there will be little, if any, reason for candidates to adhere to the policy decisions of the party and the inevitable splintering olf the two-party system will have begum. T0 prevent this from occurring, national and state parties must be exempted from the same limitations on contributions by political corrlmittees. Financin_t o/6_onventions The Minority is also opposed to the public financing: of political conventions. Conventions are uniquely a party function and as such should not be supported by thi, overburdened public treasury. Nor should the party be entangled in the bureaucrktic regulatory w_ob which is envisioned by the present language of the bill. The party must have the ability to determine the size and form of its convention; this can only be accomplished if the party retains control of its purse strings. Furthermore, the vitality of the party is enhanced by the participatxo' n of its mem[_rs, while public financing of conventions will undercut individual initiative and participation. The ever increasing encroachment of the federal bureaucracy into the private lives of our citizens is taking another large step with the enactment of convention financing. 'The two party system, free from bureaucratic tampering, has been a fourth branch in our constitutional form of government and will only remain a strong force if it is kept in the hands of the people. Administration a_t Enforcement Administration and enforcement of election law should be independent and avoid the alypearunce of conflict of' interest. Any agency 75 1.18 charge, d with responsibility of election law should not raise ]::,_:olie sUspmions about the fairness and effex_iveness of enforcement. I:"ui_lic confidence in public officials should not be further lowered l:,y em administration-enforcement system that fosters public cynicism, '[qm Commith_ bill is not :fully adequate, in this regard. Hopefu[}_ ,, a better mechanism (such as an independent Federal Elections C_:mamission) can be found_ either by amendment on the floor or i:i::the conference with the Senate. Special I_terest Groups By placing a $5,000 limitation on how much special interest corot :alttees can give to candidates, the Committee bill took an import_nl:: st:ep towards, reducing the influence tlhat special interests gain %hrm._g'h political contributions. More importantly, this limitation will hi,Jp reduce public suspicions that public officials are "bought" by the ila:'_;e political c,ontributions of special interest groups. Howew_.r, the Committee bill did m)t go nearly far enough. Cl_!_'a'ly, the Congress must end tlhe suspicion created among the public by :,he special interest contribution. The Minority has prepared and plms to offer five amendments on the floor that would eliminate or d!_'a:_tirally curtail the ability of special _nterest groups to make contribn 5 )ns to federal c_ndidates. 1. Ideally, it would probably be best to prohibit all contribu:d, ms by special interest groups. In committee, Rep. Harold FroeM ch offered an amendment to outlaw contributions by other than ind:iv iduals and political party organizations. In offering this amendmeI_% he astutely noted: If campaign contributions have ever been used for leverage in the political system, then surely the political action funds of special interest groups top the list for influencing political officials. If we are truly to reform the po]!kical system, then special interest campaign money should be outlawed. This amendment w_s defeated by 15-7 on an ahnost straight 1;,I:_:'1_:¢ vote, with Republicans supporting it and Democrats opposed. 2. Since: it can be argued that a band on giving by political ,:20 _:nmittees is unconstitutional, the Minority' strongqy favors anc4:l:er approach which would drastically curtail the capabilities of sp,cial interests to gain influence through campaigqa contributimls. ']iTq_:is amendment, authored by Rep. Clarence Brown of Ohio, would ?t ohibit the pooling of funds by any groups and requi, re all eontI4butic, as to be identified as to the original donon SpeciM interest groups wort Id only be allowed to act as the agents of individual contributors, the_t'e 9, reducing considerably special interest influence gained via polil!i(al contributions. This amendment, as offered by Rep. Caldwell Bui:l,_r, was also defeated in the Commit_e on a vote of 14:to 12 on an ahn(:st straight party vote. 3. The Committee bill allows special interest groups to give uli;:kc, $5,000 per election. This limit is too high: Special interest gr(,ai)s should not be allowed to contribute five times as much as individ!:t.a :s_ 752 119 A moi-e appropriate limitation would be $2,500, $3,000 or even perhaps $1,000. The Minority will support efforts to lower this limit. 4. A fourth amendment that the Minority plans to offer is one tlmt would prohibit contributions "in-kind" and require that coatributions be made in cash or its equivalent. Presently, special interest' groups..,, are o/ten able to get undue influence through providing "in-kind' services and goods such as cars, planes, storefronts, food, invaluable personal services, etc. Not only did the Committee bill fail to deal effectively with such abuses, it opened loopholes, in tl_ form of exceptions to the definition of contribution and expenditure, that wouhi exempt many of these activities from both the limitations and disclosure! Instead of curbing such abuses, the Committee bill would, encourage them. Special interests would be especially well-equipped to use these loopholes to the hilt. 5. In the past, special interest groups have avoided full diselosu:re or the gift tax by proliferating the number of their political commit,teas. This same activity could be used to circumvent contribution limitations. Several special interest groups have already 'set up ten, fifteen or twenty Political committees to channel funds to candidates in an,ticipation of the passage of low contribution limitations. While the Cormnittee report does contain language prohibiting this activity and it :is obviously the intent of the bill to prohibit such activity, the Min,]rity feels that an amendment banning the proliferation of political committees to circumvent the limitation is in order to ensure that the courts and administrators of the law have absolutely no latitude in interpreting the law. In committee, when the opportunity for severely limiting or elfininating special interest money was presented, Republicans generally supported it, but Democrats were opposed. Democrats claim that special interest groups would severely limit the effectiveness of labor unions and liberal groups. But these amendments also apply in the same fashion to business, farm, conservative and corporate groups as well. The Minority intends to offer these amendments on the floor ,_) that the American public will know how each Member and each ])arty stands on the issue of special interest money. The public has a ri_ht to know who is more dependent on special interest contributions. Minority Role The Committee bill would }rave been far superior if the minority had been given a gre_ter role in shaping the Committee's final product. Unfortunately, the Committee was run in a highly partisan fashion, to Vhe detriment of both the bill and the general public. Out of the over 100 amendments offered in committee, about 60 were offered by the majority and slightly over 40 by the minority (about 30 of these were substantive). Only a couple of the Minority's amendments were accepted, while over a couple of dozen Majority amendments were ar__ptod. In particular, towards the end of 'the mark-up sessions, some r_dnority amendments were rejected _lmost out of hand. As a result, severM important amendments were rejected. For example, Rep. Caldwell Butler offered an amendment to close a major loophole in the contribu- 753 1,20 tion limitation section, but was defeated on an almost straight ?_;y vote. This amendment would imve required that the endorser or guarantor of a bank loan count the loan as a contribution for the iur ~ poses of disclosure and the limitation. Under the Committee bill, wealthy individuals and special in_ere_ groups could guarantee lc;:ms worth thousands or tans of thousands of dollars without being mibi,_at to the contribution limil_tion. If the loans are defaulted_ they wo:ald be in violation of t_he law no m_tter what they did. Further, the c_l_didate would feel a strong obligation to the wealthy individual or sl:.e_:fial interest group. Hopefully, when the bill comes to the floor, this ar:re ::Mmerit and other important ttmt were so, abruptly treatedado_?t i_:_:he committee will receive more ones thoughtful consid, eration. Their ion will make the bill a much stronger one. Dirty Trieks In committee, Rep. Bill Frenze]k offered ar. amendment to pr¢,h!ibit certain types of "dirty tricks", but unfortunately, the committee 4:,h0_ not to adopt it. The main argument against the amendment was tlmt hearings had not been held to determine the best manner in whi& to deal with the problem. However, the abuses of Watergate h:!:ve received ample attention in both the press and congressional hear k,_. On the floor, the minority plans tx) offer amendments patterned M,Le.r the recommendagions of the Senate Watergate Committee to pro)hi bit "dirty tricks". These recommendations are the product of months ,of public hearings and considerable deliberation and debate and s_ t)_Lld be promptly accepted by the House. Citizen Participation A final concern of the Minority is that the sh_r length and _:',o:nplexity of this bill will discourage citizen participation and inv:::_l_emerit perhaps even driving many people right out of politics. Many people, when confronted with the camplexity of this leg)is ation, may become overwhelmed and give up roli¢icsin disgtmt. _'h.!_:t_e will be ample potential for unintentional violations of the law. lYfaay people may worry about going to jail or being fined for an ina,dve:_'_:nt {dolation. Many well-qualified individuals regulations may view theasburdensome reporbi:ag requirements and complicated an insurmoum_;:_l,s obstacle and choose not to run. In addition to understanding lhe lengthy complicated disclosure forms, candidates may have to fa,rr_i!iarize themselves with hundreds of pages of regulations proraulgxt_A to insure fair administration and enforcement of the limitations. I'tm complexity of this law may limit candidacies only to lawyers crm those who can afford to pay lawyers for their' time. Spontaneous, grassroots action and people who are political no';'i, :_s or independent of regular political channels should not be diseour_,_,_d. The loss of such activities and candidacies would be a major blo',;_ ll×_ our political process. 754 121 The Minority urges the administrators and enforcers of the law to take every action possible to simplify reporting procedures anq to make regulations easy to understand and intelligible to those not well versed in the law. In addition, services should be, provided to candidates who do not understand the }aw or who are unable _o understand the legal jargon used in the law and regulations so that they will not 1_ found in violation of the law. It would be ironic indeed, if, in the name of reforming our pm_nt system of campaign financing, we fail to drive out the special inteIv_t_, and only succeed in driving honest, concerned citizens from participation in tho political process. BmL Fm_ZEL. CHAradES I_. WIOOINS. JAMES F. HASTINGS. HAROLD V. FROEHLIOH. M. CALDWELL BUTLER. 75:5 SEPARATE VIEWS OF CONGRESSMEN DEVINE DICKINSON AND The undersigned recognize that honest elections are essential to the survival of our form of Government and that there is a constant and ongoing need for legislation in this _eld. However, this legislat]ion, to be effective must be fair and workable. It is with this last thought in mind that the undersigned oppose this bill. The undersigned regard the following aspects of the bill as partiicularly unrealistic for the reasons given: 1. Fi_ng of Presidential P_z_s.--The provisions for public financing of Presidential Primaries will inject the Federal Treasury into what many times amounts to a popularity contest under a formula that will probably work unfairly to the candidates involved. The prospect of a F_deral subsidy to run for office may very well result in a proliferation of candidates. Access to such subsidies would" b_ an incentive to everyone with a desire for publicity to become a candidate; primaries miry then become an anarchic jungle with policy issues largely obscured. The subsidy might also be a temptation fro. those who anticipate fin:_ncial gain from running for office. The use of private money we are told has weakened public confidence in the democratic process. But is this confidence likely to be restored when tax payers pay for campaigns they regard as frivolous, wastEfful and in some cases, abhorrent? Finally, we are told that subsidies will reduce the pressures candi- I dates for dependence on large campaign contributions fromonprivate sources. Where indeed will our democratic process be when the candidates' principal constituent is the Federal Establishment. 2. Fizzling/of Go_entio_s.---The undersigned oppose the p?lic financing of political conventions. Conventions are mfiquely a p_Lrty function and as such slhould not be supported by the overburdened public treasury. Nor should the party be entangled in tbe bureaucratic regulatory web which is envisioned by the present language of the ]bill. The Party must have the ability to determine the size and form of its convention; this can on]!y be accomplished if the party retains control of its purse strings. Furthermore, the vitality of the party is enhanced by the participation of :[ts members, while public financing of conventions will undercut individual initiative and participation. The ever increasing encroachment· of the federal bureaucracy ]into the private lives of our citizens is taking another large step with the enactment of convention financing. The two party system, free from bureaucratic tampering? has been a fourth branch in our constitutional form of government and will only remain a strong force if it is kept in the hands of the people. (123) 755' 124 3. Poli_ical Parties.--Instead of strengthe:aing the role of poZ:itca1 parties in the political process, the Committee ]bill.,by treating poi iitcal parties tile same as all other political committees, would sigmfic_.:ltly weaken and contribute to the demise c<_the two party systern. Section 101(b)(2) of the bill places a limitation of $5,000 c,L the contributions_of political committees:to candidates for Federal :Jiice. The definition of political committee clearly encompasses4he nat:i_ hal and state committees of the major parties, thus limiting them to $5 )00 in contributions. It would also apply to both dir_zt cash transfer !; md services provided to or for the tanefit of candidates, many of _;qk:h presently performed without the candidates _ :full knowledge. The undersigned strongly believe that the natiofial and state c, _n2mittees of the major parties should be excluded from the definit] _:_ t of political[ committee for the purpose of contribution limitations '['he national and state conunittees have been tradi?onally the policy l_r_Lklng bodies of the major partieo and are corn,_rstones of our poliit .aal system. The definition in the bill presently treats these impcr_m_t committees equally with all other committees, even small specitd interest committees. The national and state committees must be ],ermitted the ability to assist candidates as the n4_edarises so that a sl;L _ mg and dynamic party system can be maintMned. The governments of many count,ries throughout the world are ,!l:clng through a period of extreme in,ability. The United States em i_est avoid this;, phenomenon by furthering the deve]topment of a sl::c',,rtg party s_stem. shackles If major pla(_ed partiesonare weakened or _iestroyed a i!_:'ies of legislative them in the :aame of reform,by om (mastitutioned form of government will be seriou,dy undermined. In their haste to reform the funding of political campaigrr!:_ the Committee has severely limited the function of the parties. If t_,t, national and state committees have no control over their candi,:[si:es, there will be little, if any, reason for candidates to adhere to l:;'he policy decisions .°f the party and the inevitable splintering of Vhe _:,7oparty system wfil haw; begun, ro prevent this from occurrint:: national and state parties must be exempted from the same limitaticr_: ¢,n contributions by political commitlLees. 4. Uitizens participation._A final concern of the undersigr_( is that the sheer length and complexity of this bill will discourage cii5_,;en participation and involvement perhaps even driving many p_i!_iOle right out of politics. :' Many people, when confronted witlh the eomtfiexity of this :_;islation, may become overwhelmed arLd give up politics in dk_g :Jst. There will be ample potential for unintentional violations of th¢_ 1_,w. Many people may worry about to jail unless or being :For_i_ ion :hxadvertent violation. Indeed, it isgoing inevitable the fined administr,:l and enforcement is done with tolerance and understanding of the ._.maplexities and problems involved. Many well-qualified individuals may view the burdensome repc _:ting requirements and complicated regulations as an insurmountab] '_,obstacle and choose not to run. In addition to understanding the lc', _;:by complicated disclosure forms, candidates may have to famil::';:'ize themselw;s with hundreds of pages o2 regulations promulgated ;,_ insure fair administration and enforcement of the limitations. 758 125 Spontaneous, grassroots action and people who are political noviices or independent of regular political channels should not be discouraged. The loss of such activities and candidacies would be a major blow to our political process. The'undersigned urge the administrators and enforcers of the ][aw to take every, action possible to simlplify.reportin..gp_ rocedures and to make regnlatlons easy to understand and mtelhglble to those not well versed in the law. In addition, services'_ should be provided to candidates who do not understand the ]aw or who are unable to understand the legal jargon used in the law and regulations so that they will not be found in violation of the law. It would be ironic indeed if, in the name of reforming our present system of campaign financing, we fail to drive out the special interests and only succeed m driving honest, concerned citizens from participation in the political process. W_. L. DXCK_NSON. SAMUEL L. DEVINE. 759 SEPARATE VIEWS OF PHILIP M. CRANE The campaign Reform Bill represents several months of hard work by members of the House Administration Committee and I believe it does correct several deficiencies in our election laws. On bMance, however_ I believe the bill as reported has a number of grave faults which is why I opposed it in Committee. First of all, although the members wisely defeated suggestions for public financing of Congressional races, the bill does open the door to the concept of public financing by making it possible (if funds are available after presidential elections are financed) for candidates in presidential prinmries to obtain public funds for their campaigns on a matching basis. Let me briefly summarize why I believe public financing is undesirable. If election campaigns are financed wholly or in large part from Washington, this will greatly increase the potential power of the federal government. Public financing would also tend to decrease popular participation in campaigns. People would say "The government is paying for it with my tax money anyway, why should I contribute twice_." There would also be an increase m candidates with very little popular support who would be encouraged to run in order to obtain federal financing. The cost to the taxpayer will not be negligible. If Congressional candidates are eventually :funded by the public (as several amendments urge) the taxpayers could be presented with an eventual bill in the area of $100 million per election. There are also very serious constitutional questions. Taxpayer subsidy of political campaigns would be a form of compulsory political activity which limits the freedom of those who would prefer to refrain as well as those who chose to participate. If a citizen is forced to contribute to a political party whose views he may be indifferent to or opposed to, it may fairly be said that his freedom of conscience is being restricted. When this forced payment is combined with ]imitations on the amount he may contribute to those candidates he does believe in, freedom of expression is dra_,,_ticallycurtaile& Most of those who now support subsidies for pOlitic,fi parties would unequivocally condemn religious _;_roups,which clearly be issue-unconstitutional. subsidies It is a to very real question whether would the underlying freedom of conscience and belief---is not, however, the same. Wtmt would happen if a religious-oriented party were formed, such as the Christian Democrats in many western nations._ If this is thought unlikely, we only have to ask what would happen if the Democratic Party. of Virginia, for instance, were to endorse the Sunday closing laws m that commonwealth, while the Republican Party were to decide to campaign against them. (127) 761 128 In reality there is simp}y no effective way that campaign cO_::Lt_:'ibutions can be limited withcmt reducing freedom of speech and, in :h_ct, without introducing a police state. OUr efforts should be dire_:'t,_d to. full and complete di_'Aosure of all contributions so that the voters will be able to judge for themselves if their representative is r,_:_presenting the majority of the people or some particular interest _,hich gave a large sum to his campaign. To maintain otherwise is to fly in the face of reality and to d:e_'eive our constituents. For instance, m a congressional election, you may have Candidate Alpha who favors a Right-to-Work Law' an,:[ :J:_ndidate Beta who supports National Health Insurance. It is inevii:able (and a necessary and healthy part of our democracy) that COt:_'_:;and other trade union organizations are going to publicize their vie w tlhat the Right-to-Work laws are undesirable, and they will do thli_ with pam. phlets, advertisements in the media ,md by door:to-doc, r canvasslng. The American Medical Association will doubtless e:,::e_rcise its constitutional right; to explain to vote_; why it believes N_,tional Health Insurance should not be enacted. Any realistic accounting of campaign funds would have to cx:_ni;ider the manpower and money devoted by COPE to Right-to:Work taws in that district as expenditures assisting the campaign efforts c f Candidate Beta. Similarly, there is no doubt that the expressed o]:i]::dons and paid advertisements of the AMA would aid in the camp_d_!:n of Candidate Alpha. The limitations on spending irt the present bill in so far as tL el.' :_re enforceable will merely increase the advantage of incumbents Since 1954, less than 10% of all Members of the E[ouse who have run for reelection ihave been defeated. The only way a private citizen r_lr ning for Congress can equalize the advantage in voter recognition re:id free publicity held by the sitting Member is by :spending money to _[iret. his message across to the people. If he is limited to spending only a_i_:mch as the incumbent his chances of defeating a well-known and entr _n_hed Congressman are greatly reduced.. This bill, as reported, is permeated with loopholes--I 'will _ry to point outt just a few of the most; outstanding. The campaigql sp, ,n,!ling limit (even grantin_ that it can be realistically enforced) all(;tws;up to 25% of the spending limit tx) be spent on the solicitation of finds without being counted toward that limit. That is, candidates, in rigidity, will be allowed to spend their limit plus 95%. The raost glaring loopholes_ however, are in the so-called ii:b:fitations on labor union and corporate campaign spending. Althouiir]L the present law states that "anything of value" contributed by a u:aion or corporation must be reported, this law has rarely been en:io?ced. If our aim is to have full disclosure of campaign contributior!_ then we will be derelict in our duty :it!we overlook the fact that "in kind" contributions from unions in presidential campaigns run as h:i_:h as $100 million a year. This represents the :salaries of union c:[fi::'ials delegated to work in campaigns, the costs of printing, t_!el:[__,::mes, motel rooms, automobiles, office space, etc. This is a "loophole"' viide enough to drive not a truck but a heavily loaded train throug::_ 762 129 A recent book by attorney [Douglas Caddy, The Hundred Millior_ Dollar Payoff, documents these facts rigorously. I understand in fact that this book together with increasing complaints from all over the country has impelled the Justice Department _o step up an investigation of union violations of the campaign laws. The thrust of Caddy's charges is directed at the real nmscle behind labor's political influence-its in-kind contributions to candidates, i.e., mailings, voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, printing, computerized lists, equipment, and a host of other services often provided under the guise of "political education" for its members. But the facts, as they are scrupulously outlined in this book, indicate that tens of millions of dollars in such union campaign services reach far beyond labor union membership and thus are in :flagrant violation of the 1971 Federal Election Campaign Act. Surely this cannot be called a "Camp'dgn Reform Bill" if it studiously avoids the single greatest loophole in our present campaign law. This bill would have a far greater claim to fairness if it were amended to insure that union dues (which workers in most instances nmst pay to keep their jobs) could not be used for political purposes any more than corporate funds can be legally used for political activities now. It is a well-known fact that union officials (whose salaries are paid with union dues) often devote a considerable .part of their time in union offices campaigning. Although the campaign contributions which are voluntarily collected from union members are maintained in segregated funds (such as COPE) the overhead expenses of collecting these contributions are often paid for by urdon dues; tlhese are so-called "in-kind" contributions. I intend to offer amendments on the floor which would ban the use of corporate funds or union dues for political purposes, including' allegedly "non-partisan" registration drives. Since many union members do not approve of the candidates their involuntarily collected dues. are supporting, it is grossly unjust to these citizens to coerce them into funding points of view with which they themselves disagree. I would also hope that our colleagues will give support to the amendment of my colleague from (except Wisconsin which would ban political committees agents(Mr. of Froehlich) political parties) from collecting funds without, having the donor designate to which candidates these funds are to be directed. Citizen participation in politics will be heightened if people give funds to individual candi dates whose views reflect their own rather than to committees who are free to disburse these funds at their own discretion rather than the donor's. Although well-intentioned, I regret to say that this bill if adopted in its present form will have a detrimental effect on our political life. It is simply too complicated and too involved to be readily understood by citizens not trained in the complexities of election law. An 80-page bill[ like this will provide the means for entrenched political machines (who can afford to employ dozens of specialist lawyers) to eliminate their ballot if they unwittingly violate obscure challengers provision offrom this the complicated legislation. Rath_.r than some encour- 763 130 aging more citizen participation this 'bill is bound to discourag,_ _Lcnprofessionals from entering politics. The thc:eat of a huge fine .,r jail sentence for committing an innocent violal;ion is almost eert::i:_ to deter at least a sizeable number of qualified rrten and women, espe:r:'i:dly the young and inexperienced, from entering; the political arena. )ur aim should be to get more people involved in politics not fewer. , Unless we pass a law to repeal Original Sin within the bound,Lries of the United States we will Mways have some corruption in pc tidcs. This will be true whether we have total public or total priv::Lt: financing of campaigns. We will eliminate corruption by encour q. ing public-spirited citizens to run for office no_ by driving them a;vay with threats of jail sentences and 80-page campaign laws. The fundamental reason why there are pesple who wish to c(:N upt our political processes is because government has so much powm i:t so many areas. If government influence were to be reduced, if the nmnbet' of privileges governnmnt has in its power to bestow were _;_ be reduced, there would be far less incentive for the unscrupulous :.ouse big government for their own advantage. The most useful ste!'_s we can take toward restoring a sense of honor and decency to om' ]_._:blie life would be to begin to lessen the tremendous power goven tn tent holds over our lives. I shou][d like to conclude this staten_ent with what I believe is _, cry appropriate comment made in a recent graduation address I:ii_ the Chancellor of the University of Rochester, 'IV. Allen Wallis: "It is a striking paradox that the more people distrust t.he g(¥ _rnment, the more powers and responsibilities they hea l) upon it, t_::my of the new powers being designed to counterbalance other power!; ihat the government already has .... The appropriate remedy for excessive governmental power!:, for abuses of governmental powers, for ruthlessness and corrupti::}_ in gaining control of governmental powers is not t.o create new gc,.,_rnmental powers but to dismantle those that now exist." Pmuir M. C_2 _:::. 764 SUPPLEMENTAL VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVE BILL FRENZEL Since March 26, the House Administration Committee has met twenty times to consider 95 amendments to the Committee's original bill. While the Committee's bill and its tardiness in beginning work on it are subject to strong and legitimate criticism_ the committee process, once mark-up was started, was full and open. Since the Committee report analyzes the bill in the order that each section appears, these remarks cover the seven major subject areas ill the following sequence: 1. administration and enforcement_ 2. disclosu,'e, 3. contribution limitations, 4. expenditure limitations, 5. other criminal code amendments, 6. public financing, 7. miscellaneous. ADkY_INISTRATION AND ]_NFORCEMENT In the aftermath of Watergate, the establishment of an effective administration and enforcement mechanism has been widely acclaimed by groups as diverse as the Nixon Administration, the Republican National Committee, the Senate Watergate Committee., the New York Times. and the Washington Post as the single most important change needed in existing election law. Yet, despite this widespread c_)nsensus that administration and enforcement of election law should be stronger and more independent, the I-Iouse Administration Committee bill actually weakens the current system because of three major provisions that might make administration and enforcement less effective and independent. 1. It places fora' appointees of Congress and three employees of Congress in charge of the administration and enforcement of electign law. The Committee bill also requires and forces tiffs seven member board to conduct much of its business in secrecy. 2. It grants these seven people the power to interpret the l_w and grant presumed immunity from prosecution by issuing advisory opinions. 3. It gives two committees of Congress veto power over the rules and regulations promulgated tx) administer and implement campanili finance legislation, thereby giving these two committees the power t_o control all regulations drawn under this law. Clearly, the Con_; has a strangle-hold on enforcement and supervision of its own elections. Not only is the fox in charge of the chicken coot) , he is living in the faima house and managing the f_rm. Board of Supervisor?/ O]_cers Section 207 of the Committee bill establishes a seven member Bogrd of Supervisory Officers composed of the Secretary of the Senate, Clerk of the House, Comptroller General, and one appointee each by the minority and majority palsies in both the Senate and the House. The (131) 765 1:82 four appointees are not subject to either executive review or cmLgcessional confirmation. Thirty percent of the staff is supposed to be c_m_posed of pm_ons recommended by the minority. The Board supet'v ]ses the administration of, seeks to obtain voluntary compliance with, md formulates overall policy with respect to the Federal Election :i_;L.mpaign Act of 1971 and certain provisions of the crinfinal code rel;_tting to elections. The Board reviews rules and regulations and renders advisory ::q,i3zions. It has the power to conduct investigations and hearin_ _tnd subpoena witnesses. Interested parties m_y file complaints wit:_ the Board. The Board may refer the violation to the ,_pproprigtt_. aw enforcement authorities or the Attorney General. After such reI+I ml_ the Attorney Gene,'al must state within 60 days what action 1-_!_ has taken; and respond every thirty days thereafmr until final disposk on. However, the creation of the Board fails to confront many cf 1Sm basic problems inherent in the present administration and enforc,;_n ent mechanism. Instead of eliminating the present conflict of ini;ei:'est situation, the Board maintains it. Not only will employees of the (ongress be administe,'ing and enforcing election laws that affect _;I_eir employers, but also direct appointees of Congress will be administel ing and enforcing these laws. The full-time supervisors will domina: _ the paid>time appointees. This situation is clearly unacceptable. Even with the most conscientious, diligent Board, public skeptic Lsm is certMn to run high and there will be widespread doubt abolt I;he zeal and fairness of the Board's enfo,'cemenL efforts. The Clerk of the House, Secretary of the Senate and the Co:_nptroller General administered the law in 1972. Despite a late stal I;,the agencies labored heroically. The administration was not particl hLrly bad, but it was not uniform. The Clerk of the House generally performed well. Neverthele!_s, he did take several actions that did not seem to conform to the sp] _:ii;of the 1971 law. Originally, he charged outside groups and indiv:id_mls $1 per page to xerox reports, thereby thwarting the disclosur,_ i?rovisions of the 1971 Act. In addition, the Clerk, along with the Sec_etary of the Senate, wrote regulations that allowed contributors to se_:_l_tly earmark and "wash" campaign funds. These practices were stopl:,e :]:in court. According to the Justice Department, the Clerk did not prom _.tly report some of the violations of title; 18. The Clerk feels he is :not required to repm_ violations of title 18, even though the GAO ihas assumed this responsibility. Consequently, corporate cont.rib,:ttions were in some cases not cited as violations of the law. The J Ltst;ice Department became aware of this failure only because a court in tlhe State of New York sent an inquiry asking wlhether or not a part:.c_fiar candidate had not been prosecuted for accepting cor],o_:'a,te contributions. The Clerk of the House waited until are,' the election to fo,'ward lnany of the violations to the Justice DepaIt:ment. The Clerk ml)o,:ted 5,000 unprocessed violations (most of them trivial or minor). ]['ihe Clerk did not actively search fo,' and investigate incomplete i[_J:ags. Thus, some candidates may have been able to circumvent t_[_, law 766 133 by simply not reporting all of their contributions and expenditures. Since the Clerk apparently did not conduct an.y field investigations, the Justice Department was forced to re-examine anti re-investigate many of the complaints reported by the Clerk. Further, the Clerk declined to make public the violations it referred to the Justice Department, so the public still does not know who did or did not allegedly violate the 1971 Act in the 1972 election. The Secretary of the .Senate also could have done a nmch better job. The Secretary did not refer failures-to-file and late, filings to the Justice Department until after the election. It was not until April, five months after the general election, that the Secretary's office undertook to identify the more significant types of violations. Even then, the Secretary only reported violations which he thought were "willful." Between June 1972 and February 1974, the General Accounting Office did report and follow up many violations, some of which were prosecuted. The GAO probably did the best job of the supervisory and enforcement agents. The GAO was also the agency which was the least politically encumbered and the most free from conflicts of interest. With the institution of the supervisory board, the GAO would have much less independence. Under the committee bill, any notification of a violation or investigation made by the Board cannot be made public by the Board or any other person without the written consent of the person who is involved in the violation or investigation. Those who are in violation of the law will be able to determine if and when their transgressions are to be made public. The public's right-to-know will be thwarted. The creation of a Supervisory Board would further exacerbate the crisis of confidence in Congress and the Federal government. _rith the general public ah'eady doubting the effectiveness and fairness of election laws, increasing and intensifying the present conflicts of in-. terest will only serve to further reduce and perhaps irreparably Mrna the public's confidence in the political process. Advisory opinio_ Section 208 of the bill adds a new section to the 1971 Act to allow a candidate or political committee to request an "advisory opinion" from the supervisory board. If the supervisory board, after having made the request public and having given interested parties opportunity for comment, rules that the action does not violate the Act or criminal code amendments relating to campaign practices, any ]?erson who makes a good faith and reasonable effort to comply with the opinion shall be presumed not to be in violation of the law. This provision would allow the Board to grant presumed immunity from prosecution to candidates and political committ{ms. The Board, composed of employees and direct appointees of Congress, would lq[ave the potential power to revise the intent of the law. Veto of regulations Sections 205(b), 408 and 409 give the. House Administration Committee and the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration veto power over the rules and regulations of not only the Clerk of the House and 'Secretary of the Senate, respectively, but also over the 76'7 134 rules and regulations of the GA(). The Mleg_d purpose of this lWOvision is to prevent the bureaucrats from changing the intent c,f the law, but this reasoning, works both ways. If bureaucrats can c]::ange the intent of the law Vl_ promulgation of regulatimls, then. so ,:::ana committee of Congress. The veto power robs the supervisory agen:Ses of even the appearance of independence. The House Administration Co:mmittee bill actually decrease:s_ the independence of the administrators and enforcers of the law in t],ree ways: 1. Direct appointees and employees of Congress are giv,_.,:nresponsibilJLty for administering and enforcing the law. 2. These _:n.le appointees and employees can issue advisory opinions which will _i}']'a:nt presumed immunity from prosecution to candidates and committees. 3. Congn_sional committees will have veto ]?ewer over the rule:!_ !md regulations. The committee's proposal does not affirmat!Lvely answer the mo.% _mportant question of all in the eyes of the public: will it revm:!!;ethe long history of non-enforcement ? If Congress's response to Wat_:t'_:,.:ate is to increase its control over Federal elections, then it will be h_,.r,:_to blame the public for becoming evem more cynical and alienated. Failure to file The committee did pass a good amendment (section 205(a)(])) that would require the supervisory officers to prepare and pub]i_h a list of those candidates who did file and those candidates who d!id not file reports. This has apparently been done by the Secretary of ;S:ate of Pennsylvania with great success in increasing the percental:4,_, of those Who comply with the law. Dis_tualification of candidates Section 302 of the bill provides that any candidate who fails I:0 fiJe will be disqualified from running for that ottice in the next ele::_tion. Any decision by the Board of Supervisory OflScers to disqual_:i!y a candidate for failure to file is subject to judicial review. This penalty appeaL_ to be excessive, especially if the fail_L:lr::to file is inadvertent or accidental More importantly, this provisic, tt is probably unconstitutional. Article I, section 2: clause 2 of thc (ilonstitution sets forth the sole qualifications for Representatives_ ar_ct Article I, section 3_clause 3 sets forth the sole qualifications for Mere :>ers of the United States Senate. Congress has :ao power to add to ¢ilc,se qualifical:ions. As was stated by the Supreme Court in Pow,eL!:v. McUor_ack, 395 U.S. 486, 522_ and 547 (1969), "the Constitution leaves the House (or the Senate) without authority to excl,g°!e any person, duly elected by his constituents, who meets all the require_n_mts for membemhip expressly prescribed in the Constitution" and _the Hou_ is without power to exclude any lnember-elect who meet:s the Constitwfion's requirements for membership." It is true that under the provisions of Article I, section 5, el:_tu,._1 of the Constitution that each House is the judge of the electio::_s, returns ami qualifications of its Members. This doesnot mean, ho,,v_ ,,mr_ that either House or the Congress as a whole has authority to ad:i[ to 768 135 the qualifications prescribed by the Constitution for the office of ]Reprcsentative or Senator, or to prevent a successful candidate from being seated who has qualifications. Yet, this is the effect of section 302. The Court, in Powell v. McUo-r'mack, took note of the fact that a House of Congress has, in the past, excluded a candidate for other reasons than failure to meet constitutional q.ualificat:[ons. The Cour$ rejected such instances as precedent by saying "that; an unconstitutional action has been taken before surely does not render that same action any less lmconstitutional at a htter date.., we are not inclined to give its precedents controlling weight. And, what evidence we have of Congress' early understanding confirms our conclusion that the House is without power to exclude any member-elect who meets the Constitution's requirements for membership." (395 U.S. 546, ,547') Proponents of this provision claim that the Ohio courts have upheld a similar disqualification provision in the Ohio law. In particular, the courts ruled that Donald E. Lukens could not file :for governor of Ohio in February 1973, because he failed to file a statement covering campaig_n receipts and expenditures as a successful candidate for the Ohio State Senate in 1972. However, this case is not comparable, because the office of governor of Ohio was not created by the United States Constitution, as was the Congress. The courts seemed to ex]press the reservation that, if applied to Members of Congress, the law would be unconstitutional because of the Po.well v. McUotw_etck decision. Statute of limitations Any candidate or person who violates any campaign finance law must be prosecuted, tried or punished for such violation within three years after the commission of the violation. This provision, contained an sect]on 302_ also applies retroactively to the 1971 Act. GA 0 Ule%*inghouse The committee, by 16 to 2, voted to abolish the elections clearinghouse in the General Accounting Office. The clearinghouse was instituted by the Keating amendment to the 1971 Act and is the only good thing the Federal government does to aid State and local officials in administering Federal elections. Presently. the Federal government dumps the administration of Federal elections into the laps of these State and local officials who are in turn at the mercy of Federal rules and regulations. Since its inception, the clearinghouse has drawn up and conducted studies using the first list of all State and local election boards, and has conducted and is conducting, a wide range of studies on fraud, election administration and voter registration. It publishes a monthly summary of election case law and changes in Federal and State election law which is invaluable to many State officials and some congressional officers. The clearinghouse has also facilitated the dissemination of information between State and local election boards. In the next few years, it will probably save these boards millions of dollars by showing State and local officials more effective means of administering elections, helping _hem to avoid the purchase of faulty and excessively expensive voting machines and encouraging the coml)uterization and modernization of registration systems. 7{39 136 Penalties Section 101(e) increases the monetary penalties for violation of sections 608, 610, 611 and 613 of title :18. Similar high monetary t enalties are .called for under sections 614 and 615. Prison penalties _iL:re left unchanged. This increase in [mnalties should help make en:l!o'cement of the law more effective. Bii,_ contributm's and corporations,, ill no longer be able to circumvent the law by making huge contribu i:]ons and then :face only a $1_000 fine. They will be forced to pay conside :,:_. bly more for any violation of the law.. Increasing the difficulty of enforcement. Sections 109 and 206 :make certain exemptions to the definitiol_; of contributions and expenditure, thereby rendering ineffective e{!l_ain disclosure provisions of the Federal ]_;lection Compaign Act of 1971 and the contribution and expenditure limitatJ.ons under title 18. '?] _ese exemptions make effective enforcement mo,'e difficult. For example, presently, candidates who do not fully disclose i:]:teir expenditures and contributions can be caught fairly easily, becaust? if they spend or receive something which they have not reported,, then there is clearly a violation of the ]aw. However, if certain exeml:,r: ohs are made unde,' the disclosure provisions, then a candidate might ,::1 dm that a contribution or expenditure that he failed to report was not covered, because it was exempted tinder the exceptions to the defil:_i':iion of contribution and expenditure. Except for the more flagrant a!:,t:_:_s, enforcement of the 1971 disclosare provisions will be more dif?k ult. Similarly, without full disclosure, it wilt be difficult to asc_:,;:,r alu whether or not a candidate or other person has violated a contrib,.l :]ion or expenditure limitation. ALTERNATIVE: THE FISDEt{LkL ELECTIONS COSII_ISSION Instead of maintaining or possibly weakening the present admi:tistration and enforcement provisions, the committee could have stren,_thened them by adopting an amendment, which will be offered el: 1;he floor by inyself and Rep. Dante Fascell, as follows: The Frenzel-Fascell amendment; is a compromise between thos,;,.' vho would like to see full criminal prosecution powel_ in a CommissioJ_ md those who wish to maintain the present unsatisfactory admin, istr:;_._onenforcement system. The Commission will become the superv!_,ory officer for all Federal elections, replacing the GAO, Clerk of the ]t-(,use and Secretary of the Senate. The Commission is designed to protect the rights of Memb,_¢'_;,of Congress and other candidates, as well as the rights of the gen,:,xal public. Safeguards are provided which do not exist under the p_'.e_ent law to prevent the filing of false complaints and unfair prosecu !:ires. They are as follows: 1. If t]he Commission becomes ,_ware of any violation, it must: immediately inform all persons involved. If the Commission deter, n nes t,hat the persons involved had been making and continue to make a ._mOdfaith I mediat_ steps and reasonable to bring about effortto compliance, comply nowith further the legal law and prcc,,edts;kc rags can be taken. 770 137 2. The Commission mug, upon request, issue an advisory opinion on the legaIity of any transaction or activity under its jurisdiction. Any person who makes a good faith and reasonable effort to eomply _rith an advisot-y opinion shall t)e presumed not to be in violation of the law. 3. The Executive Director and employees are strictly prohibite, d from making regu]ations and using the enforcement and subpoena powex's of the Commission. These powers remain solely ii1 the hanqs of the full-time members of tile Commission. 4. Any person who knowingly and willingly files a false comp'laint or makes false statements to the Commission can be fined and imprisoned. 5. If a candidate is cleared of false charges by an independent Commission, the public will more than likely have confidence in and respect the Commission's finding. On the other hand, if a candidate, especially an incumbent, is cleared of false charges t)y the Board of Supervisory Officers, the public may believe the Board's decision smacks of cronyism or is the result of a special favor or deal. All six members of the Commission are selected from lists submitted by Congress. The congressional leadership nominates; and the President appoints only from these lists. Since the Coramissioners are full-time members and the Commission is an independent establishment of the executive branch, no Members of Congress may serve on the Commission. Considerable controversy has arisen over the advisability of allowing Commission appointments to be made by the Watergate White House. Our Commission would only allow the President to choose t¥o_x, among names submitted by Congress. We gave the President this limited discretion mainly because Presidential appointment is absolutely necessary if the Commission is to be given any authority t_o enforce campaign finance laws in the courts. The Supervisory Board in the committee bill is not presidentially appointed and, hence has no enforcement powers and cannot be given these powers. The Commission would be similar in structure to the independent agencies of the executive branch. Such independent agencies have been found to have the constitutional authority to enforce the laws under their jurisdiction. See e.g. Nation, al [Iar_ess Manufacturer's Assoc. v. Federal Trade Uommissio_, 268 F. 705 (6th Cir. 1920); United States v. Morton Salt, 338 U.S. 632 (1950); Texas and Pacific Railroad Uo. v. Interstate Uommerce Uommission, 162 U.S. 197 (1896). The manner in which officers of independent agencies are appointed is controlled by Article II, section 9, clause 2 of tlhe United States Constitution which s_ates: (The President) shall nominate, and, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and M1 other officers of. the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law. But the Congress may, by law, vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments. 771 1,38 Whether the members of a Federal Elections Commission qmL ii!y as "officers of the United States" or as "inferior officers," it 'is ,:]ear from the Constitution that ultimate authority to appoint such mmv2 ecs rests either with the President alone or with the courts of law' or ),eilds of departments, as Congress may designate by law. Congressional appointment would be a usurpation of execttlive powers. I n Springer v. PhiNipi,r,e Islands, 9,77 U.S. 189 (19'2811 _:he Court stated: Legislative power, as distinguished from executive power, is authority to make laws, but not to enforce them or appoin'i: the agents charged with the duty of such enforcement. Th_ latter are executive functions. It is unnecessary to enlarge fur (her upon the general subject, since it has so recently receive(: the full consideration of this court... (in) Myers v. LSaite_? States. Although Congress docs not have the authority itself to appoil_ J the hetLds of independent agencies of other officers of the United Si:al:es_ it does have the power to circumscribe the Presidept's power to ]omixmte such officers. The contrary assertion that the mere o'rant of e:_c_ cutire power confers upon the President the unfettered power el}' ;-t]? point.merit is clearly inconsistent with statutes which restric_ the exercise by the President of the power of noraination of officers (::f the United States. Many of these statutes impose limitations Ul)On Presidential ,,;q?pointntents to Federal agencies. See e.g. Interstate ('onllBerce _[',,lqlmission, 41 Stat. 456, 497 (February 28, 1929); Federal Trade C.:mamission, 38 Stat. 717 (Set)tember 26, 1914); United Stat:es 'l[;'_'iff Commission, 39 Stat. 756, 795 (September 8, 1916). Of l)articula:: ,ignificance are those statutes which provide that the President mt:t3 be restricted in his appointment to certain named individuals. See [.;';'_: _cd States v. Myers, 272 U. So 52. In conclusion, it is constitutionally required trader Article II that the President appoint the members of the Commission. Howev_::]. it has been established by the courts and legislative practice tlnt; his power may be limited by Congress through designation of a lis_ of individuals from which to choose. To assure the Commission's independence, the members are c]::trsen as follows: one from ttmong indiv][(hmls recommended by the Si),[_aker and majority leader of the House, one from among individuals r_:,_.:,nmended bv the majority leader of the Senate. one jointly by these I:ltee con,gressional leaders of the majority party, one by the minority 1,:!_a der of the House, one by the minority leader of the Senate and one j(:,]t_t]y by the two congressional leaders of the minority party. A Federal Elections Advisory Board, composed of membe,s of Congress and appointees of the major political parties, is establisl:te, l l:o assure that Congress and the national parties have maximum :i_:ll?nt into the workings of the Commission. The powers of the Commission are almost; identical to those 2:iyen the Board of Elections of the District of Columbia in the I:}.C. Campaign Finance Reform Act which passed the House by a 3:.4-47 vote. 772 139 All criminal prosecution is left with the Justice Department. The Commission can conduct hearings and investigations oil alleged or apparent violations. It call also petition the courts for declaratory or injunctive relief to bring about civil compliance with the law. Since November 1972, sixteen States have enacted (Alaska, California, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Massachusets, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Washington and Wisconsin) and three States have greatly strengthened (Kentucky, North Carolina and Rhode Island) independent a4__encies to enforce State campaign finance laws. The Federal Electt_)ns Comimssion builds on that experience. ADVANTAGES OF COMPROMISE ][NDEFENDENT FEDERAL ELECTIONS, COM:mSSmN 1. Restore public confidence By judiciously enforcing campaign finance reforra legislation, a Commission could increase public confidence in the effectiveness and fairness of election laws, and indirect]y, in public officials themselves. Attainment of a coordinated, fair and equitable enforcement-administration agent without the present appearance of conflicts of interest would help restore public confidence. 2. Prevent unfair prosecutions Under the present system, the Justi.,_ Department h as the power to prosecute even the most minor violations of the law. In 1972_ the Clerk of the House referred 5,000 violations to the Justice Department. If Justice wanted to, it could prosecute most of the candidates (including most of the incumbents) that ran in the 1972 election. In the aftermath of Watergate, the Justice Deparl;ment could seriously embarrass and end the political careers of many candidates and incumbents by simply prosecuting them for minor vi(:,lations. The Commission would have the power and authority to prevent such unfair prosecutions. The Commission is designed to provide for the protection of the rights of Members of Congress and other candidates as well as the rights of the general public. Several safeguards, already listed above, are provided which do not exist under _?xisting law. 3. Eliminate conflicts o.f interest Currently, a conflict of interest situt_tion exists in which employees of the House and Senate are charged with identifying and reporting possible violations of the ]aw committed by their employers. E,ven with the most conscientious and well-intentioned Clerk of the House and Secretary of the Senate, the publ:ic is certain to be skeptical and question the objectivity and zeal of their enforcement efforts against persons to whom they owe their jobs. The House Administration Committee bill establislhes a Boar([ of Supervisory Officers which would place four direct appointees of Congress and three employees of Coni._ress in charge of the administration and enforcement of election law. Instead of eliminating the present conflict of interest situation, the Board would maintain it by allowing employees and direct app,)intees of Congress to police elections. 773 140 4. Reversb_g the past history of ,m9_e_foreement, Historically, campaign fina;nee ref°rm legislation has been t_ :i!ailure because of the lack of effective enforcement. The Corrupt Pr:_c:ices Act was almost never effective _rt its 50 year life. The failure ,,:3t!the Justice Department to prosecute in 1972 is widely known. No adtninistration or enforcement agency that is irt any manner poll ti(ally encumbered has ever done an ade_luate , eonsisten_ job in a(hninist(, dug and enforcing election law. 5. t_ed. ce bureaucracy One criticism of the Comnfission t'ms been that it would ,edit still anothec bureaucracy to the g'vowi:ng proliferation of Fedet'al .tat,[',:'les. To the contrary, 'the Commission. would combine ,the present wt)t !:,zof three agencies (.Clerk of t;he House, Secretary of the Sene,re and [i'_.'_J_)) into a single enti.ty. Although it was argued in 1971 th.at the present art'angement w:)uld prevent the need for creating add'itional bul:eaueracy, the fact :i,,_; .:hat the Clerk assigned over 20 employees to .this function, the Secrel::t_ry 8 an'd the ,GAO 26. The cret_tion of a single Commission would col:r_[/ne these duties and should reduce the total number of employees l_e._.ded to carry ,att'[the same functions. 6. [_w_ea.se coordb_aticyn At prese_rt, four separate agencies--the Clerk of t_m House. :!%cceta W of the Senate, Comptroller General, and Justice Departmen > --are charged wit:h enforcing .the 1971 law. This makes it difficult to .a,:}:ieve fair, consistent and coordinated supervision and enforcement of the law. Such matters as preparatim:t of reporting forms or interpretal:ions of the law may be treated differently by e_ch entity or may r,?quire burdensome and extensive consul,ration to achieve consistency. A :_]ngle Commission would eliminate many of these problems. 7. Visibility The Commission wouhl have much greater visibility than a_. ,,tike or agency buried within _cheC]erk, Secretary, GAO or Justice Del:,artmalt. The press, the public, elected officials, the parties and politi,gal committees could carefully scrutinize 'the Commission's actions aw:it]ay the blame for' any failure squarely with the Commission. Wi::h a highly visible Commission, the public would expect and hay,? confidence in nonpart'isan, vigorus enforcemen_ of the law. 8. Ass_ere expeditio,s enforceme._t Any adminstration and enforcement mechanism nmst provi4::_ :_or continuous, smooth coordina'tion between Om administrator:!_ and enforcers of the law. Without it, many serious violat4ons tha_ e(mid be disclosed before ..theelection (when en:foreement is most effectiw:!_)will not bo made public until long after the election is over. With spending and contribution limita_;ions, enforcement befor0 t:.he eloc{ion may bo all-important. A Commission would be able to ts.ke almost instantaneous action to curb illegal activities and I)rotecl:. the rights of honest candidates while exposing the violators. 774 141 H. DISCLOSVP_A_D r.XE_rrmNs Section 206 of the Committee bill makes certain exceptions to the definitions of contribution and expenditure .for the purpose of disclosure under title III of the Federal Election ©ampa.ign Act of 1971. Section 102 makes these exemptions .applicwble to contribution and expenditure limitations under title 18. These exemptions, which were proposed in good f_uith to deal with legitimate problems have several :negative, potentially disastrous effects. 'Since some types of donations and disbursements formerly defined as contributions .and expenditures are no longer included in that definition, candidates will no longer have to make full and complete disclosure of contributions and expenditures. Secondly, as was previously noted, enforcement of both the disclosure provisions and of contribution and expenditure limitations may be much more difficult. Thirdly, these exemptions may be used as loopholes by s[ecial interests .and wealthy individuals to circumvent limitations and to channel funds? goods and services into Federal campaigns from hidden, subterranean and suspicious sources. Fourthly, these loopholes make arrtbiguous the pro(hibitions on contributions in the name of another and contributions by unions, coporations and foreign nationals. Since the exemptions apply to these sections as well, if the Committee bill passes _ith the loopholes intact, _he courts may decide that certain types of donations by unions, c_)rporations and foreign nationals are permissible. Originally, the loopholes in the Committee bill were substantial. After ,tentative approval by the Committee, however, they were cleaned up an tightened up to a large extent. Nevertheless, ,these exemptions are still loopholes and may have disastrous effects on election law if the courts linterpret them literally. Food, travel, a_l perso._al property Two exceptions are exempt up to $500 from both _he definithm of contribution and expenditure for the purpose of disclosure and contributions and expenditure limitations. Without :fifil disclosure of these exemptions, it may be difficult to determine whether an individual or political commi,ttee _has spent $500 or more under either of these exemptions. Through these loopholes, contributors can legally breach .the $1,000 maximum contribution limit. The_ exemFtions are as follows: 1. ,the use of real or pm_onal property by any individual who 5isthe owner of the property with resp_t to ,the rendering of voluntary services to any candidate or political committee, including the cost of invitations and food and beverages provided on the individual's preraises. This amendment was originally intended to cover only a person's ihome or a volunteer's van or car and was also created to allow friends; of a candidate to have small receptions in their homes wi.Vhout becoming subject to the provisions of Federal election law. But this exemption's apt)licability is much wider'. It would allow an individual or political committee to dona,te a compu,ter, slx)refront, fleet of cars, printing 775 142 factory, perhaps even a television or radio station.. It would also _,.]iow "fat cats" to stage large, fancy re6eptions, cocktail parties and d]:i:,_l::tel_ in their homes. The candidate would not have ,to disclose the firs1::]'.500 of such use as a contribution or expenditure and would not ha?_;,:_ to credit the first $500 to spending _nd contribtrtion limitations. 2. Ally unreimbursed/;ravel exi)ense with respect to the renderi It_ii_ of volunteer services. The original intent of thi.s exemption was to. )_revent candidates from being prosecuted for not reporting the ,l:r:,_vel expenses of volunteers or friends working in their campaign, il!towever, the legislative language of this loophole is much greater tktan that. Candidates might not have to report their rides on pri,:ai:ely owned jel_s_yachts etc. dm'ing a campaign. Costs of transportation:}]:: of voters to ]polls could also be exempt. These two loopholes could be reduced in scope and still preserve t]ae intent of their advocates, but there is no real need for either of i:L[m_. If the activities exempted by the.se loopholes are not part of thc (andidate's formal, organized campaign, they may be classified :Ls an independent expenditure. Any person can nmke independent exFel:_ditures advocating the election or defeat of a candidate that (to not ,exceed $1,000 without the candidate's knowledge or authorizati(:,:n If such activities are part of a eamlidatc's formal, organized eaml::;:tgn, then they should be reported and counted against his contributio:l! iihd expenditure ]ilnitations. Slatecards The so--called slatecard amendment exempts from the definiti,::_ of contribution and expenditure _or the pm'poses o_ disclosu_e and _ontribution and expenditure limitations any payment by a Stw:_ ,or local party committee for the costs o._ prel)_ration _ display, miLi!ing or other distribution of a listing of three or more candidates fo:: !my public office. This exemption does not. apply to costs incurred v4th respect to broadcasting stations_ lnagazines and other sim'ilar 1:2pes of general public political advertising (other than newspapers). 'ili']'.ere is no ceiling or limitation placed on such activity. The orJ[ginal intent of the slatecard amendment was to allow i?::_it;ies to print slatecards, sample ballots etc. to educate voters and encoL_._a_e straight party voting without being subject, to the disclos_rc ]::,r:)visions and contribution and expen(li[tur(_ limitations in Federal laxv. '{!'}le slatecard amendment would eliminate the difficult problem of t :'3lng to prorate the costs of these items to each candidate's campaign s.::_. _:hat they can 1)e reported and credited to a candidate's contributio_:_ [nd expenditure limitation. It would :also prevenl: candidates from :,{lng prosecuted for party activities they do not haw_ any knowled;ii,? of. This provision would be especially helpful in senatorial and ]:l_sidentia] campaigns where a candMate may have no idea what a !,)cal party iix a remote region of the State or cou:ntry may be doing itJl his behalf. Unfortunately, this amendmeI_t also opens up a loophole. Stat,_ :md local parties could send out numerous mass mailings, buy huge ,:ii,antitles of sample ballots and pay for dozens of advertisements in :t_e:wspapers. As long as the candidate appeared or was involved witi!_ :;wo 776 143 other candidates, the expenditure and source of the money would not have to be disclosed. Further, this might include mailings and newspaper advertisements that just incidentally mention two other candidates. Since State and local party committee is not defined, this provision could be widely abused. Special interests and weMthy individuals might set up dummy party comndttees and pump in thousands of dollars for a candidate's mailings or advertisements and would: not have to disclose these donations as contributions. This exemption is not needed. Both State and local and national parties could be allowed to spend funds independently of a candidate without that candidate's being forced to credit these expenditures to his limitations. The recently passed Senate bill (S. 3044) contMned such a provision. State and local and national parties were eac]h allowed to spend up to $10,000 in a House race and $_20,000 or 2 cents per voter in any other race for Federal office. The 1971 law already gives the supervisory officers discretion and flexibility in allowing State and local party committees to avoid disclosing and prorating expenses on behalf of specific Federal candidates. Under section 306(c), the supervisory officers may relieve any category of political committees of the obligation to comply witlh reporting requirements if the committee primarily supports persons seeking State or local office, does not substantially support any Federal candidate and does not operate in more than one St;ate or on a statewide basis. A similar provision would be written into title 18 to cover contribution and expenditure limitations. Fund raising Any costs incurred by a candidate for fund raising purposes, provided that they do not exceed 1/_ of the candidate's total spending limit, will be exempted from the definition of expenditure for the purposes of the expenditure limitations. This exemption does not apply to fund raising efforts made through broadcasting stat:ions, newspapers, magazines, outdoor advertising facilities and other similar types of general public politicM advertising. This provision is another loophole, but is one that is actually needed. A major goal of campaign finance reform is to encourage the solicitation and raising of small contributions. Yet, it generally costs considerably more to raise funds in small amounts. If candidates and political committees are forced to credit to their limitations all fund raising costs, then there will be a huge incentive to raise money in large chunks, thus defeating ()rte of the major purposes of reform. By exempting fund raising costs from contribution and expenditure limitations, the Committee bill encourages candidates to raise sums in small amounts. Further, since these costs must be disclosed, the basic integrity of the 1971 Act is maintained. The Committee bill also exempts fund raising costs by broad-based political committees. These costs cannot be incurred with respect to broadcasting stations, newspapers, magazines, outdoor advertising facilities and other similar types of ,o:eneral public political adw_rtislng. There is no limitation on such activities. This provision is not really needed since it is unlikely that fund raising costs by broad-based political committees that give to many 7'77 :l,t4 candidates will actually be prorated _md credited to the c_ndida_;es' own limitations. To assure that these costs aren't prorated and credked, legislatiw_ history can be made on the floor specifically exempting these costs. ._ loophole is opened by this exeml)tion. Five or more candid _:_::es, especially in large metropolitan, may get together and set Ul? du:::qmy fund raising committees. These committees would spend con side_ble sums on :mass mailings and other similar fund raising technJ:i)_es. They would give $5,000 to each candidate, but would actually Si?,md much more in their behMf by using' fund raising techniques to inc::'_,,_se the candidates' name recognition and popularity, ouch activities w.oJLld not be credited to the candidates' contrilmtion and expendit,:tre limitations. Vendors The sale, of food or beverage by a vendor :for use in a candida:e's campaign at a charge less than the normal charge, but at _ charii_¢ at least equal to tim cost of food or beverage is exeml?ted from the d_:finilion of contribution for both the purposes of disclosure and of c:)ntribution limitations. This exempt;ion may not be needed, since f,:_od and beverage pu:rchases are largely exempt tmdet' another exce]ptJon. Nevertheless, this provision does allow friends to give the cand!.:]:_te large amounts of food at; a discount price without disclosure,, Since corporations and labor unions may be included as ven.:h:r.s, they may be able to make indirect contributions by selling eandi_:t_[t:es food and beverages at extremely clheat) prices; without even havh:¢_ to disclose sudl activities. It is also reasonable tc assume that incumbe tits will have better luck in receiving these unreported gifts from whisi::ey lnerchants, provisioners, and innkeepers than their challengei_. Communications to _nerr_bersh._porgc_nizcttio_,s The committee bill exempts from both the disclosu:re provision:!i _nd expenditure limitations any communication by any Inembershii[:, organization to its members, as long as the group is not organized l'rilnarily for the purpose of influencing- Federal elections. Thus,, _my special interest group whose primary purpose is not to influence F_deral elections could engage in eampai_g'n efforts which might pa:l'_ Icl those being cmlducted by the candidate's organization. 3I is ce llc_,m_ ows There are three other exemptions in the committee bill, all of wi ich appear to be non-controversial. 1. Any news story, commentary or editorial distributed through :he facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine or ,::_ther periodical publication is exempted from the definition of expend] I:t_re, unless such facilities are owned or controlled[ by any politicM pal ty, political committee or eandidate_ This provision is basically in .3ortfortuity with the law already, although it may exempt some Sl?[_cial interest publications which may be extremely useful and efl!eeth;_eto cm_ain candidates during a campaign. 2. Nonpai_isan registration aet:ivkY designed to encourage indv id... uals to register to vote or to vote is exempted[ from the definition cf expenditure. This activity is exempt anyhow. 778 145 3. Finally, any communication which is not made for the purpose of influencing an election is also exempted from the definition of expenditure. This seems to ratify existing ]aw, but may be aimed at exempting an incumbent's newsletter and other similar publications (which are exempted anyhow). Almost all of these exemptions are not needed. Tile Committee's problem is that its spending limits are too low. These exemptions acknowledge a need for candidates to spend in excess of $75,000. Raising the limit would accomplish the same purpose and assure full disclosure. Co.rn, mon Uav_e amendment Section 206 (a) attempts to bring under the disclosure provisions of the 1971 Act groups such as Common Cause and the Environmental Policy Center (which attempt to influence the public by publishing information about incumbents and their records) by extending the definition of political committees to include those that commit any act for the purpose of influencing, directly or indirectly, the election of any pm_on to Federal office. This section, however, will probably not force groups such as Common Cause to report because the phrase "act for the purpose" would require the Government to prove intent. This will be extremely difficult to prove in a court of law. Duties of the supervisory o]_cer Section 205(a) eliminates the provisions of the 1971 Act that require the supervisory officers to publish an annual compilation of total contributions and expenditures made by candidates in the preceding year. It also eliminates the preparation of special reports and analyses of campaign financing trends and patterns. Finally, :it eliminates the requirements that the supervisory officers assure wide dissemination of statistics, summaries and reports. Thus, private individuals and public interest groups will be the public's only source of concise information about the disclosure information filed by candidates. The provision that eliminates the requirement that the supervisory officers consolidate data and publish summary reports may help to frustrate and reduce the usefulness of disclosure. Without these summaries, the public may find itself confronted only by a maze of reports and forms. The main purpose of disclosu_'e--the dissemination to the public of information about candidates' sources of funds and disbursements--will be thwarted. Also, without the section encouraging wide dissemination, the Clerk and the Secretary might read the intent of the law as being that the reports remain locked up in their offices or be available to the public for only limited time periods. Sale of c_uvvulative index Section 205(a) also adds a provision that requires the supervisory officers to publish a cumulative index of reports and statements in the Federal Register at regular intervals and to make the index available for purchase for a reasonable price. This would be a welcome addition to the present system. 779 146 Ue_tral or pvi_wipal cam,paign co.,m/m_ttee Sections 201 and 202 provide that every candidate for Federal o i:fice must designate a principal or central campaign committee and th:d all reports of' other committees established to support that candidate :must be funneled through tile central committee. The purpose of these !;ections is to assure accountability and stop efforts to circumvent !%closure via the proliferation of committees. In addition, only the central committee may make expenditures on behalf of a candidate. !!¢im'.e the Committee's loophole definition of expenditure applies to I:t_ese sex_tions, this provision is not as effective as it could be. Candidate_i; eau simply use the exemptions to circumvent the law and spend mo:_my through other committees. These two sections have two other good provisions. They de;ere the current requirements that a political committee include a r_oi:ice on the face of all literature that a copy of its reports is available :h',:nn the Sui)erintendent of Documents_ and the requirement that the 1_!:d:,like Printer publish a_mua! reports on the contributions and expendil:ures of every registered candidate or political committee. These provi:!;ions will lessen the burden o:n candidates, save the taxpayers millio:t:ts of dollars, while at the same time not, weakening the disclosure provi_!;i.cms of the 19'71 Act. Sections 201 and 202 could be :further strengthened by adopt.i,:,tl o_ the Cool,: amendment requiring that all expenditures made on b,:,,hM_ of a candidate who has received the nomination of his political l:a:ty for president be specifically approved by the chairman of the politi:ml party or ihis designated represent;_tive. Reports Section 203 reduces Om number of reports a candidate must iil% thereby reducing the administrative, burden on candidates, whi_e at the same time assuring that the disclosure provisions are in no '_ al?' weakened. Instead of a 5 day and 15 day report, there is a s:in_:de 10 day report which is complete as of the fifteenth day before the. election. Reports are also filed on the thirtieth day after the elecbion and must be complete as of the twentieth day ,_;fterthe election. In a "O' year in which an individual is a candidate, a report, must be :!q]ed between December 31 of that year and January 31 of the follo,:;'ing year. Repm_s nmst also be filed quarterly. If, however, a candidate o:c political committee both receives contributions and makes expendit re'es of less than $1,000 during a quarter in a urea-election year, the't:t no quarterly report is required. Whe:a the last day for filing a quart,:_.l'ly report occurs within ten days of an election, 'the quarterly repo:_:'tis waived. Finally, any contribution of $1,000 or raore received a:'fier the final pre-election report must be reported within forty-eight h_:n_ after its receipt. The nat,ional acknowledgement on all reports shrmld be eliminated and the candidate and his committee should reporl: ,m the same form. Tra_s.f ers Section 203 also requires that when a candidate files a reporL m shall inclmie not only the total sum of contributions and expendituc,:,s, but also contributions and expenditures less wansfers between c,oln- 780 147 mittees. This provision will alleviate t]he problem whereby it appea,rs a candidate has spent $100,000, when actually he spent only $50,000, because half of the expenditures (or contributions) were transfers between his own committees. Date of filiq,g Section 204 allows quarterly and post-election reports to be delivered by registered or certified mail and provides that thc_ United States"_ postmark stamped on the cover of the envelope shall be deemed the date of filing. III. CONTRIBUTION L1]_ITATIONS The committee bill limits contributions by political committee,s to candidates for Federal office to $5,000 per election. For the purposes of this limitation, a political committee is a committee which has existed for a period of not less than 6 months which has recedved contributions from more than 50 pen;ons and has made contributions to 5 or mom candidates for Federal office. State committees of a ])olitical party are not required to contribute to 5 or more candidates m order to qualify. All other persons may contribute $1,000 per election to any candidate for Federal office. A candidate for Federal office may contribute up to $25,000 from his ow_l personal funds or the funds of his immediate family. A candidate may pay off from his own funds or the funds of his immediate family, any campaign debt incurred before December 31, 1972. The contribution limitations contained in the Cmnmittee bill will be somewhat ineffective and difficult to enforce, because of the exemptions the bill m'tkes to the definition of contribution for the purpos,_ of disclosure and the limitations. Even if the exemptions are eliminated, there are several other problems with the way the contribution section is worded and drafted. l. £_ndorsed o_' g_aranteed loan loophole The underlying rationale behind contribution limitations is that a person who provides large amounts of money to a campaign gains, or appcat_ to gain, undue influence over the recipient candidate. However, the definition of contribution contained in the committee bill does not specifically exempt loans from State or national banks. Ori_o'inally, this exemption was necessary in order that such loans not bc considered _ contribution by the bank. Such loans are extremely useful in the early phases of campaigns before fund-raising efforts be_in to show a return. It is common practice for such loans, especially loans to political committees, to be endm_ed by one or more individuals of sufficient means to repay the loan in case the recipient should fail to do so. Such endorsements must be reported by the recipient, but there is no mention of them in the definition of contribution in the contribution limitation section. With the adoption of contribution limitations, these endorsements emerge as a major problem. They represent a gaping loophole thI_)ugh 781 148 which individuals can still make large 'tmounts of money availab] s to a campaign. The contribution limitation earmot prevent anyone ft:,om endorsing loans in amounts as large as a bank will approve. Even. if the loan is repaid, the endorser h'm demonstrated his ability t ° m_ke large amounts of money available to a campaign, and would almost certainly acquire whatever undue influence accrued to individuMs Mm formerly were able to make larg'e corttributions. Moreover, this practice would enable wealthy candidates to end,::,rse loans to their own campaigns in excess of the present limitatka_ of $25,000 on expenditures from personal funds, an advantage wi:ich candidates of modest means would[ not enjoy.. If the recipient of the loan is unable to repay it, further compl cations arise. If the endorsed loans exceed $1,00<), the endorser has either violated the law in the course of fulfilling a legal obligation openlv ..md legitimately assumed, or the contribution limitation is essent:hdly meaningbkss. An amendment to repair this section was offered to require endorsements of bank loans to be treated as actual loans by the endorser for the purposes of reporting and the limitatic,Im. 'Under the terms of the amendment, no person would have :been able to make contribui:ic,ns, loans, or' endorsements of loans to any candidate or committee which total more than $1,000. This seemed to be a reasonable way of dealing with a m,;jor loophole, [)ut the committee saw fit to reject ii;. 2. Neparate elections The contribution limitation applies separately to each election., imt the bill does not state what qualifies as an cie.etlon. Under the definition of election, a candidate couM conceivably receive from one :individual: $1,000 for a party convention, $1,000 for a primary, $1,000 iior a primary run-off and $1.000 for the general election, or a total of $4,000. Similarly, special interest committees could conceivably e!ve up to $20,000. Since the enforcers of the 1971 Act, have had consi:derable trouble interpreting the meaning of election, language shouhl be drafted to alleviate this problem. 3. Further' contribution loopholes Even if such language is added.. :an individual could still contr!ib_tte up to $4,000 ($1,000 for the nomirtation+$1,000 for the general elz_ction +$500 for each of the two exemptions or $1,000+$1,000 in in, lcpendent expenditures). He could also funnel money into the st[_te and local parties that could be used for slatecards, sample ballots a nd newspaver advertisements which feature the candidate with two ,or more other candidates briefly mentioned. A political committee col[hi contribute $12,000 plus donate money to state and local party ,:_ommittees for slatecards, newspaper advertisements_ etc. 4. Special interest contributions A recent Common Cause survey found that special interests grcmps have a total of $17.4 million in funds available for the 1974 congressional :races; almost twice as much as the same groups repo['tsd spending on behMf of candidates in the 1972 congressional electioas. Further, the prime fund raising season has :not ,even started. ()b,;fi- 782 149 ously, special interest groups have not learned nmch from Water:gate. Public confidence will only be further undermined by the unleashing of this mammoth warchest, If public confidence is to be bolstered, then spe_?l money must ofbe th( stt]in?ently regulated. 5_ hileinterest it is the intent com,n_ttee that wealthy indivitdn'tl and special inte, rest groups be prohibited front proliferating their committees to circumvent the contribution limitat ions, there is no specific legislative languao'e which prevents proliferation. Some special interest a'roups presently have ten, fifteen or twenty committees. These special interests could conceiwtbly give up to ahnost a quarter of a million dollars ($1'2,000 x 20) to a candidate. While the commktee's legislative history may be sufficient to prohibit such proliferation, a safer way would be to write legislative language into the bill. Under the comndttee bill. an individual can give up to $55,000 to a political })arty or special interest committee supp. orting more than one candidate. However, the earmarking lan_ua_'e m the bill prevents an individual from channelino' funds to a particular cfmdidate through these _,olitieal parties and political committees. Nonetheless, an individual could give several thousand dollars to a particular party or special interest committee, knowing full well that a substantial part of that money would end ut) in the hands of a particular candidate. In addition, special interest committees can give unlimited amounts of funds to political l)art{es and political committees supporting more than one candidate. Some limits naig'ht be placed on such gwmg. The committee's $5.000 limit on special interest committees should 1)c reduced to $3,000, $2,5t30 o_i perhaps even $1,000. A major purpose of this legislation is to discoura_'e special interest influence, yet sloeeial interest groups are allowed to ,_,'ivefive times as much ns an individual. Ideally, these problems could be eliminated by prohibiting the uss of special interest money. Because this might be unconstitution:_l, all contributions should at least, be identified as to the original donor. Special interest g'roups would only be allowed to act as the agents of individual contributors. This _)rovision would reduce considerably special interest influence gained via political contributions. It would stimulate individual interest and participation and would prevent a few "bosses" from dictating political decisions to the many people in the organization. Such an amendment, offered by Rep. Caldwel] Butler, was defeated by a vote of 14 to 19 in the committee. 5. £'o_tributions "i_-_,_nd' The committee left unchanged the status of "in-kind' contributions. The committee defeated a needed amendment to prohibit such contributions. Under the present disclosure language, "in-kind" contributions must be reported ns contributions, but the law should be more specific as far as limitations are eoncenmd. 6. Autl_o_*izedcommittee loophole The bill, as drafted, states that if a contribution is given to a political committee authorized by the candidate in ,v_iti, W to accept contributions for that candidate, then that contribution is treated as a contribution to the candidate. This lan_mge leaves a major loophole. It allows a candidate to receive contributions in excess of the limits simply '783 150 by having the contributions go to a political committee of the c_!_didate whidh is not authorized in writing to accept contributions fo i- t:he candidate. This loophole is best closed by describing the limit in t_n ms of a contribution made "to or for the benefit; of a candidate" rs:Cher than just "to a candidate" and/or requiring that any political _:_(,mmittee which is raising money for a specific candidate has to be auti_ orized in writing by that candidate4n order to raise mon W for him. 7. Uampaign trips by the President a_d Vice President The President and Vice President are often required either by ]:J_w or the Secret Service to fly an official plane to political events. The c ::,st of such a trip often runs into the tens of thousands of dollars. W't:_:ld this count as a contribution? Certainly, it should not. If it does,. ::he President or Vice President might unavoidably or inadvertently violate the contribution limitations. Also, the carLdidate might exceed :tis expenditure limitation. For the purposes of _:he limitations, the c:>st of such trips must be considered what ii; would normally cost a pe:t'so_ to travel by commercial airline. 8. Aggregate limits The bill limits the aggregate amount an individual can contribul:e in one year to all candidates to $25,000. However, the exemptions ui:_ler the definition of contribution apply to this section, so an individual can in reality give more than this amount. IV. EXPENDIT_qRE LIMITATIONS The committee bill sets expenditure limitmSons of $10 million for candidates for nomination for President; $20 million for the gene 'al election for President; 5¢ times the population of the geograpi_i:al area or $7.5,000 for nomination for' election, or election, to the Sel_:tte (whichever is greater); $75,000 for nomination for election, or t;_l_!_ction, to the House of Representatives, Delegate from the Districl: of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner; :md $15,000 for nomination :!or election, or election, for delegate from Guam or the Vir_n Island_!;. The bill also allows any person to make independent expendit,_:t es advocating the election or defeat of a candidate not to exceed $17.),)0. The bill :repeals the media limitations in the 1971 Act so that cg,l, lidates will have greater :flexibility in how they use their cam _i:_)_ funds. P" To assure that these limitations do not become outdated, the kill contains a cost of living escalator clause_ The exemptions under t;he definition of expenditure for 'the purpo..¢;es of disclosure make the limitation,; ineffective and most difficu]q to enforce. Without full disclosure, it is impossible tx) know how muct a candidate Jksspending. Further, the :fund raising exemption speeifkc:id ly allows candidates to spend up to $18,750 in additional funds in a H,:)t_,3e race. If an expenditure limitation is to be enacted, it should be stra'i_SLt forward and not fraught with loopholes. Pu!blic confidence will !not be helped by a low limitation that can be easily circumvented thrc,.l?.i,q:t loopholes. 784 151 The spending limits in *he bill could conceivably have a salutary effect. However, there is simply not enough information available on the cost of campaigns on which to attempt to establish realistic spending limitations. Higher limits should be established until we have better data. States and congressional districts differ greatly geographically and 'in economic, social communioations, and other factors. Campaign conditions, requirements and costs vary greatly in different parts of the country. There is no formula which can be used to gauge wharf is the proper amount _o spend on a campMgn. Placing .the same limitation on total spending for all areas is bound to be discriminatory unless the limit is set high enough to account for the varyi?g conditimls. The spending limits in the bill have _ pro-recumbent bias. Low limits like filose in the bill would tend *o limit a challenger's ability to compete effectively. A $90,000 or $100,000 limi_tation for a congressional campaigll may sound generous to reformers Or to ineuml)ents who re-election does nr_t reqmre spending of amrmnts anywhere near that figure. However, for the challenger a limitation of $7.5,000 imposes nearly imt)ossible problems. With today's costs there is ne way a challenger can make himself known over a. well-known incumbent under stringeut circumstances. In 1972, incumbents won well over 95% of the time, and the 12 challengers that did beat incumbents averaged expenditures of $125,000. Incumbents have a formidable array of weaponry available _ them. They have staff allowances. Legitimate staff legislative work frelquently overlaps file political function. They have t?he franking privSege. Legitimate use of the frank can be extremely helpful politically, and the use of postal patron mailing's is commonly thought to be a powerful political device as well as a necessary and legitimate, means of communicating with constituents. Incumbents also have name and face recognition because they :have ready access to the media, c' most political expense is directed toward name recoga_ition, the incumbent need not spend nearly as much as a challenger even thougq_ he can raise funds more easily. Higher spending h'mi¢s will not mean excessively hig'h spending. While political spending is increasing at a rapid rate, political spendlng in the United S.tates is still not excessively high. While total spendlng for all political campaigns was $400 million in 1972, this figure was still less than the combined advertising budget for Proctor and Gamble, Ford and General Motors for the same year. Four times as much is spen* on .advertising for drugs .and cosmetics. In 1972, a,dverrising for all U.S. companies totaled $'22.5 billion. Is this a rational allocation of national priorities? S':hould the cost of the debate on which type of soap suds or ear to buy exceed 'by fifty ¢imes _he c(_ of the debate on the important political issues of our time ? Furthermore, the costs of campaigning in the United States are not significantly higher ,than the correspond'lng costs in ,some nations and are actually lower than in many other countries. An index of poli¢ical expenditures compared to the economic development of a country found a range of from 9,7¢ for Australi_ to $21.20 for Israel. The United States, at $1.12, was clustered near India ,and Japan at the lower range of q;heindex. 785 While t,'he amoUn,_ of expenditures 'in .a canp.,aign is not t,he o:_'fiy variable affecting the number of people who vote, a reductic_n in .expenditures would lead to a reduction in advertising and c_[mp:.i:::,;nmg which migh* very well furt:her reduce citizen interest and pa.rt;c!ipatton. I_>w limi,tations tend to reduce opportunities for voters to learn about candidates, but even more signficantly, low ceilings r_,,:t_lce thf_.opport;uni:ties for voters to learn mo:ce abouC polit.ics. In set,ting strict limit, ations on the common per-son's ability t ', ?;et himself or' herself elected ,to Con2:r_ss, the committee's bill would ]'_[!.l to do .anything a-bout the problem of the man who brings not m,m_ey but ot,her resources to the election. The celebrit,y, sports figqn'e,' ]ne movie star .and o_her famous individuals all have had their advert:i.s! a_k' done for t.hem as a result of their occu.pations. They don't, need t_5 spend money on their polit.ical c,anapal_ls.. Financial restrlc: '"' ,t_ ns imposed on their opponents simpl?_ insure an une{mal contest and _:i_ny the common man a chance to serve in Congress. Low, st]fingent,, sweeping overall expenditure limiVations may i:avitc violations of t;he law because such violations IrL,_ybe extremely clifl!i.c t'Llt to document or prove. It gets progreaqivelv harder to keep track of wha't a c.aladid,ate or his suppo_ms are spin(ding _.n such easily ir _:t] :.u-factured items as 'bumper st:Jokers or or.her types of printed mateci:'ls. Ertreme limitations would increase incentives for circumventic,:_t of the taw. The belief that the committee's spendin,o: l'imits are too low is; bolstered t)y a careful, voluminous study of the 33 Senate races in :1!,7:2 by a group of political scientists at H_trvard. The study argues 'ti_at the purpose of a p olit,ical campaig:n is :not just to elec_ the candi,dSsre, but, Mso to, inform _;he candidates_ educate the electorate and encor: _'f_ ge wider polit.ical participahon. Watergate and related events trend to place the issue in thc context of preventing exces_sive spending and controlling. "corruption". The idea is that the less money s_nt, the less needs to be raised, and thus the puT'er the ]process. Completely neglected in this statement of the :issue is the need for campa]_m to serve the broader public purposes and currently proposed spending limits just wouldn't pe rmk this to be done. Even th.ouch 94 of the 67 candidates would have violated a ]infit of 25¢ per' adult, and 47 would ha.ye violated a 10¢ limit, few cs n:lida;res or campaign managers felt they had ad,,quately carried ou_:lhe broad _oals of education and involvement. "If canmai_ns are to f:_li:ill any of tlhe functions listed above o . . t;he pre, sent level of spendi]::g' is much too low, if anything" the Harvard study contends. I_ sug_._..t_,,,,,: ',' _h'a_ 50¢ per .adult might, be a sufficient figure---a .total of $77 million in Senate general election campaigns,, over three t,imest, he $24 miillkm reported in the 1979 races. Tight spending limits also substantially favor incumbents, acco_ ding to the survey. Of the 95 incumbent Senm;ors running for re_;!:l,_:ction in 197_2,only six were outspem; by challengers and three of th_m lost. Of the 90 Senate candidates spending below 10¢ per adult, t__,t_ only fourto win were all incumbents who ran :against challengers '_:_-]to spent even less than they did. The only incumbent to spend more l:h:ytn 786 153 25¢ per adult and lose was CMeb Bogg, s of Delaware who was outspent by challenger Joseph Biden. Present proposals, it continues, are "far too low to achieve any conceivable purpose other than to maintain incumbents in office." The independent expenditure limitation in the committee bill would allow an individual to spend $1,000 on dozens, perhaps even a hun(idred candidates. To assure there are no abuses of this exemption, an aggregate limit of $5,000 should be set on independent expenditures. V. OTHER CRIMINAL CODE A_ENDI_EN'rS Contributions by government contractors Section 103 allows government c.ontractors to set up separate, segregated funds. This eliminates the present ambiguity whereby corporations and labor unions who have government contracts ma_y or may not be able to set up such funds for their' members or employees to contribute to while those without contracts can. Formerly, government contractors were prohibited from making and soliciting contributions, except possibly through separate, segregat_d funds. The committee's loopholes will now aply to government contractors as well as to individuals, Since these contributions will also be exempt from disclosure provisions, they will be difficult to monitor and will be subject to considerable abuse. Uontributio_s by foreign nationals _,* Section 101(d) prohibits contributions by forei_x nationals, omce the definitions under section 591 do not apply to section 613, the meanmg of contribution is not clear. If the definitions for this title are made to apply, foreign nationals will be able to use the exemptions or loopholes to circumvent the law. They will be able to give real and personal property, etc., as long as their donations under the exemptions do not exceed $500. Again, since these donations are also exempt from disclosure provisions, they will be extremely difficult to monitor and enforce. Uontributions in the name of another Section 101 (f) prohibits contributions Uash contrib_tions Section 101 (f) prohibits in the name of another. cash contributions inexcess of $100. Excessive honorariums Section 101 (f) limits the amount of honorariums an officer or employee of any branch of the Federal government can accept to $1,000 per appearance, speech, or article and to an aggregate of $10,000 in any calendar year. This lorovision is aimed particularly at those who enjoy full-time, relatively good paying government jobs, but who earn large fees for speechmaking. Some Members of Congress earn more than their salary each year by speaking to groups who will be limited as to how much they can _ve in campaign contributions, but not in honorarium contributions. 78'7 154 VI. PUBLIC FINANCING General Section Campaig_l Section Presidential election. Section certification 403 makes appropriations to the PresidentiM Ele_:_tion Fund automatic. 404 limits the amount a candidate can receive from t;he Election Campaign Fund to $20 million in a gE,:m_rM 405 makes payments from the Fund payable upon i_Ji:ial of eligibility, not upon certification of each expense. Party eo_vve_tlons Section 406 of: the committee bill provides for $2 million of t_xpayers' funds for each major party's convention. Minor parti_:_s :r,_ceive an amount which bears the same ratio to the amount the nat i_¢hal committee of a major party is ez_titled to receive as the numb,:_l of popular votes received by the candidate for President of the mi aor party in the preceding presidential election bears to the average m 4tuber of popular votes received by the candidates for President (:,:ft:he major p_rties. National parties may not make expenditures over and above tm _2 million limit, unless the supervisory board determines that the]:_._are extraordinary or unforeseen circumstances. Presidential primaries Matching taxpayer financing is provided in presidential pric_! i_. The funds for the presidential primaries are supplied by the ]:_l._sidential Election Campaign Fund. In order to quMify for fund%.a candidate must raise contributions of $250 or less totaling $5¢_0,_ m each of 90 States. Once he reaches the threshold, all aggregate c,_:_tribUtions of $250 or less will be matched on a one for one basis. A ca: tdidate can receive up to $5 million in public funds. Payments to candidates of the same political party cannot ¢::,:_eed 45% of the total amount available, while payments to any one c;it:Ldidate cannot exceed 25%. Candidates are subject to the same bitsic provisions as they would be under the Presidential Election Camp_ign Fund. The House Administration Committee and Senate Commi:tee on Rules; and Administration can veto any rules and regul!Lt OhS promulgated to administer the presidential primary fund. Pros and co_s of public financing The pros and cons of public financing are well-_iown. I pers,::,n,l,lly feel that any advantages that might possib_ly accrue under a s?t;em of public financing are outweighed by the potential negative ,::fi:_c[s it would ihave on the electoral process, lin particular: 1. There is nothing inherent in public finatming that will mak::ii(ally and instantly purify the elections process. Even with full publi:: financing, special interest influence will not necessarily be reduced _md the law and its spirit will still be broken, inrocently and willfully 2. Incumbents will be protected and challengers discourage_. A challenger has much less name recogmition. In order to comp_i_n_-;ate for the many legitimate advantages of an incumbent (franking [ civileges, access to media, large personal staff, seniority, free office s:mce 788 155 and services), a challenger must commence campaigning early and spend considerably more. While in 1972 the typical challenger who · beat an incumbent spent $125,000, almost all public financing bills will provide M1 candidates with only a small fraction of this amount: 3. Subsidizing campaigns from the Federal treasury will discourage citizen interest and participation, and make candidates less responsive to the demands, needs and concerns of the people. This reduction in interest, participation and responsiveness might further depress Voter turnout and foster alienation and cynicism among khe general public. 4. Public financing forces the taxpayer to support candidates who are in opposition to their own political views. Public :financing denies the taxpayer the right to desi_(mate where his or her contribution will go. Worse, there is no personal contribution under the check-off. The oheck-off is a delusion, because it only allows a taxpayer to apportion some one else's money. 5. Full public financing is an infringement of freedom of speech. Public financing would deprive individuals of the long-enjoyed right of giving money to support candidates of one's choice. Any such prohibition or stringent limitation on giving is proba'bly unconstitutional. 6. Public financing will weaken the party structure. With PuJblic financing, parties would have less reason to be responsive to _:heir constituencies. Also, elected officials who receive their campaign funds directly from the Federal government will feel no obligation to their parties. 7. Public financing will unfairly discourage the formulation and operation of serious _hird or new parties. In so doing, it will d_ up important sources of ideas and outlets for dissent and permanently enshrine the prescott two weak political parties (which in turn it further weakens). 8. Public financing is discriminatory in that it allows one individual to contribute thousands of dollars worth of time and labor, while arrother individual--perhaps handicapped or ill--cannot make a similar contribution in money. 9. Public financing will take control of the elections from the people and put it into the Federal bureaucracy. The people have little enough left in this country. We should not take their' elections away too. VII. 5I,ISCELLANEOUS Preemptio,n o/State law Sections 104 and 301 preempt State law. This is a welcome change which will insure that election laws are consistent and uniform and that candidates for Federal office do not bear the burden of complying with several different sets of laws and regulations. Political activities by State and local employees This bill allows State and local government employees to participate in political campaign activities. This needed change will opefl up, the political process to greater numbers of people. These employees are still prohibited from running in partisan elections. 789 156 T(1.o3¢8 Presently, candidates must pay income taxes on the funds left-t:,-er from the last campaign. The committee bill ,_,xempts candidates s ad political committees from. this requirement. Politica_ parties If this bill passes in its present form, national political party, cc mmittees, including congressional and senatorial campaign commli:t_ es, may be forced, for all practical purposes, to go out of _business. St de and local ]party committees will not be much better off. The comn:tit i:ee bill limits eoni_ributions by political committees to $5,000. The d._;,_ ::lLtion of political committee clearly includes and encompasses nat io ml and State and local political party comnfittees. The definition ot :'mtri%ution clearly includes :'in-kind" goods and services. The national committees and De:mocratic and Republican Senat o:'!i'd and Congressional Campai_ml Committees currently provide in,.'[luable services to 'both incumbents and challengers. They have ia.'ge staffs witt}, considerable expertise in public relations, campaign [h_t :Lclng and campaign orga:nization. They provide television a'nd :,':_15o services (!including recording stud:los) and myriad other services_ !all of these staff expenses and public relations :serviices will have 'i:o be credited and prorated to individual candidates' contribution an.:! _xpenditure limitations. Both the _,.ational committees and Senate _nd Congressional committees would probably sl?end up to their $ii;,._00 contribution limit per candidate before, the elec,tion. Candidates wo: dd then be forced to provide these se-rvic(_s on tt:.eir own. These poi i:ical party committees would then be unable to give any funds dSrectil_ to candidates' campaigns. The $5,000 limitation would be especiall!;' d>surd in m'esidential races and in senatorial races in large States. This limit becomes even more restr!ictive when, as is presently :.he case, most of the action is centered in 50 Hc,use races and 10 S[!,_ate races. Currently_ much of the parties' efforts are channeled into _:t[_se races. Party involvement in these con tpetitive races would be dra_;tically curtailed under the committee's bill. While overall, in the short run, _Republican party organization'.; ,_'il] probably be hurt the most, I)emocratic organizations will also su ['er greatly, because they concentrate such a large port] on of their resmu ces in a few key races. This limitation also lends an er,eh greater pro-incumbent bias tc i:tLe committee's bill. The political parties a.re frequently most instru::n_mtal in defeating incmnbents. They are the organizations be.s_table to channel into a particular area the large amounts of resources and ]'_t:_tds needed to beat well-known incumbents. Yet., the Committee bill wo dd essentially prohibit these activities and further insulate incuml_,_:_:ts. State and local[ political parties mi_:ht fare, little better. For e:_m~ ple, the Democratic State Central Committee of Iowa spent ,o,,'er $177,000 in the 1979 election, but mi_:ht be limited to about $4ili,[i}C,0 under the committee bill. The Republican Party of Wisconsin _:;]o:mt over $680.,000, but would be limited to around $50,000 under the ::_(:mmittee's limits. While it is true that these State committees couM be divested of their fund raising efforts on behalf of candidates, ,_;'.:.ch an action would greatly weaken these orga:aizations. Powerful ii:e- 790 157 publican suburban organizations and big city Democratic organizations would face similar problems. A possibility would be that parties would begin spending large amounts in party primaries, thereby increasing intra-party conflict, creating consider'able bitterness al{d further weakening the party system. Political parties are the most broadly based groups in the political process and have a great potential for revitalizing our society. Strengthening the role of tl_e parties in the political process may be as important a reform as changing the present system of campaign financing. In many other democratic nations, the political parties provide a strong focus and rallying point for' the consumer or public interest. In the United States, the weak political party system provides no match for the powerful special and vested interests. Yet, somewhat paradoxically, the committee bill further weakens political parties, thereby reducing the potential for harnessing and regulating the powerful special interests. In its haste to reform our present system of campaign financing, the committee has weakened the party's control over candidates. There will bo less and less ,'eason for candidates to work together to formu late party policy and to adher e to party policy decisions. The party system may become hopelessly splintered and could even disintegrate. Given the political instability in European couutries with fragmented party systems, such a change may undermine the very foundations of our political system. National, State and local party committees should be exempted from the contribution limitations. Reformers assert that this will create a gaping loophole. To the contra W, a stronger party system is perhaps the most significant reform needed in the present political system. Further, if a $5,000 limitation is placed on how much a party or,(_anization can accept from an individual, or committee, wealthy individuals will not be able to gain excessive influence. Also remember that since secretive earmarking and laundering are prohibited under the committee bill, no individual will be able to earmark more than $1,000 to any particular candidate. A political party exemption would[ not create a loophole and would be an invaluable addition to the Committee's bill. If a straight-out party exemption is unacceptable, [he House should consider an alternative proposal that was adopted by the Senate. Both national and State and local party committees should be able to make expenditures on behalf of a candidate totMing $10,000 in a House race and $20,000 or 9,¢ per voter (whichever is greater) in both Senatorial and Presidential races. Such a provision would allow the patti.es to pla?' a stron_ role in the electoral process, while at the same time assuring that limitations are placed on their activities. A3IEND3_[ENTS Campaign finance reform directly affects the lives and livelihood of every member of this body. Each member should have the opportunity to make his contribution to this piece of legislation. I am already 791 ].58 aware of many amendments that may be offered. Other members Zi[i ] _ave not spoken with will undoubtedly have their own amendments. ][ will offer a number of major amendments to improve the bill, including amendments to establish an independent Federal Elections Commission, delete the loopholes, increase the spending limits and allow the parties a greater role in candidates' campaigns. I may also offer a i:,out ten amendments based on the recommendations of the Senate Vir_tergate Coramittee. While it is conceivable that an "amateur nit;,:ht' might ensue if all of these amendments are offered, I have suf[icient confidence in the Members of tMs body to believe that open, fully democratic proceedings are the way to obtain the best bill possibh_. SUM73IARY' After a late start, the Committee has worked diligently to pro(i'uce an elections bill. Despite its deficiencies, it should be promptly brm_ght to the floor for the necessary repairs. After _mendment, it should be passed, ri'he American public has waited long enough for a po_;]tive, straight-forward response to Watergate. We should not pass just :my bill, but one that will, as much kS possible, be free of loopholes md one that 'will restore public confidence in the integrity of the electoral process. The sooner we pass this bill, get it into and out of confi,:,:,nce and on to the President's desk for signing, the better off everyone ,_vill be. BILL 792 FREN:;'_E :,. ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF MR. BUTLER I was disappointed that the committee did not see fit amel_dments to deal with several problem areas of the bill. three admendments which I felt would have improved the I still believe there is a need for action, in these areas. A brief tion of ¢he problem and proposed solution follows: 1. POOLED to ad.opt I offered bill_ and explana- CONTRIBUTIONS It is my considered opinion that the use of political action committees as conduits for political contributions of particular special interest groups is one of the great evils of American politics today. Lobbying groups which also handle contributions have placed themselves in a position where they cannot serve their proper function, which is to educate and assist their representatives, without the suggestion of impropriety arising from past or potential financial contributions to the representative's campaign. I offered an amendment which would have prohibited the, pooling of contributions by special interest gr:oups, I'equiring that alt contributions to a candidate or party committee be identified as to the original donor, and that the donor designate the candidate or party committee which is to receive his contribution. This approach avoids the possible Constitutional challenge which might accompany a:tt effort to prohibit outright contributions from other than individuals. 2. ENDORSEI_ENTS OF BANI( LOANS Under the existing law, loans _re considered contributions to political candidates or committees. There is, an exception for loans made by banks. I proposed to amend the law to provide that, for the purposes of defining a political contribution only, endorsers of bank loans to political candidates are to be considered lenders in the amount of the unpaid bahmce of the loan. This balance would be divided equally among the endorsers if there are more than one. This will, of course, bring such endorsements within the contributions limitations proposed in the bill. There will be no change in existing reporting requirements, as the Clerk now requires that all bank loans and their endorsers be reported on a single form, and their repayment on a different form. My purpose is to insure that no one is able to use endorsements of bank loans as a means of circumventing the contributions limitatioh. 3, VOLUNTARY LIIVIITATIONS ON CONTRIBIYrIONS There are many who contend that statutary butions and expenditures for political campaigns (159) AND EXPENDITURES limitations on contriare unconstitutional.. 793 1'60 I propose to provide that any agreement between all the cand!d ates for any single federal office to abide by the spending and con:!;::ibutions limitations set forth iii this legislation would be valid and },hiding on the parties to the agreement, even if the courts ruled a t:,o:tion of the l_w with reference thereto unconstitutional. Such agreements would be filed with the appropriate superv sory officer on forms to be approved ,or supplied by him. There w(,_lld be no criminal penalties for violation of such an agreement, w!:l:L [he parties to each agreement being left to existing civil reined!ia; for enforcement. This would be a reasonable solution to what could become a n_ajor problem. M CALD_VELL BIY:i?]L;::IL 794 HOUSE FLOOR DEBATES ON H.R. 16090 House of Representatives WEDNESDAY The House The Chaplain, D.D., offered the Tile fi'Uit of _e$$ and tight¢ Et)hesians 5: 9. Almlghgy God, them to live good will, renew restore to us a those with whon_ Look with Thy _serve our Grant unto Strength Of and so peace and benefit of all our We pray espect our Speaker, and gres_ Make then task& just in the erous in judgmer the roy_ wtthln t In the spirit of TI-IE The SPEAKEB amJned the Journ ceedings and an_ approval thereof, Without objecti approved, There was no o_ i MESSAGE 2 o'clock noom G. Latch, prayer: in l_Z gooiig_ _t_t]_.-our with in and and with ' live and upon here on Capitol wisdom of goodness of -in their decisions may prevail for for our President, ;very Member of Conequal to their high ,xercise of power, gert;, and always loyal to mmselves, _hrist we pray. Amen. rOUR,N_ The Chair has ex.] of the last day's promaces to the House his m, the Journal stands ectlon, FRO _ THE PRF_IDENT A message in _ dting from the Presl~ dent of the Unite4 States was communtcared to the Hous; by Mr. Marks, one of his secretaries, _ _0 also informed the House that approw on ti _ following dates President and signed billsthe of the House of the _ollowing titles: On July 30, li 14: H.R. _20_. An act for the relief of Emmett A. and Agnes J. Ri _hbun; H.R. 9440. An ac_ to provide for access to all duly licensed c lnical psychologists and optometrists withe tt prior referral in the ]/ederal employee h alth benefits program; H_R. 11295. An a_ to amend th® Anadromolls Fish Conserv ion Act tn order to extend the authoriza_ ,n for appropriations to to carry out such a¢ ;,and for other purposes; and H_I_.15461. An ac_ to secure to the Congre ss additional tlme in _ hich to consider the proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure which the Chief JUstice of the U.S. Suprez :e Court transmitted to the Congress on Ap_ 22, 19/4; H.R. 377. An act authorize _the Secretary o_ the Interior to ;11certain rights in the State Florida; ar [or the relief of Robert J. H.R.of3544. An act Bea_. OnAugust5, .974: H.R. 14592. An a(; to authorize appropriairons during the tis _alyear 1975 for procurement of aircraft missiles, nava_ vessel, AUGUST 7, 1974 tracked combat vet sles, torpedoes, and other weapons and resear h, development, test and ovaluatlon for the _ drmed Forces, strength and to prescribe the authorl_ personnel for each active duty cc mponent and of the Selected Reserve of e_ '.h Reserve component of the Armed Forces nd of civilian personnel of the Department _f Defense, and to authorlze the military ir; lnlng student 'loads and for other purposes. (Mr. VANIK a_ mission to adch n3Jnute, to revise and Include ext_ [Mr. VANIK a_ remarks will ap Extensions of Rei PERSONA MESSAGE FB A message rington, one of its the Senate had ment a House of the Tr. Con. Res. 566. report of the message had Which H.I_ close of dutie_ on The Senate insists the bill iH.It. 11 extend and carrying out tlon programs and to authorize such programs disagreed to by conference asked disagreeing thereon, and Mr. HART, Mr. Mr. COOK THE SENATE Senate by Mr. Arannounced that without amendresolution of the title: resolution to and the Committee on announced that the with amendments in of the I_ouse is the House of the fol- to continue until the the suspension of of copper, announced that the its amendments to 7) entitled "An act to the authority for and rehabilitareservations. ' of lands," agrees to the on the (Mr[ RUTH Houses mission to M. AGNUSON, ute and to Mr. and remarks.) conferees the part Mr. RUTH. of the Senate. PERMISSION REPORT ON ]ArORK_ (Mr. _Y permission to ad ,n_ute.) Mr. HANLEY. day to announce of the Giaimo funding for the was incorrectly I have for the Safe every intention I believe that gram is essential to develop a as site defense, we would gain in guard would velopment of site To support the guard now, after research and $4.9 seem to me to folly. F'rT,'_. 15155, been some many questions concerning the For the record I this point. _ed and was given per_ the House :for 1 .nd e_tend his remarks neotu/matter.) dressed the House. His _r hereafter ha tZhe Larks.] _ STATEMENT asked and was tress the House t_t given for 1 Speaker, I rise tomy vote in favor to i_duce ABM system supported funding system and I have continuing to .do so. proour Nation's e_fforts advanced system such practical experience operation of Safeinvaluable in the de- the of Safeof ABM expended would height o/ fiscal STATEMENTS INAPPROPRIATE ._ ON and was give_a perthe House for 1 rainand extend bls . Speaker, there has in my response to the have all received inquiry. my respo_ase at STArF_E_rr OFEARL 3_R_r_H--Au_us_ 6, 1974 Mr. EVINS of _. During the Watergate tnvest_;atlon, I ask unanimous that the 'Conagers have until tonight to file were not Prin_rlly, ! a conference on the bill (H.R. _tting on the impeach15155) making for public an mind is a prerequisite works for water power development, including the of who have made premature stateme that my p_s_tion is the Bureau of the Borlneof ix statements ha_e been vllle Power and other what they hoped to be power agencies of Dep_rtment of the true or to be fact. Interior, the regional deAs Xfeel that ff and when velopment the Federal Power a a vote Comlnk_on, the Valley Authe issue clear-cut, which in thority, Energy Commission, reality is the of the lnvesti_at/on. and related agencl x realize flurry o:_ cornthe fiscal year 30, 1975, and ' ment is due to latest staSe:[or othe_ purposes, ment and it recent try ln_erpretlng these However, The SPEAKER. Is there objection to with things happe so fast, Just as yesthe request of the from Ten_erday's statement have no relevance ' nessee? to events of today's statement There wasno be outmoded 799 H 7790 CONGRESSIONAL FOURTH ANN_fAL REPORT ON GevERN1VIENT _ .ERVICES TO RURAL AMER!CA---R ESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES (lEt. DOC. NO. 93-330) Th e SPEAKE { laid before the the following ri essage from the dent of the Ur read and, togetl ing papers, re:e] Agricultm'e and House Presi- .ted States; which was er with the accompany_ed to the Committee on )rdered to be printed: To the Congress s/the United States: I am transm.it ;ing herewith the fourth annual report o I Government Services to rural America as required by the Agri· cultural Act of I 70. ttecord of August 9, 1974, at page H7597, which amendment sha}'.l be in order, any rule of 5the House to the contrary notwithstanding: Provided, however, That not withs_anding the foregoing provisions of this reselution, amendmenLs to any portion of the bill shall be in order, any rule of tile House t_3 tlhe conLrary notwithstanding, if offered by tile direction of the Committee on House Administration, b'at said amendments shalI no_; be subject to amendment. At the conclusion of the cousideration of the bill for amendment, the Committee shall rise and report the bill l_:, the House with such amendments as may have been adopted_ and t:he previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without, intervening excerpt ore motion to recommit. RICHARDNIXON. THE WHITE _ )_SE, August motion 'CALL OF ['HE HOUSE ', PROVIDING FOR CONSIDEItATION OF H,tt. 16090, FEDERAL ELECTION CAZMPAIGN ACT AMENDMENTS O]? 1974 ]_Ir. WYDLER,. ]_ fr. Speaker, I make t]3_. point of order _ hat a quorum is not present, The SPEAKER. vidently a quorum is not present. Mr. YOUNG of Texas. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I I move callMr.of O'NEILL. the House. ]_ . Speaker, A cai] of the Houe was ordered. call up HouSe Resolution 1292 a_id ask for its immec[iate consideration, The Clerk read bhe resolution, as follows: H. RES. 1292 Resolved,, That 'upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to move that the House resolve itself .into the Committee The call was tak m by electronic de_ vice, and the follo, ,lng Members failed to respond: [Roll 'o. 456] Blaggi Gude PoweU, Ohio Blatnik Hansel Idaho Randall BEe,see HanseE Wash. Rarick Burke, Calif. Harrin_:on Reid Chisholm Hars:_a! Riegle Clark Hol£fiel_[ Raoney, N.Y. Clay Ichord ! Roybal Conyers McK:[n_ey Ruppe Coughlin McSpac_den Scherle Davis, Ga. Macdonald Smith. N.Y'. I)l_gs Molloh_x Stark Dawning Mu:_)h_ N.Y. Stokes Edwards, Ala. Nedzi Sullivan Esch Owens Ullman Oi_,lmo Pat:ma_ Wiggins Gray Podell Wylie of the Whole House on the Stat_ of the Union for the consideration of the bill (H.tt. 16090) expenditures to lnlpos_ overall on campaign and limitations political contributlons; to provide that each candidate for Federal office shall designate a principal campaign committee; 90 provide for a single reporting responsqbility with respect to reeeipts and expenditures by certain political committees; to change the times for the illlng of reports regarding campaign expendltures and political contributions; tx) provide for public financing of Presidential nominattug conventions and Presidential primary elections; and for other purposes, and ali '.rile SPEAKEi_t. Members have ::ec, by electronic device, ]By unanimou,; c( a )n this rollcall 386 :ded their presence _ quorum. nsent, further prowere _mendment of the House to bill, Insert the. foUowing: hay be cited as the "Office of merit Polic_y Act". DEC_ ,RATION OF PoLIcY SEC. 2. It is declared to be the policy of (.)Lgress to pr( aqo_e economy, effÉciency, and e ![ective]::_ess ir the procurement of property e lid serv!ces b_ and for the executive branch c I _;he Federal Government by (l) es_abllsl ng policies, procedures, and _ :'actices whicl will require the Government t :, acquire pro] erty and services of the req, t .site q_lality md within the time needed s i. the lowest r asonable cost, utilizing corn_;tJtive procui :merit methods to the maxi- dispensed (3) a_oidin[ or eliminating unnecessary c_'erlapp_rLg or duplication of procurement s nd relat,ed act titles; (4) avoiding )r eliminatllq_ unnecessary or r !dundar_.treql [rements placed on contractor $ nd Fed,!..ral p ocurement officials; (5) ideutlfyi]lg gaps, omissions, or lneons._t_neie.,_ in p_ ocurement laws, regulations, s ad direc.tives: nd in other laws, regulations, _c Ld directives, relating to or affecting prom_men _; (_) as:hievir g greater uniformity and s ::nplieity. whe_.ever appropriate, l_x procurer .mt pr(,cedur_s; (7) cc<,rdinaling procurement policies and [ rolgram._ of _e several departments and s i[e:acles; (3) mmimi: _g possible disruptive effects c 1' Goveynmeni procurement on particular [ :,d_strles, area , or occupations; (9) lmprovin _ understanding of Governi ._nt procurem _nt laws and policies within t-_e Gow_rnmer; and by organizations and i .d[vldm_ls doi _g business with the Gove :ri:merit ([0) p:l'omoti g _air dealing and equitable r _].stionships a] _ong the parties in Govern:_:_ent co_tracth g; and (il) otherw: _e promoting economy, el[ ciency, and , _ectiveness in Government _ vocurement or anizations and operations. rind _rGs AND PURPOSE 's:_c. 3, (a) T_ e Congress finds that econo ny, e_eiency and effectiveness in the _ ,c_rarement of property and services by the eoecutive, ager :tes will be improved by ests,blish[ng ar office to exercise responsiveili::y for proct ,'ement policies, regulations, :_cocedures, and forms. (b) Tie pur Iase of this Act is to estabI!_;h 'an Office o: Federal Procurement Policy :u_ the Ol_ice of Management and Budget to ceedings with. ,the bill and shall continue not to exceed two hours, to be e_tuany divided minority and controlled by the chairman and ranking member of the Committee on House Administratlon, the bill shall be considered as having PERMISSION TO I ILE CONFERENCE ftEPOPtT ON S 2510, CREATING FEDEttAL Ot'_B _ OF PROCURE_ ]YIENT POLICY been read any for amendment amendment. in No including the amendment, nature of a substitute for the bill, shall be in order to the bill except the following: In title I. (1) germane amendments to subsection 101(a) proposing solely to change the money amounts contained in said subsection, protiding that said amendments have been printed in the Congressional Record at least one calendar day before being offered; and ]VIr. ST GERM[AIl . Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent t:hat the managers lq'lay have until arid _Jght tonight to file a conference re]Jori on the Senate bill _.. 2510. [[qle SPEAKER. ]; there objection to the request of the ge _tleman from Rhode Island? (2) the tex_ of the amendment to be offered on page 13, f_llowing line 4, inserted in the Congressional :Record of August 5, 1974, by Mr. Butler. In title II, (1) germane amendments to the provisions contained on page 33, line 17 through page 35, line 11, providing they have been. prinf_ed in the Congressional Record at leasq; one calendar day 'before belng offered; and (2) the amendment printed on page E5246 of the Congressional Record of August 2, 197,4. In title IV, (1) germane amendments which have been printed in tt%e Congressional Record at least one calendar day before they are offered, except that sectlons 401, 402, 407, 409, and 410 shall not be There was no obj¢ :tion. CO:N[FEREI_[CE REPORT I. REPT. NO. 93-1268) _lc:)licies, :'ovide overall direction of procurement regula' fens, procedures, and forms f a' exec'4tive _ :encies in accordance with a ,plicable laws DEFINITION S::C. 4. As used in this Act, the term "execu_ ye agen::y" me _ns ,an executive department, a militar7 depm tment, and an independent e ;tablishment v'ithin the meaning of sec_2:)ns 101, 102, md 104(1), respectively, of ;::_;le 5, United S' _tes Code, and also a wholly 0 ,reed Governrr mt corporation within the The committee of reference on the disagreeing votes of tl two Houses on the amendments of the Ho Lse to the bill (S. 2510) to create an Offies of Federal Procurement Policy within the Executive Office of the President, and for et her purposes, having met, after full and Tee conference, have agreed to recommend knd do recommend to their respective He,use as follows: ']?hat (;he Senat_ rec de from its disagreement to the amend:me: t of the House to the text of 'i:he bill and al roe to the same with I_ _aning of secl on 101 of the 'Government :wi)oration Coz ;roi Act (31 U.S.C. 846). orPiCE OF FEll :RAL PROCTJREMENTPOLICY '_L'C.5. (a) Th_ 'e is established In the Office o Managemen and Budget an office _:,,be kncwn as _ xe Office of Federal Procuren _mt Po]icy (h_ _einafter referred to as the ')ffice"). (b) T__ere sh' 11 be at the head of the C ffi(_, an Admin _trator for Federal Procuren _r.t Policy (h( :einafter referred to as the "_,dminis_rator" who shah be appointed by subJec¢ to amendment; the amendment printed an Inamendment J!ol]o' ,s: proposed lieu of theas matt t[H_ Presi,fient,_ c ::a;ent cf the 800 _;he call 7, 19 74 points of order against title IV of said bill for failure with hereby the provisions claUSe 4,torulecomply XXI, are waived. Afterof general debate, which shall be corLfined to andthe (2)Congressional the text of in under sited b.;r the t _e text of the 2h_t thi!; Act tederal I:_coour August r vu:m extent pr _ticable; (2)improvir ,' the quality, efficiency, econo:nv, and. per:, rmance of Government proc.m._men:;orgs_izations and personnel; _'"__ 7, 1974. --- RECORD -- He'[ :I,5 I] _' to be in- and rote. with the advice and Auyust 7, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL t RECORD tially similar provision found in subsections 5(a) and 5(d) of the H_use amendment, section 8(a) ) for the the Congress and its _$ubsectt+ 6(c) This subscd_tinn of _he conference substitute incorpo_tes pr_visions found In the House amendment (s_bsection 5(a) ) excludlng nonapp_prla_d fund activities from the scope oi_th_ act. This takes the place of a similar _ro_lsion in the Senate bill (subsection 6[d)_4_ ) which was limited to military nonapproI_ated fund activities. conference The substl_te also incorporates a provision in the bill, but not in the House amendment, for to conduct a study of by nonappropriated fund to the currently Ld to submit annual of and other informed reports on a he major activities the Office, The conf reed agree that 'this wording is to be given _ reasonable interpreration permitting subl _ission of information on a summary basis :t intervals consistent with tho intent of thi subsection. The conference substitute om ts a provision in the Senate bill (subsectio L 8(b)) requiring the Administrator and O_ 'P personnel to testify before Congress. Ti _ conferees agree that it would be anomalo_ J to spell out this requirement for the el PP without a similar requirement for all ex cutive officials. Nevertheless, the conferees xpect that OFPP per- Congress within two Subsections The conference bination of language in section 6(c)) and (subsection 5(b) ) functions of the of clarifying changes, clea_ that the OFPP promote rather than Commission and other personnel rprograms, tute also drops one the Senate bill dundant to another (subsection 6(d) (3) substitute), Subsection 6(e) of trite incorporates (subsection 6(c) (8)) amendment to consult with devdlopment of sonnel will be availab _ for information and testimony before con ressional committees, and there is no inte it to imply that the OFPP, or any other office, is beyond the reach of congreselonE committees. _') a cornbill (subspecific substi5(c)) for the OFPP agencies in the regulations , proce- dures, substitute adopts and the forms. Senate The authorizing destgnation of other age _ciss to coordinate agency views. $ubsectic _ 6 (/) The conference sub ;titute incorporates with minor changes th_ )rovlslons found in the House a_nendment _bsectlons 5(d) (1) and (2)) to rule out authority of the O]_PP to interfere wi executive agency procurement actions c determinations of procurement needs. Cc _terpart provisions were included in the Se: ate bill (subsections 6(d) (1) and (2)). A provision in the Se rote bill (subsection 6(d) (3)) defining th_ authority of the and forms was deleted a redundan.% to other OFPP to deal with pro_ urement procedures and forms w_s deleted s; redundant to other provisions in the confer_ ace substitute (subsection 6(a)) giving ti_ ; OFPP general authortty over policies, re_ llations, procedures, and forms. , $ubsectic r 6(g) To assure that the )FPP will not have its procurement reform ole diluted, the conference substitute inclu les specific language that, except as otherwt _e provided by law, the Administrator will h _ve only those func'tions expressly assigned _y the act. The conferees do not wish the _dminlstrator to be burdened with extraneo s responsibilities or to have any of his fi nctions transferred elsewhere, , SECTIOi_ _--ADMINI. c _RATI_fEPOWERS The conference sub_ _itute incorporates substantially identical ,revisions found in the Senate bill (subsec ion 7(b)) and the House amendment (sect on 6) providing for executive agencies to fu_ dish the OFPP with se_wices, personnel, faci Lties, and access to re(_rds. The conferen¢ ! substitute omits oti_er administrative ] 'ovislons found in subsections 7(a) and 7( ) of the Senate bill as no longer necessary appropriate in view of placement of the OF_ ? in the OMB. SECTIOi_ S--RESPONSI_ _ESS TO CONGRESS S.ubsectto_ 8(a) The conference sub., ;itute incorporates me.lifted language of th Senate bill (sub- $ubsec_iOq_ Ldministrator _ommlttees -- HOUSE _ (b)· to keep fully and (/_) The conference su_ ,_itute incorporates a provision for the Ad; llnistrator to give 39 days' adva_xce notice _f any proposed major policy change to the C )mmittees on Governmerit Operations of th Senate and the House of Representatives, wi_h a description thereof, a summary of reasons, and the names of OFPP representatives[designated for consultation with the com__tt_s. This reporting _equirement is lnten_[ed also to extend to l_llcies implementin_executive orders. This is_ modified version _f a provision found in thd_Senate bill ,(subseCtion 8 (c)) but not in the¥ouse amendment. The conference substitu_ adds a provision for waiver by the President in emergency cases, but omits a provislo_ for the prol_osed policy to be ten- The 4- H 7793 SECTION/! -DELEG&TXOI'_ conference s_pstitute incorporates a Senate provision 12) and authorizing delegation to OFPP(s[cti0n _personnel, also to other agencies of a_y OFPP authority except the basic authority Of OFPP to direct procurement policy _nd prescribe policies and regulations. Th_ wording is changed specifically to author zz redelegation _s provialed in a counte_ _art provis/on of the House amendment ( ection 11). The House amendment did not [:aclude the restriction as to delegating the basic authority of the OFPP. SECTION 13 --A1qNUAJ[,PAY The of conference s the provision the Housesu'l a stitute nendmentadopt (section 12) for compensating th4 Administrator at Executive Level IV ($3_ ,000) rather than Executlve Level IIZ as rovided in the Senate bill (section 13). SECTION IA--ACC] ;S TO INFORMATXOJ_' $ubsec_ on ZA(a) The conference Lbstltute incorporates identical provisions und in the Senate bill (subsection 14(a) ) id the House amendment (section 13) lying the Comptroller General access to re rds of the OFPP'. $ubsecl on 14(b) The House confer, _s receded from their objection to subsecti n 14(b) of the Sen/_te bill and accepted a edified version thereof in the conference su'_stltute. There was no similar provision in lhe House amendment. This subsection of th conference sub.'_titute requires the Admini_ ,rater to open to the public certain formal, scheduled meeting s of the OFPP concernin_ the establishment procurement policies and regulations and tiered i/_ffectlve60 days by_! resolution of either specifies a ten-d .y notice will be give_l House wi/_in of such that meetings..TI Administrator is to S_CTXO_--_rE_r_ ON EXZST_Na _AWS designate the meetinl s subject to this subThe conf_ence s_bstltuts follows the section and prescribe, myregulation, the prolanguage of t_e Hou_ a_nendment (section cedures to be followed in the conduct of such 8) making any_autho_ity of executive agenmeetings. Although ti _ Administrator is glvcies to prescrib_ pol_ies, regulations, proe_ authority to deter dine the need for and cedx_res, and forfi_ st]bJect to the authority conduct of the publl meetings, in general, of the OFPP. The _en_te bill included a subit is intended that the formal meetings of the similar ionstantially (section 9). Office will be conduc ed so as to giw_ sub.is SECTION 10--EFFECT._ EXISTING REG_YLATXONSstantial visibility to Lts rulemaking deterThe conference sub: adopts a Senate minations. This subse_ tion complements the bill provision exist- provisions of subsecti n 6(d) (2) calling for lng procurement procethe timely, effective s_ !lcitation of the. viewdures, and forms in until repealed, points of interested ] arties, and is in line amended, or OFPP action. A with the policy decla _tion in subsection. 2 substantially similar i _ was contained (9) on improving the _nderstanding of proin the Hous_ curement policies. SECTION OF SECTION IS--REPEAL; AND AMENDME:_qTS ArPg The conference su mtitute adopts with The conference _'orporates, technical changes pr( _isions in the House with changes, the in Senate amendment amendin four sections of the bill (section 11) app: As changed, this Federal Property and _lmtnistrative Services prlations not to exc $2 million Act to make the nut _rity of the A(hnlnisfiscal year ending 30, 1975, of trator of General Ser_ Lces to issue regulanot more than $150 is to be for tions and forms subord hate to the authority research, and as conferred on the OFPP _.dministrator to premay be necessary for of the four scribe procurement poi _ies, regulation:;, proyears thereafter. It provides that cedures, and forms un, er this act. The Senquent legislation to is to be referred in Senate to the ate bill covered two si ailar amendments to mittee on Operations. The auFederal Property and Administrative thorization of $2 ion for the first fiscal Act. The tec}: xical changes in the year is in lieu of the$4 million authorized _ference substitute make clear that no in the Senate bill, an_ in lieu of the $1 milis given ti) t _e OFPP Administralion estimated by th_ report on H.R. 15233 that sp, cifically conferred by of the Committee on ( overnment Operations _rovisions of thi.' act. (It. Rept. No. 93-1176 pp. 6-7). CHar HoI,i FI.ELD, The conference sur stitute is in lieu of provision i,_ the Hous amendment (section FERNAN1) _ ST GEIIMAIIq, 10) which indefinitell authorized such unDON FUQI] ,, specified sums as ma_ be necessary to carry FRANK Ho] ;TON, out the act. Howevel, the conference substitute does include 1_nguage, reflecting the Man_ o! the House. House amendment, th at appropriations shall CHILES, be available "for no (ther purpose." This is S_ intended to assure th _t such appropriations WA HUDDLESTON, will be used only for activities of the OFPP WIL ROTH, and will not be mingl _d with appropriations for other OMB activil _s. Managers on o! the Senate. 8O 1 H 7794 CONGRESSIONAL PROVIDING. FOR CONSIDE:RATION OF H.R. 16090, FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1974 The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. 'YOUNG) is recognized for 1 hour. (Mr. YOUNG of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. YOUNG of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I · yield 30 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. MARTIN), for the purl_)ses of debate only, pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 1292 provides for a modified open rule with 2 hours of general debate on H.R. 16090, the Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974. House Resolution 1292 provides that aU points of order against title IV of the bill for failure to comply with the provisions of clause 4, rule XXI-=prohibiting appropriations in a legislative moasurn--are waived, House Resolution 1292 also provides no amendment, including any amendmerit in the nature of a substitute for the bill, shall be in order except the fo1lowing: in title I: First, germane amendmerits to subsection 101(a) proposing to ctlknge the money amounts regarding contribution and expenditure limits conrained in that subsection, providing that the amendments have been printed in the CONGRFJ3SIONALRECORD at least 1 calendar day prior to being offered; and second, the text of the amendment to be offered on page 13, following line 4, inserted in the CONGRESSIONALRECORD by Mr. Butler on August 5, 1974, perlathing to the consideration of bank loan endorses to be counted as contributora In title Iff: First, germane amendments relating to the composition of the Board of Supervisory Officers provisions conrained on psge 33, line 17 through page 35, line 11, providing they have been printed in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD at least 1 calendar day before conslderation; and second, the amendment printed on page E5246 of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORr of August 2, 1974, relating to a change in the composition of the Board of Supervisory Officers and also deleting the authority of congressional committees to review campaign regulations. In title IV: First, germane amendments which have been printed in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORDat least i calendar day before they are offered, except that sections 401, 402, 407, 409, and 410-pertaining to public financing for Presidential campaigns--shall not be subject to amendment; and second, the text of the amendment printed in the CONGRESSIONALRECORD of August 2, 1974, relatlng to matching public financing for congressional elections, which shall be in order, any rule of the House to the eonteary notwithstanding, House _esolution 1292 also Provides that amendments to any portion of the bill shall be in order, any rule of the House to the contrary notwithstanding, if offered by the direction of the Cornmittee on '.House Administration, but such amendments shall not be subject to amendment, 8O2 RECORD --- HO'!./(_;iE August 7, 1973 H.R. :16090 places limitations on campaign contributions and expenditures, it facilitates the reporting and disclosure c,f the sources and disposition of campaign funds by centralizing campaign expenditure contribution reporting. 'I_le bill also and! establishes a Board of Su- , ,thee g.oups if three or more candidates _re adw_rtised through this means. This i_; _ wide loophole which disregards the 'otal e:_:penditUres as set fo_ih in this 'egislat!on. }Class mailingsSample may ballots be mademaybybethese ,,rganizations. dis- per_sory Officers to oversee enforcemerit of and with Feder_. campaign laws compliance and strengthens the law : ci0uted and, as I said, newspaper ads 'nay be covered. Then we ·have another loophole in this for financing of Presidential eral public elections and authorizes the usegeDof the dollar checkoff fund for financing Presidential nominating conventions and campaigns for :nomination to the office of Preside:at. Mr. Speaker, ][ urge the adoption of iffouse Resolution 1292 in order that we may discuss, debate, and pass H.R. 16090, Mr. MARTIN of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 4 minutes, (Mr. MARTIN of Nebraska asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. MARTIN of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 1292, as the gentleman from Tex_s (Mr. YOUNG) has explaided, provide_ for 2 hours of debate on this very important piece of legislalion. Unfortunately, however, this resolulion provides practically for a closed rule on the bill that will be debated by this, body t:hds afternoon. The Member,,; can carefully go through the rule and the bill ii_,_elfand they will find that really only three amendments are in order: First, in regard to the amount oil money which a candidate may expend or the amount of money which may be .contributed to a candidate's campaign; Second, an amendment may be offered [n regard to changing the composition of the Board of Supervisory Officers, which amendment will be offered by the gentleman from Mirmesota (Mr. FREN-' z_:i); And then the third amendment will[ be in order in regard to endorsers of loans from banks to political campaigns. This is another loophole in this present bill. Those in essence are the only 2 amend-. ments to be allowed to the bill it§elf. ;ill whit_h so-called. allows a $500 Personal ':ropertT, This limit wouldof allow fat ,:als or friendly people to stage recep'ions, (',ocktail parties, and dinners in ' lleir hemes for the purpose of promoting _le caILdidacy of a particular Member 'unning for Federal office. This also is ::.o_ included in the total expenditures 'eported. [Rides on private jets or airplanes or o:3atet[ travel, such as hauling a candi!aLe around his district in an automoAle, an_ so forth, is not reported. This is ,nother loophole. A fourth loophole concerns veIidors, in 'egard [;othe sale of food or beverages at '_iucetL prices for receptions or dinners :y peoI:,le friendly to a particular candi:.ate. The _!3PEAKEI{. The time of the geD:leman has expired. i._{r.5{AItTIN of Nebraska. Mr. Speak_:c,I yield myself 1 additional minute. :_{r. _ipeaker, there are exemptions also Or org_mizations in communications to heir _:_embers where these organiza-. :ions are not organized primarily for :h_ purpose of influencing political etec-. ;ions. Mir. t3peaker, again I point out there :.r_ far too many loopholes in this legisalton, and there is no chance, and I re-. ;_eat, no chance at all, to offer amend-. Rents to change these provisions. There-. ore, tVlr. Speaker, we propose, on our ide of the aisle, to make an attempt--. md I hope it will be successful--to vote :lown tine previous question, and I urge :he Members to vote "no" on the previous :Luestion. I intend then to offer a resolu-. :ion w]Lich provides for an open rule, not equiring that the amendments to be :.gered be published in the CONGRESSIONAl, ;'_rcoaD I calendar day previously. Also': :ihat the bill shall be read by title rather Mr. Speaker, without going into all of :i_an b_ section. I urge the Members to the details of 5he bitl, I would like to _'ote "no" on the previous question. _)int out some of the loopholes that we Mr. 'ifOUNG of Texas. Mr. Speaker, _[ are confronted with lin this piece of leg-- 4eld 5 :minutes to the distinguished gen-. islation. The American people are de.. A_man from Ohio (Mr. HAYS). madding, Mr. Speaker, that the Congress (Mr. I-lAYS asked and was given per-. enact tough legislation to tighten the mlissior_ to revise and extend his re-. laws in regard to campaign receipts and marks. campaign expenditures in the conduct M[r. I{AYS. Mr. Speaker, I was a little, of campaigns. This bill does not meel _u:_prised to see the gentleman from. tile criteria that the American people :{[ebraska riding in here on a white horse are demanding today. .,e:aus_ 'the gentleman has never been. Let me point out further some of the _oted i:_ my time here of being such a loopholes in this legislation. First, we ::hampion in carrying out election reih:ave the so-called slatecard expendi-. :ruThS. tures. This provides that a committee o]: ,lust let'me take a mizmte or two to an organization 'may expend ally amounl :lear the air a little bit about the loop-. that it wishes in regard to candidates in :_cles ti_e gentleman talks about. We do a situation where there are three or more _rovide in the bill--and I think it is a candidates included in the advertising ensibh_ provision--that if some woman without being reported nor counted in i:ives a coffee party in her own house, 'tile total expenditures of that candidate :..ne[h{vites 30 or 40 of hex' neighbors in. :from his recoil:ts, hat she does not have to report to the, This is restricted somewhat, but news.. !_'edera) Elections Commission, which is', paper ads can be taken out by labor un.. _,_;up :n this bill, that she made a conions, the American Association of l_.[anu.. :ributk,n to a candidate, and the candifacturers, the chamber of commerce, o]: :(ate, who may not know about it and. August 7, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- HOUSE failed to report it, could be subject to legal sanctions if he did not report it. If that is a great big loophole, then I will argue this with you all afternoon. There is a limit on it. We have a couple of committee amendmerits that were adopted in the committee this morning, _ and which will be offered to further tighten it up. The gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. FSrNz_.r.) was concerned about them, and the gentleman is satisfied that these amendments we will offer Will make it workable, It was not the intention of the cornmittee to create great big loopholes. It we_s the intention of the committee not to have anyone who might want _o ehgage in a little neighborhood politics subject to indictment, fine, and iraprisonment, because they did not know that if they spent $20 for cookies and coffee they had to make a report to the Federal Elections Commission. What we tried to do is put a tight limit with some sensible--and I emphasize the word sensible__exemptions ' What about the travel amendment? We are saying--and I am paraphrasing so:me language--we further tightened that up with a committee amendment that if a person voluntarily, on his own, comes into the gentleman's district to help him, then his expenses which he pays for up to $500 shall not be considered a contribution. That is all. We are saying, furthermore, these are the big loopholes the gentleman is talklng about, that if one gives a reception on his own as a fund raiser and he has a friend who has a motel, or any other place that he can hold a reception in, and he., sells the person the food and beverage at wholesale price, that the difference between the wholesale price and the retail price is not considered a contribution, He may not sell it to the person at less than cost. He may not lose a dime on it. _ he.,does, that becomes a contribution, and that, again, to the extent of $500. If it is $600, he has got to list it. These are just some commonsense exemptions that we have found over the past few years that we had better write into law, because ff we do not we are goinn to have some rulings that just make it impossible to comply with the law. Let me just give the Members one example of what I am talking about. Under the laws of the State of Ohio, one has to Day $50 filing fee and have 100 signatures or he cannot get on the ballot. That is the law. The secretary of state of Ohio, who is not a great friend of mine, says this is not a campaign expenditure; it is a legal requirement, :But under the rules promulgated by the Commission, they told me that I had to file--and I did not realize this until I had already filed--an amended return saylng that I had contributed $50 to myself and then another set of papers saying I had spend $50 to pay the election board my filing fee. That appealed to me as so ridiculous that I refused to do it. I simply wrote a letter to the Clerk of the House and I said, "I went to the Election Board and filed my papers, and I reached in my billfold and paid $50, which the law requires, and I have a receipt for it. You can con- sider that as saying I made a contribution to myself and, therefore, spent it, or anything you want to, but this letter is all I am filing." I had the letter notarized, and. I sent it in. Up to now I have not been indicted, but I may be. I cannot tell. All we are trying to do in this bill is pass a tight expenditures law. I want to reiterate again for the benefit of those who supported the substitute 2 years ago which wag floated by my friend, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. ANrEgSON), who stood on this floor and said: "We do not need limitations; we just need disclosure; that will do the job," the bill I brought to the floor 2 years ago had limitations of $15 million on a Presidential campaign. I do not say this with any pleasure, but I will say this, if that bill had been passed and the substitute had not been passed--and I know it was not in the name of the gentleman from Illinots (Mr. ANDERSON),but it was his bill; he got Mr. BROWN or somebody else to introduce it for him, but it was his bill-The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman has expired, Mr. YOUNG of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 additional minutes to the gentleman from Ohio. Mr. ANDERSON of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. HAYS. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois. Mr. ANDERSON Of Illinois. I just want to make a point. I am sure the gentleman now in the well would not mislead the House. When I said I did not think we need the limitations, I was referring to overall limits, Mr. HAYS. Mr. Speaker,. I cannot yield any further; I do not have the time. I wfil say that ff we had limitations in the amount I specified 2 years ago, the country would not be in the trauma it is in today, because all of these people would not have been running around all over the country with bags full of money. In retrospect, the President could have been elected for $4.59 given the situation we were in. Mr. DAVIS of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. HAYS. I yield to the gentleman from SOuth Carolina. Mr. DAVIS of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, I rise in support of the resolution. I ask that we do not vote down the previous question. I just say simply that if we vote down the previous question and do not have this rule and adopt some of the amendments that are floating around, it will make the Hatch Act look like the Bill of Rights. Mr. HAYS. I think the gentleman has summed it up better than I could, Mr. MARTIN of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from AMabama (Mr. DICKINSON) 3 minutes. Mr. DICKINSON. Mr. Speaker, I want to say why I am going to oppose this rule. I would like to get the attention of the Members because I think this is probably something they have not thought of before. I favored the idea of requiring the H '7795 printing of proposed amendments in the CONGRF. SSIONALRECORD at least one cs,lendar day prior to their consideration, but I had never envisioned that in its in0nite wisdom the Rules Committee would not provide any guarantee of at least 24 hours so that the Members could comply with this requirement. This is the situation we are faced[ with now. We are considering adopting a rule that requires on its adoption that we have to have gone back to yesterday and have printed in the RECORD something that will make it in order to introduce today. How can this be so? We weretold, some of us on the inside, that this was going to be so, and some of us did get our amendmerrts put in the RECOm) yesterday. But what are we doing? Mr. HAYS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. DICKINSON. I yield; but I have only a few minutes. Mr. HAYS. I appreciate the gentleman's cooperation. Mr. Speaker, I announcedto the ].;louse last night we would do this when there were at least 250 Members here on t]he floor, for whatever that is worth. Mr. DICKINSON. That is all right. I happen not to have been here. But ff 250 Members were here, that means about 250 Members were not here. They had no notice and even those present had no staff in their office due to the lateness of the hour. I think the basic fundamental constitutional right of the Members is being abrogated and threatened if we start this type of procedure. What we are saylng is that we must have at least i calendar day notice to get one's amencMaent printed, but immediately upon adoption of this rule we go right into the bill. There is no way one can protect himself unless one is privy to what is going on inside the committee or has some kuowledge of it. The "Rules of Proceedings" say: In the exercise of their constitutional power to determine their rules of proce6_iings, the House of Oongress may not "ignore constitutional restraints or violate fund. amental rights,.between and there be metlaod a reason-of able relation the should mode or proceeding estal)lished by the rule and the result which is sought %o be attained'.. If we start this tyDe of procedure, then no Member can ever be Sure that he will be allowed to introduce an amendment even if it would normally be in order and it would be germane. We are denying to the Members of the House the right to offer an amendment that would norreally be in order, that would be acceptable, but if he does not have the knowledge ahead of time that the rule would require him to do this, then he is preeluded. l_or this reason I urge the Members to vote down the rule and the previous question. Mr. YOUNG of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Term _e,,see(Mr. JONrs). (Mr. JONES of Tennessee asked and was given perml_on to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. JONES of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, 803 H 7796 CONGRESSIONAL I support the motion and I support the rule on H.R. 16090. This is a very complex bill which the House Administration Committee has spent many long hours writing and rewriting. In size alone, it numbers 79 pages, more than double the length of the committee print we started with last March. I think that all of us on the committee learned a lot during the hearing and markup process. There is a tendency to think that we are all experts on political campaigns and on election law. And that may be true in our own districts..But this bill is bigger than the Seventh Congressional r)istrlct Of Tennessee. It is being propo,;ed as a new law to govern the conduct of all candidates for Federal office and ali political committees that get involved; in the campaigns of any candidate for Federal office anywhere in the country, We have produced a good bill. It took a long time and it was not easy. It is not a perfect bill; there are still !_oints of controversy. But under this rule, amendments will :be offered 'to answer every doubt a Member may have about this bill. Public financing of elections is one of the controversial points. I-I.R. 16090 prorides for a complete package of public financing for the 1976 Presidential elecrich. I favor that, because it is in the Presidential election that millions of dollars are required, where the publ!e is demanding that we put a stop to the excessive of the sure special ests. We influence need to make that,interthe abuses of 1972 do not happen again,'and that is the reason I am supporting the idea of paying for the next Presidential election out of the dollar check-off fund. Some people think we need to extend public financing to House and Senate elections as well I disagree. I think we ought to give this new idea a trial run in the 1976 Presidential primaries to see how it will work. But to my colleagues who want to extend public financing to congressional races, let me a_ure you that you will get a chance to vote for SUEh an amendment under the rule we are considering, Then, there are some who feel we need to change the enforcement mechanism. Personally, I think Pat Jennings, the Clerk of the House, has done an outstanding job overseeing the thousands of pages of reports which candidates must file. _s far as I can discover, there have been no complaints about the operation of his office or the office of the Secretary o:r the Senate during the past 2 difficult years we have operated under the current election laW. But for the Members who wish to provide for somebody else to serve on a Board of Supervisory Officers, an amendmerit will be offered to provide for this. There are other amendments planned, I agree with some of my colleagues who feel that $75,000 is too much to spend on a primary, that $75,000 is too much to spend on an election for the House. I plan to support the amendment offered by my friend from Pennsylvania (Mr. DENT) to lower this amount. Others of 804 RECORD -- HO:_::E you plan to support amendments to illcrease this amount. My point is t:ais: Under the rule proposed by the Rules Committee, all oX these amendments will be in order. The major vote t:hat will not be irk order will be proposals to create new loopholes for political party committees, to permit wealthy individuals and special interest groups to give money to a politicai party, which in turn could provide services to candidates. Under the bill, no committee can give a candidate more than $5,000. I think that is more than enough. I can assure you that we will have :many hours of debate under the 5-.mtnute rule on the many amendments that 'will be offered tmde:c the pending rule, :H:owever, a completely open rule would. prevent us from completing work on this bill for' another week. Look at what t_appened during' the debate on the strip mining bill. Very few of us have any mining in our districts yet the debate went on and on and on--, almost 2 full weeks of legislative time Unfortunately, we just do not have _ weeks left on the calendar to devote to this very important bill. I speak front the experience of our committee deliberations. To those of you who really believe :in election reform, who sincerely want to get a good bil]t passed this year to make sure that w_ do not have a repeat of the scandals o1: 1972--I urge you to support the rule oz_ this bill. August 7, 19 7_ aan will yield further, I alu aware of :hat. I thi_zk all Members of the House ::re a_'are of this and if the rule is ,.:,dopted and the amendment is germane, :t will be accepted. Mr. JONES of Tennessee. Mr. Speak,::r, I urge support for this bill. :[_gr._SARTIN of Nebraska. Mr. Speak-. er, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman :[rom I:linois (Mr. ANDERSON). Mr. ANDERSON of Illinois. Mr. Speak-. :;r, Members of the House, it is certainly :::ct an overstatement to say that this is :_ bill ::'or which the country has been :vatting, and one in which every one o£ i,:he 435 Members of this body is very, very much interested. The only question be-. ['ore us during this hour is the kind of ,ule under which we are to debate this bill. I am asking the Members to vote down the previous question. I want a rule. I _Tant a bill, but I suggest that it is a tray-. esty on the legislative process and an insuit to every one of the 435 Members of this House to tell us that we should be limited by the kind of rule that is pro-posed m this case.The D_mocratic caueus in February 1973, at least adopted some rules that were postulated in order to meet Democratic aims to do away with what tiaey said was the iniquitous procedure that had been followed by the Committee on Ways and Means in pre.sentin_: closed rules. Yet, we have the distinguished chairman--I think he is here--_:)f our Committee on Rules take office ia this Congress, and I remember Mr. HAYS. t:leman yield? Mr. Speaker, will the gen.. ::eading an interview where he said he Mr. JONES of Tennessee. I yield t(J wanted the Members--referring to the the gentleman from Ohio. :.VIembcrs of this body--to vote. "That is Mr. HAYS. I do not see the gentlemar_ w:aat they are sent here for." from Alabama on the floor, but I would Yet, they are going to muzzle the like to announce to the membership, i: Membexs of this House today with the would not be my position, nor do I knov, t:ind of rule suggested for adoption. Vote ii; would be the purpose of anybod-j or_ clown _he previous question; give us a t:he committee, to object to an amend., zhance: to legislate. We will do that remerit not printt_l in the RECOSD whiclJ sponsibly and intelligently. would be otherwise germane raider th_: Mr. Speaker, I took the trouble to see rule. w:aat _ome of the people around the I want the Members to know that ff it _ountry who are really interested in the i,'_germane and the rule is adopted an(: subject of reform had to say about this, i:_ the amendment is germane or al:: and I leave letters and will put them in amendment to an amendment, we do noi: the R_:coRm John Gardner wrote: intend to objec'G. DEAR REPRESENTATrVE ANDERSON:We dcWe asked for that because this is a_: plore the failure of the House Ru/es Cornextremely technical bill, as the gentle.; mibtee _o fully open up the contribution and man from Tennessee knows. We had s!c,endi_Jg limits of H.R. 16090 to germane hoped that on major amendments we _unendments. would be put on notice so our legal stall I have a letter which I will put in the would have a chance to examine then', RECOE:_ that I frankly solicited from 'and tell us what the implications are Ralph Nader saying the same thing: but I have no intention to preclude _:L The failure yesterday of the House Rules ]JIember if therule is adopted from of. Commi:tee to fuUy open up the contribution fering any amendnient to any sectior_ and spending limits of LI.R. 16090 to amendthat the rule says amendments are il:_ ments is an inappropriate action. order to. I ant reminded of the claims that are Mr. MARTIN of Nebraska. Mr. Speak.. given that this is the "Sunshine Coner, will the gen:leman yield? gress.': We have opened up the House to Mr_ JONES of Tennessee. I yield t::, let the sunshine in. I have read that in the gentleman fronl Nebraska. the closing scene of the musical producMr. MARTIN of Nebraska. I would tion "Hair" that they take off their like to point out that under the resolu .... c].othe,_ and they are naked by the tion we are considering at the preseni: time they finish, "Let the Sunshine In." time any Member of the House could Those who say they are for reform of object to the offering of an amendment, the procedures of this House are going that is not printed in the RECOPa), _) be equally naked this afternoon in Mr. HAYS. M:r. Speaker, if the gentle., their pretentions to open up this body to August 7, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- HOUSE let the sunshine in ff they support this tance to the democratic institutions of the closed rule. . United States--H.R. 16090--the Federal ElecXf we adopted the kind of modified tion Campaign Act Amendments of 1974. The House Administration Committee's closed rule that is being sought, and there bill reforms several areas of campaign ftnancare at least 10 areas---10 areas that were lng abuses--abuses which have brought called to my attention as a member of _andal, disrespect and criminal convictions the Committee on Rules in which pernot only to Presidential campaigns, but to fectly legitimate amendments are congressional, state and local campaigns as sought to be offered on the floor of this well. House, and to suggest that in a matter The Committee's bill would establish exas fundamentally as important as the penditure and committees; contribution limits for individuals and would provide electoral process, how we solicit campublic funds from the income tax check-off ioaign funds, how we are elected to office, fund for Presidential general and primary ts not of equal interest to every Member campaigns; and would provide funds for naof this body--and I appreciate the tional party conventions. However, it does gentleman's expertise, I appreciate the contain two glaring omissions, 21 ' markup sessions that it took to proFirst, the bill limits any public support duce a bill and I am glad he is here to only Presidential campaigns, completely omitting congressional races. Representatives today. Many of the provisions, perhaps most John Anderson (1%-Ill.) Morris IIdall (D· Ariz.) are proposing an and amendment to cover of them, I will support, gladly support, congre_ional campaigns that deserves your but I would suggest that to deny us who support. Under this amendment, money from are interested in other areas of the bill the income tax check-off fund would be prowhat is our legitimate right to write a vialed to congressional candidates for general piece of legislation of this interest and elections on a matching basis for private of this import on the floor is to deny us contributions of $50 or less. The matching the right we ought to have as Members funds could only bei.e., usedradio for voter communication functions, and TV, newsof this body. paper advertising, billboards, etc. and would Mr. Speaker, the letters follow: be limited to Vj of the candidate's spendCOMMON CAUSE, lng limit (under the Committee's bill, to Waskington, D.C., August 6, 1974. $25,000). In addition, each candidate will lion. JOHN B. ANDEasON, have to raise a threshold amount equal tm tt(rgse o_ Representatives, 10% of the spending limit in order to qualify Lo_g_oortlt House Office B_ilding, for matching payments. Thus, frivolous canW_h_h, zgton, D.C. didates would not qualify for these funds. DEAR R_P_ENTATrVE AlWOERSON: We deThe second omission concerns enforcement plore the failure of the House Rules Cornpowers. Representatives William Frenzel (Rmlttee to fully open up the contribution and 111.) and Dante Fascell (D-Fla.) are intro_pendtng limits of HR- 16090 to germane ducing an amendment to correct this deftamendments. This action prevents major isciency. As a Washington Post editorial, Augsues in controversy on the campaign finance nst 5, 1974 said, ".. , for there could be no bill from being considered on the House more constructive change in federal camfloor, paign practices than to have the regulatory We believe that the House in considering laws---whatever they may bc aggressively the rule on HR 16090 should vote to defeat and-consistently policed by an agency with the previous question and should adopt an enough authority to do the Job." Given the open rule making all germane amendments history of weak enforcement of campaign fiin order; To do less will seriously Jeopardize _ancing laws and the extensive evidence of tIouse consideration and action on cammisuse of law enforcement agencies for palgn finance reform in 1974. political purposes, anything less than a truly Sincerely, independent elections commission with sufjo_z_ GARDNER. ficient law enforcement authority will be percelved by citizens a_ a _lf-serving arrangeAUGUST 6, 1974. ment. Hon. JOHN B. A_D_mON, Congress Watch supports the provisions Hffase ofRepresentatives, of the Committee bill to provide public funds r.Ongwortk House Office Building, for Presidential general elections, primaries, Washington, D.C. and nominating conventions. We oppose, 1_ R_U_N*rAX_VB ANOERSON: The f_A1- however, the high limit on contributions by ute yesterday of the House Rules Committee special interest groups ($10,000 per election), to fully open up the contribution and spendReform of the campaign finanging system tug limits of HR 16090 to germane amendis one of the most difficult challenges facing menta is an ·inappropriate action. Legislathe 93rd Congress. The Senate is firmly tion of the dimensions of HR 16090 needs to on record for' serious reform. It is now the receive full consideration on the floor of the duty of the House of Representatives to see House. Tills action prevents major areas of that the abuses which have brought the clemlegitimate controversy from being considered ocratlo institutions of America such disby all members of the House of Representsrespect are corrected. Your support of the rives. Anderson-Udall and the Frenzel-Fascelt The House, in considering the rule on HR amendments and HR 16090 is crucial to the 16090 (H. ReS. 1292), should vote to defeat reconstruction of citizen trust In governthe previous question and should vote an ment. open rule making all germane amendments The House Rules Committee has failed in order. HR 16090_ the Anderson-Udall to fully open tile contribution and spendamendment and the Frenzel-Faacell amendlng limits of HR 16090 to germane amend.merits should be passed with the benefit of ments. The House, in considering the rule on full debate and consideration of all relevant HR 16090, should vote to defeat the previous points of view. question and should adopt a rule making all Yours truly, germane amendments in order. It is lnapRALPH NADER. propriate for a bill of the importance of HR 16090 to be considered under a rule Po_c Crrl_. N, .which does not allow for major areas of conAugust 6, 1974. trOversy to be considered on the floor, :Draa Mxm_s_a o_' Co_ca_ss:-Thls WednesYours truly, day and Thursday,: August 7th and 8th, the Joa_ CLAYBROOK. HoUSe win deq_ate a bill of immense lmporMoac_aN DOWNEY. Mr. DENNIS. Mr. Speaker, gentleman yield? Mr. ANDERSON of Illinois. the gentleman from Indiana. H 7797 will I yield the to Mr. DENNIS. Mr. Speaker, I 'would like to extend my congratulations to the gentleman from Illinois for what he said, and I associate myself with his remarks. I would like to say that as tong as this Congress tries to start election reform by adopting a gag rule, it cannot expect to be any better thought of by the public than it unfortunately is. Mr. ANDERSON of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman is correct. There is the utmost irony in a situation where we find that we are legislating reform under the kind of rule that it proposed here this afternoon. Vote down the previous question; ]et the gentleman freni Nebraska offer an open rule so that we can work our will on this vital piece of legislation and get on with the kind of reform that the country iS waiting for. Mr. YOUNG of lVlorida. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. ANDERSON of Illinois. I yield to the gentleman from Florida. (Mr. YOUNG of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and extend his xemarks.) Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the previous question on House Resolution 1292, the rule for consideration of H.tL 16090, the, Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974. H.R. 16090 is one of the most important legislative items on our calendar this year; it provides for long-overdue reforms in Federal election laws. The American people have been calling for these reforms ever since the revelations of widespread abuses by many candidates and campaign organizations of both parties during the 1972 elections. It is _Tifortunate that there has been such substantial delay in getting a bill before the House, and that we must consider it at a time of domestic upheaval which diverts our energies and attention. I have long been a vigorous supporter of campaign reform, both in the l_torida State Senate and here in the House. I agree with millions of Americans that there are glaring defects in existing Federal law, and I have introduced my own campaign reform bill, H.R. 11735, to correct these defects. My bfil is much tougher in many respects than H.R. 16090, and I had tl_erefore looked forward to offering amendments to the cornmittee bill to make it tougher. However, the Rules Committee, has unfortunately decided that H.R. 16090 will be considered under what is essentially a "gag rule." Whole crucial sections of the bill will, under House Resolution 1292, be totally exempt from amendment. We will not be able to toughen up the provisions of H.R. 16090, nor will we be able to close some very glaring loopholes in the bill. AS I noted previ(amly, campaign reform is one of the most pressing issues of our time. I am reluctant to vote against the rule for consideration of such an important bill, because I feel that 8O5 H 7798 CONGRESSIONAL H.R. 16090 slaould be debated and passed, with certain, amendments. But the rule which we have before us today is totally unsatisfactory for consideration of this measure bex:ause it does not allow the House to work its'will in the normal legislative manner. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I am going to join other Members in rotlng against the previous question on House ResOlution 1292 so that we may bring' H.R. 16090 to the floor under a completely ()pen rule. Mr. CLEVELAND. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. ANDF. RSON of Illinois. I yield to _he gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. CLErk.LAND). (Mr. CLF. VELAND asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. CLEVELAND. Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Committee on House Ad_ m'mistrs, tion which produced this bill, I rise in opposition to its consideration under what amounts to a closed rule. It would be an utter disgrace for the House to act on the critical issue of political campaign r_fforrns while denying Merebers meaningful opportunity to improve it by amendment, The record will show that this legislation was finally reported, more _han 2 years after the Watergatabreak-in, by a committee dominated--like the rest of the House--by the majority party. Many amendments offered in committee were rejected by party-line vote. Some amendments such as the Brademas proposal to use oheck-off funds for matching of small contributions to candidates in presidential primaries were adopted with bipartisan support, including my own. Yet the bill with all its deficiencies is essen,tially a Deraocratic product. It is sigr_[flcant to me that many of the amendments barred from considerstion by this rule deal with specialinterest contributions, the problem of pooling of fimds so as to prevent identiflcation of original donors, and in-kind contributions, The affinity of organized labor for the majority party makes all too evident the basis for resistance to this type of reforms, as well as other measures to tighten up this legislation. Because the majority does operate from a privMeged sanctuary, the media and election reform advocates will probably remain respectfully and benignly silent, The spectacle of a sharply limited rule is all the more abhorrent in view of the impeachment proceedings now in process of being accelerated. Granted, the fixing of responsibility for Watergate is the principal priority response to Watergate. But a close second is election reform. To do only half the job now would be manifestly a return to business as usual, politics as usual and I will have no part in it. Incidentally, a third priority is further progress in congressional reform, from which this rule represents a giant step backward. It would be absolutely absm'd to abandon our progress toward a more open and _esponsive Congress in enactlng a legislative response to the closeddoor horrors of Watergate. I, for one, 806 RECORD --- HO'USE August 7, 1974 tend to _lew tlx_s as being of a piece wit_; paign reform. Openness is a basic ingre.the tactics of the Democratic Caucus ir._ dient :_f any democratic system is to b_ttling up the latest congressional re-. work; openness is what reform is ali form pYopo_s, about. If we are truly concerned about One might arguE; that the debate reform with this bill on campaign financ.would last too long, that the bill mightl ing and campaign practices, then itis be extensively altered. That is no excuse imperative that we have an open rule. for preventing the !Iouse from working Therefore, I will vote no on the previous its will. I rej._ct the suggestion that question, and I urge my colleagues to do Members cannot act constructively anti !ikewis_. responsibly. Indeed, we have an obliga-. Mr. YOUNG of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I tion to assure that they are confronted yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from _th the opportunity and the responsi-, Ohio (Mr. HAYS), the chairman of the bility to vote these pending amendment'; committee. up or down, on the record. Mr. _:_AYS. Mr. Speaker, I would yield I insist that we must take the time. !:o the gentleman from Illinois, who The body has rccentiy scheduled an en-, refuser: to yield to me, but that is beside tire 2 weeks of debaLe on impeachment, i:he poi:at. Il; now appears that I week will suffice I jus_ want to make a few observations. _ere is no way the House could spencl ':_he gentleman from Indiana (Mr. its time more in the public interest, than I):_NNIS) has shifted his position once to take an entire week, if need be, to dc :b_s week on a very vital matter. He tlle job that must be done on this bill might shift again when he understands Mr. CRONI_ Mr. Speaker, will the w:aatis involved here. gentleman yield? A lot of the Members are shifting their Mr. ANDERSON of Illinois. I yield tc positions over there, when they should the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr not have taken one, as I did. I did not C!RON_). _. :lmvet(, _shift. (Mr. CROMN asked and was give_l Let me say this to you, Mr. ANDERSON: permission to revise and extend his re.. I can understand the speech you made, marks.) and if I had been the author of the bill Mr. CRONIN. Mr. Speaker, Congres:: wi:ich :produced Watergate, as you were, has spent the past year and a half at.. with l:o limitations I would be making tempting to enact a meaningful cam.. I;he same kind of speech you made. paign reform bin..During this period Mr. MARTIN of Nebraska. Mx'. ninny of us strongly and consistentb Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleurged prompt action by the House Ad. man from Minnesota (Mr. FRrNZEL). ministration Committee, only to be mci. (Mr_ FRENZEL asked and was given with delay after delay. I was please(:, permission to revise and extend his when the corr_dttee--at long last---re, remarks.) ported out a campaign reform measure Mr. FRENZEL. Mr. Speaker, during because I foresaw the opportunity t,:, i;he pa::;t 2 years, the American public has transform aH of our efforts into reality been lorced to witness the depressing Although I do no_ believe the bfil a:_ s];_ectacle of massive violations of our reported is strong enough to prevenl; campaign laws under a coverup atmoscampaign financing abuses, it is a goo(ii phere. Do we now dare to subject the base from which to initiate an effective American people to the irony or perhaps reform. Through the adoption on the the outrage of considering the camfloor of many strengthening amend.paign :anance reform bill under a closed ments--several of which I am cospen, rule? soring---I believe that the House coul4:l The confidence of the American peopass a meani:agful reform bill whic]_ ple in _:heir Government is too low for us could be further strengthened in _:_ to embark on such a risky undertaking. House-Senate conference. With l)ublic cynicism and alienation so Now, through the procedural tactic o: rampant, a campaign reform biU that is a modified closed rule, we are prohibite,i considered under a closed rule will be from even offering these amendmenk short on credibility. which I feel ace necessary if we are to The rationale for the closed rule is that claim, with any integrity, that we haw_: the House cannot be trusted to deal with enacted a refc,rm ineasure. If this rul_ one of the most important issues it will is adopted, many of the major areas c:_: consider all year. If our own leadership controversy of campaign financing wi].], does not have confidence in us, then how never be considered by the 93d Congress,; c.'m we expect the American people to Instead of ignoring these issues, I feel i; have any confidence in us? is the responsibility of every iVfember c:!: I think we can be trusted to handle the Congress to take a public stand of eac?:. :people's business. I think that is what we of them, so that their constituents wi!2 were elected for. If the public is to regain _aaow exactly how their Congressman ha:; confidence in the Congress, then we have Voted on legislation to change the law '_) show confidence in ourselves. I think which governs his reelection efforts. :1: the best way to display that confidence believe the fu]l House should have thc is for _11Members to cornmit themselves opportunity to consider each of .these 'bo the prihciple that open proceedings s_mendments and to determine its merit:, are the way to obtain the best bill Although I am certain my vote on the possible. previous quest[on to this rule could b,: The closed rule will both stifle debate misinterpreted by some of my constitu, and d:iscussion and drastically limit the ents as "antireform?' I am equally con amenc[ments that can be offered. Only fident that my constituents will not be, about half a dozen amerxdments wiU be deceived by attempts to limit true camin or_er. Proponents claim that, under August 7, 19 74 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- ttOUSE H 7799 an open rule, the House will take weeks to complete a bill. TO date, there have been only about 50 separate amendments printed in the RECORD. Committee amendments will eliminate many of these. Under our proposed open rule, these are the only amendments that could be offered. A close examination of these amendments demonstrates that all of them are germane to the topic at hand, and should be debated. I do not want to discuss the merits or demerits of the bill, but in an- 80-page comprehensive election reform bill, each of us can find ideas roi' amendment. Why should some of us be more equal than the rest? We used an open rule in 1971, and we all survived, Mr. Speaker, the case for an open rule is overwhelming. We are not going to bring sunshine into the electoral process by considering the campaign reform bill in the dark. We cannot expect the public to have confidence in this body, when we ourSelves do not have sufficient confidence to allow Members to work their will freely on one of the most important issues of the year--an issue on which each of us has plenty of expertise, What a dreadful irony it will be to handle a bin designed to open up the political processes under a procedure that is not open. The public is not going to believe that this bill will open up the processes when it is legislated under a closed rule. ! urge Members to vote down the prevtous question so that we can consider the biilunder an open rule. -Mr. YOUNG of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. I see no need to open it up further, not make in order, amendments to the especially on those technical aspects bill which would be offered by the gertwhich really do not go to the heart of tleman from California (Mr. DEL (;LAm'the matter. The heart of the matter is son) and others aimed at outlawing spein the financing, in the limitation, and ciflc Watergate types of abuse. I refer to in the enforcement procedures, all of campaign spying, and espionage, and which are open. that kind of thing. In my judgment, these Mr. Speaker, I respectfully request the are far more in need of legislative attenMembers of the House to vote for this tire than other aspects of the bill that rule. comes before us. Mr. MARTIN of Nebraska. Mr. Let me say to the Members of the Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the genHouse that worthwhile amendments will tleman from Colorado (Mr. ARMSTRON0). be proposed; let them be considered and (Mr. ARMSTRONG asked and was vote them up or down on their merits. I given pelTnission to revise and extend urge ray colleagues to vote down the prehis remarks.) vious questions so that the Members of Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Speaker, I this body can exercise their prerogatives thank the gentleman from Nebraska for and have free and open debate on the bill yielding this time to me. and its amendments. I commend the gentleman from NeThe SPEAKER. The time of the gertbraska for his leadership in this matter tleman has expired. in drawing the attention of the House to Mr. YOUNG of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I the serious shortcomings of this rule. I yield 3 minutes to a distinguished merealso particularly commend the gentleher of the committee, the gentleman man from Illinois (Mr. ANDERSON), who from Indiana (Mr. Br_DEMAS). has underscored so vividly the reasons /Mr. BRADEMAS asked and was given of principle and conscience why this permission to revise and extend his rerule must be defeated. He has pointed marks.) out, and I think we all know, the moral Mr. BRADEMAS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in implications of bringing this bill to the support of the rule, and urge ths_t the House floor for consideration under an Committee on Rules and the Committee antireform rule. on House Administration be supported The very idea of bringing an election in their effort to produce 'what I believe reform bill to the floor of the Congress can mark a milestone in major campaign of the United States under a closed rule reform legislation written by the Conis absurd, and it would be laughable if gress of the United States. it were not tragic. The gentle_a from Illinois _Mr. Mr. Speaker; I want to say a word ANDEgSON) who has himself made a about some needed amendments which significant contribution to the shaping of will be precluded unless we vote down public opinion on this important legislathe previous question so an amendment tion, remarked that the only question beproviding for an open rule can be fore the House today was the rule. That adopted, is not the only question. The real quesTHOMPSON). Let me call attention of the Members tion coming up, in my judgment, is Mr. THOMPSON of New Jersey. Mr. to provisions of this bill as-it is now whether we will have a campaign reform Speaker, with due respect to the feelings written which give to candidates for bill this year or not. For one of the reaof the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. public office a veto power over the rights sons for the rule that has been brought FRrNZrL), who has worked long and hard of publication and speech of other perforth by the Committee on Rules _o the on this legislation and of the gentleman sons. The language contained in this bill floor of the House t_)day is to make sure, from Illinois (Mr. ANrEnSON), I rise in is strikingly similar to that which was on the one hand, that all of the :major support of this rule. I do so because, notheld by a New York court to be unconmatters that are in controversy or 'that withstanding the fact that it is not cornstitutional Just a few months ago. It is may have been considered by the Completely Open, every single section of the not my purpose to argue the legal conmittee on House Administration are in proposed legislation in which there has siderations_ but I just do not see how we fact brought before the floor of the House been a major public interest is open and can give that kind of a veto power to so that we will have a chance to w)te on wiU be open. any person over the free speech and them while, on the other hand, assuring Further, our distinguished committee publication rights of another person that we are not hit With such a raft o_ chairman, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. without violating the first amendment amendments that may be frivolous in Hays), has indicated a willingness not of the Constitution. nature that, with time running out in to 5bject to amendments which have not I think we ought to have an amendthis ,session of Congress, they could pose been printed in the RECORD if they are ment to strike that provision Out of the a danger to the passage of effective camgermane. What could be more open than bill. The Committee of the Whole ought paign reform legislation this year. that? to be entitled to take this matter up 'Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to It has not been my habit to vote for under debate and vote on an amendnote, if the Members will look at the rule, closed ! really not merit that germane amendments to limitations consider rules, this but to be closed honestly since thedo very portion which of the would bill. be proposed on that on expenc_itures and contributions will be vital elements of it are open. Second, I want to point out this bill made in order. Mr. Speaker, Only this morning in does not deal effectively with in kind conThe amendment to be offered by the committee there were adopted and tributions. It does not close the existing gentleman from Virginia (Mr. BUTLES) agreed to by the gentleman from Minneloopholes; it opens up new loopholes, not to make bank loan endorsers con_tribusota FnENZrL) and by mereonly as to limitation but also as to retors is in order. Germane amendments hers, (Mr. including myself, five other committee porting. to the composition of the superviso_,y amendments which go a long, Ior_g way Third, Mr. Speaker, I want to respond board are in order, and the l_ascelltoward satisfying the desires of those to the chairman of the committee, the Frenzel amendment relating to the Supwho really want_meaningful election regentleman from Ohio (Mr. HAYS), who ervisOry Board is made in order. 'rhe_e form. Certainly the American people has mentioned Watergate. One of the parts of title IV which have to do with want it and demand it, and they are go- most serious shortcomings of this piece public financing will be made in order, lng to get it. We are going to get a very of legislation is that it fails to take into and the rule specifically permits a vote splendid piece of legislation as a result account the abuses revealed by the on the Anderson-UdaU amendment on of this process. Watergate investigation. This rule would pubIic financing of congressional elec807 H 7800 CONGRESSIONAL lions, committee amendments are also made in order under the rule. There will be, therefore, this speaker, ample opportunity for the House to work its will in this bill on matters of substance, The Com:afittee on House Administralion considered nearly 100 amendments over the raany days of markup. We worked lon_: and hard. I want to say further, Mr. Speaker, that this is a bipartisan bill. The gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. FaENZEL) made contributions. Members on both sides of the aisle made contributions, So, Mr. Speaker, I suggest that the real issue here, and I am not now going to take time to go into the substance of the major features of the bill, but the real issue here is: Do the Members want a campaign reform bill this year or not? If they do, lbhen they should vote for the previous question and the rule. Mr. M/_TIN of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consurae. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the chairman of the Comrrfittee on House Administration, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. HAYs), a question, The gentbleman has stated that he would not object to amendments being offered on t_he floor regardless of whether they had 'been published in the CONGRESSIONALRECORD I calendar day previous to today, I would ask the gentleman from Ohio, does the gentleman's statement also inchide that the entire bill bi; open to amendment;, and that the gentleman does not object _boamendments to other seclions? Mr. HAYS. Of course not. I said anything that the rule does make in order. Mr. MARTIN Of Nebraska. I decline to yield any further. I am glad the gentleman from Ohio clarified that, because we still have a closed rule before us. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the RECORD --- HO!_;JE I ;_ould say to my colleagues on th_ ether side of the a_sle that we are in :z_ position today where the House call con. tinue in the path which the Committe_z on the Judicia_7_ followed. Certainly, it i_ a tough vote to vote do_m the previous; question and provide an open rule wher_ the head of tile Democratic Campaig]:L Committee wants a :modified closed rule But your posit:(on is not nearly as tough s_ the position that many of us have bem:L i:a and had to wrestle with. There is onl:i one fair way to approach this issue. Tha! is to vote down the previous question and open up this rule and give us a reaJ chance at reform. Z:fiis something tha! we want; it is something that this conn.'try needs. This country will not tolerat_ a double standard of conduct; one fo_:' impeachment of the President, the othe_:' for the Democratic Pm-ty and the Con. gress. It is time, in the House for fairness;, not partisan action. The vote will te)i the story more than any words, Mr. YOUNG of Texas. Mr. Speaker. Z[ yield 2 minutes to the distinguished, gentleman from Penilsylvanla (Mr I)ENT). (Mr. DENT asked and was given per. mission to revise and extend hi:: remarks.) Mr. DENT. Mr. Speaker, I take thi:_; moment just to say that I endorse th_ rule and the previous question on it, be. cause I started this little bill on its way with _he hearings in our subcommittm_ over a long period of time. Most of th_, closed parts of the bill are matters thai; in my honest opinion have very littk_ 'to do with campaign behavior. Most e:f them are kinds of regulations and cfi.-. teria that haw_ to be put into legislatioz_, for guidelines, The real heart of the legislation th9 i; _dl of us are interested in is the matter August 7, 1974 ';)ez'mi:;sion to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. :RHODES. Mr. Speaker, I rise in _pposition to the rule on H.R. 16090, the Federal Election Campaign Act Amendmeats of 1974, and I ask that the previous question be voted dox_ul so that the _xde m_xy be amended. Z hs,ve consistently urged enactment _)f responsible campaign reform legislalion, s,nd I feel it is a priority for the 93d Congress. The House AdministraMan Committee has worked long to devclop H.R. 16090, and while I do not a_ee with all of the committee's proposals I commend the members for their dJligert efforts. I cannot, however, allow the rule under which we will consider this important legislation to go unchallenged_ In a straight partyline vote, the 'Cornmittee on Rules adopted House Resolulion 1292, a "modified closed" rule. Instead of full and open consideration of campaign reform, the rule permits Mere~ bors to .amend only a few, specific perlbions cf the bill. On such a vital issue, where real, workable reform is essential, it is unconscionable that the major party would JLraposeagagrule. As set forth in the statement by the lqepublican Policy Committee, H.R. 16090 contains many areas of serious concern. ]For that reason the House should have every opportunity to work its will and consider not just the provisions adopted b;r the House Administration Committee bat the substantive amendments proposed by other Members of the House. I think it is strange, Mr. Speaker, o:: these sections which are eligible for amendment under this rule the section 'which have to be amended in order to shut off the "soft money" type of con- gentleman Florida (Mr. given FSEY). (Mr. FRF. from Y asked and was permission to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. FREY. Mr. Speaker, reference was of solicitation of funds, the spending e:i'. tribution there are no is amendments not one. In which other can words be funds, limitatJ.ons or no limitations. X offered which would shut off the kind of am going to support the since rule. But I sa:i' contribution to the House that ever I started which certainly is unconscionable, if not illegal. I do not know working on the bill before we put it up why ii; would be that any campaign reto the full corr6nittee, Mr. HaYS took a;[_[ of the hard work and all of the blame form bill worthy of the name would not and abuse on the legislation because shut off the largest source of illegal aid some persons do not believe one has te thatIt has we have the that wholethiscountry. been insaid bill does just to the position of the gentleman made from ]Indiana (Mr. DrN_m) and by implication to other Members on our have to work, and had this to have time. time The Members may he think is a:n argument on a rule. Can they imagine mitteeof the side on the :aisleJudiciary. who servedI certailzly on the Cornwas proud of these men, or I was proud of the entire Committee on the Judiciary in the way they approached this issue of impeachment. It was obviously a tough issue and tore a lot of people apart. But these men acted on the evidence, and they acted within their ' consciences, Then changes of position in light of the few evidence was not only courageous but correct. To question this is to do these men a disservice, Dm-lng this time of the debate on lmpeachment we heard from both sides of the committee words like "fairness and justice," words like "bipartisan appreach," arid words like"rule of law." The Judiciary Committee, I think, acted on the whole within these concepts and most of us in thls country were proud of such actions. what 'we have .gone through for over '" ':' years in the committee? I intend to offer two amendments. ;Z will offer one myself and the other wi:i] be offered by the gentleman from Lqeorgia (Mr. i[VL_THIS)dealing with th,s, ]1mits of spending, dealing with the toted, amounts, dealing with how much on_, can contribute and how much one cm_ accept. That is what the people call re. form. That is what the people are inter · ested in. When we get to the floor and action o:n the bill, I hope some of us will sis:i, around and let me give them the fack_', after 2 years of intense work on this bil'.., Mr. MARTZN of Nebraska. M:_, :_peaker, I yield 3 minutes to the dis.., tinguished Mi2ority Leader, the gentle.,, man from Arizona (Mr. RHODES). (Mr. RHODES asked and was glven_ 808 :not deal with all of the things which cause([ Watergate. That is undoubtedly true, but I think it is even more serious that ii; does not even deal with the type of opening in the artery of the political system which causes the hemorrhage which the "soft money" causes. I do not believe that the gentleman from Ohio really is getting his hats mixed up, and that he is wearing his hat as the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Committee with as much more pride as he wears the hat of the c:bairraan of the House Administration Comn_ittee. ! just think it is at least suspect that this "soft money" phase of t]ae b_ll is not covered adequately. 'r a_l: that the previous question be defeated so that the proper amendments can be offered to make this truly a campaign reform bill which will be evenhanded as it deals with both parties. Mr. YOUNG of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished ma- A_tgust 7, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL jority leader, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. O'NEXLL). Mr. O'NEILL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the rule. I ask the Members on our side of the aisle to stay with the gentleman from Ohio, the chairman of the committee, who has worked so long and arduously on this bill. It is quite unexpected that the minority party should at the last minute come up with the roadblocks that they have. Their actions have made this a partisan issue. I certainly hope that our party stays with the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. HaYs) and I congratulate him and his committee for the work which they have done in reporting a campaign reform blt1 that has teeth in it. H.R. 16090 is a strong measure, and it is a giant step toward improving Federal campaigr_ practices, The bipartisan House Administration Committee has had an exhaustive and lengthy debate on this issue. They have spent over 4 months drafting this legislation and have considered more than 95 amendments. Chairman HAYS has been fair and patient with ali the members of his committee, and everyone--Demo_ crags and Republicans alike--have had ample opportunity to offer amendments and alternative proposals, The leadership considers this bill of highest priority in the 93d Congress. The American people have been waiting long enough for a straightforward and positire response from the Congress on the numerous campaign abuses stemming from the Watergate affair. The Senate has already acted. Time is running out. The House must agree on an effective campaign reform package as a step toward restoring public confidence in Government. ! believe that this bill meets that obJective. It is a solid measure, which correcgs some of the abuses of campaign financing that were so graphically pointed out to ail of us over the past 2 years. II.R. 16090 places strict limits on campaign contributions and expenditures-simplifies campaign reporting procedures and provides for public financing of the 1976 Presidential election, If this badly needed reform is to become effective in time for the 1976 election, it must be acted upon this session, ! repeat---time is running out. We must have immediate action by the House so that the differences with the Senatepassed bill can be worked out quickly in conference. This is why I think the rule is a fair and reasonable one. It all°Ws for amendments to the most controversial sections Of the bill: expenditure limits, contribution limits, composition of the board, public fmanclng of both Presidential and congressional elections, and bank loan endorsers as contributors. We cannot delay action, Public confidence in the electoral process will continue to erode unless we act responsibly and expeditiously on this bill. If we do not adopt this rule, we will open up the floor to amendments that will prolong interminably the debate and .final action on this urgently needed legislation. That would not only be self-defeating, it would also be a betrayal of RECORD--HOUSE H 78{}l the public maxtdate to their representatives to act immediately on substantive revisions ill our' campaign financing laws. Mr. Speaker, the rule is openly fair. We cannot delay action. I urge all my colleagues to vote "aye" on the previous question. Mr. MARTIN of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. PRXTC_RD). (Mr. PRITCI.'-IARD asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. PRITCIIARD. Mr. Speaker, the very credibility' of this Congress reform spirit depends 'upon adoption of an open rule for this Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments bill so that a number of crucial perfecting amendments can be considered. Without these amendments, this Congress, under the facade of refro'm, will be p:_sing laws that in reality are insufficient and incomplete, I have been a strong proponent of Federal campaign reform throughout my short tenure here in the House. This rule, House Resolution 1292, which limits consideration of perfecting amendments to only certain sections of the bill is h fimicai to the very :;pirit of reform, Numerous crucial amendments have been drafted :for this Federal election campaign reform bin. But many of these cannot even be considered because of this modified closed rule that we have been given by the Rules Committee. How are we to be able to develop the best possible legislation for Federal election campaign refo:mn if we are unwilling to subject the entire bill to proper scrutiny? Does this Congress fear consideration of ail these amendments? Is this true reform? This bill in its present form is not the true campaign, reform legislation we so crucially need and I cannot accept it until certain basic and eruclal revisions are affected, Halfway measures designed to appease the appetite without satisfying the hunger of the times for thorough election campaign reform are little better than no pretense at reform, This bill fails to provide for any Federa1 funding in congressional elections, but requires comprehensive public financing of Presidential election campaigns. I urge adoption of the AndersonUdall amendment to eliminate this donble standard 'md extend clean election standards to. congressional races. The Anderson-Udall congressional matching amendment provides for limited public funds to match small private contributions to congressional campaigns. and fulltime to devoLe to being Congressmen, we naturally have a tremendous advantage over any challenger. I have heard some of my colleagues estimate the advantage to be, one of as much as $80,000. A challenger limited to spendh_g $75,000 must attempt to overcome_a Congressman also spending $75,000 in addition to his huge incumbency benefits. Is this limitation equitable when we know that a challenger must spend so much more than the incumbent just to be in the race? Common Cause prefers a $90,000 spending limitation:i $75,000 seems quite low for major congressional campa-i_n,_ The point is that wli,h the present format of the legislation, any lowering of the limitation level would only exacerbite the disadvantage of the nonincumbent. Clearly we need to develop a mechanism to create greater equity in campaigns by allowing challengers to spend an amount to begin to counter the incumbency advantage. The solution may be a lower spending limitation for the incumbent. I suspect that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are anticipating the predicted landslide congressional victories for their party this fall. So naturally they are anxious to pass this bill, heavily weighted in favor of the incumbent, which will become law next year with Congress heavily controlled by the Democratic majority. Such a bias to the advantage of the incumbent will insure their continued strength and dmnination in this body. The new election campaign laws would not apply to this fall's eleCtion campaigns. Finally, Mr. Spe_ker, I believe it essential that we establish strong financial disclosure laws for candidates and elected officials. To this end I am a cosponsor of H.R. 16195. We had hoped tm offer that bill as the Steehnan amendment to H.R. 16090 before us today. But to my distress the Parliamentarian ruled the proposed _mendment nongermane and the Rules Committ_ refused the special rule necessary for its consideration. For the record, though, this financial disclosure legislation is something this Congress must concern itself with in the very near future. That is where we stand now with H.R. 16090. With these necessary amendments we can make it an acceptable Federal election campaign act amendments bill; without these amendments the American people will have to wait another year for true election campaign reform laws. I urge this Congress to demand an open rule for consideration cf amendments to H.R. 16090. I also urge adoption of the FrenzelFascell amendment to create an independent bodyto enforce compliance with these clean election taws and require full congressional accountability. This bill before us, H.R. 16090, limits congressional campaign expenditures to $75,000. It sounds good to the lay ear. But sm-ely we :are all aware that such an across-the-board spending limitation gives a nearly insurmountable advantage to the incumbent, As incumbents with the franking privilege, high profiles in our district media, Mr. MARTIN of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I yield such thne as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas ,Mr. ARCHER).. (Mr. ARCHER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. ARCHER. Mi'. Speaker, one of the major responsibilities of this Congress, is to eliminate the abuses in our Nation's election processes, but the reform proposai before us is surely deficient in this desired result. It does have a number of strong points, but there are still too many 8O9 H 7802 CONGRESSIONAL weaknesses :ill tile bill that can only be corrected by amendment, Unfortunately, we will not be allowed to offer those amendments on the House floor. The chairman of the House Administration. Committee saw to that when he went before the Rules Committee. The result is a rule aUowing only ths five amendinents he approved. Others will not be allowed because, by his own admission before the committee, they would not benefit Democrats. In my opinion, this is an irresponsible answer to the Nation's plea for open elcotion processes. The bill that should accomplish that goal has become itself a closed partisan issue. As it now stands, there can be no amendment to restrict the "in-kind" contributions Democrats enjoy from 'big labor. Instead, the limlration has actually been increased from $100 provided in present law to $500 per individual. Nor can any amendment even be considered to restrict contributions by organized gwiups, whether they be big labor or big business, which,deny the individual's right to decide which candidate receive_ his contributAon, According to the present bill. incumbents still have too great an advantage over their c.hallengers in congressional races. I also question whetheommit_ees. That would be the Democra::ic Campaign Committee, the Republican C!ampaign Committee, et cetera. There is a $25,000 limit on the amount one individual may contribute in one year to all candidates. In other words, if a __lan wanted to contribute $1,000 to 25 _:andidates, he could do it, and then the ball ga_ne is over for him. This gets away from the type of $2.5 million contributions and $1 million contributions that were had on both sides the last time, and of course, ff the bill .';tays as it is, there will be no contrlbutio TM in Federal elections because we ]:)ropose to fund them out of the income ClancYclawson, Del HuberH°Smer SteelmanSpence Cleveland Hudnut Steiger, Ariz. Cochran Hunt Steiger, W_ Collins, Tex. Hutchinson Stratton Consble King Symms conlan KuykendaU Treen Crane Lagomarsino Wilson, Bob Davis, Wis. L_.ndgrebe Wyatt DennisDenh°lm LottMcCollister WymanWydler Derwlfiskl McEwen Young, Fla. ErlenbornDiCkins°nMadlganMartin, Nebr. ZionY°Ung' S.C. Forsythe Michel Frelinghuysen M0sher NOT VOTING--26 Biaggl Gray Patman Brasco Hanna Podell carey, N.Y. Hansen, Idaho Rarick Clay Holifield Chisholm Hansen, Wash. Scherle Rooney, N.Y. Davis, Ga. McSpadden Vander Jagt Dlggs Mathias, Calif. Waldle Downing Mollohan Wylie Evin s, Tenn. Owens, So thereso][utionwasagreedto. The Clerk announced the following pairs: Mr. Downing with Mr. Hollfield. limitations on campaign expenditures and political contributions; to provide that each candidate for Federal office Shall designate a principal campaign committee; to provide for a single reporting responsibility with respect to receipts and expenditures by certain polit:leal committees; to change the times for the filing of reports regarding cam-' paign expenditures and political contributions; to provide for public financlng of Presidential nominating converttigris and Presidential primary elections; and for other purposes, 'rile SPEAKER The question is on the motion Offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. HAYS). The motion was agreed to. _ l_HE CO_/i_[ITTEEOF THE WHOLE (:ax Checkoff. q['he expenditure limits are set overall in. this way: The President for the gert(_ral election, $20 million; for the primary election, $10 million; for the Senate, $75,000 or 5 cents times the population of the State, whichever is larger; i:.a the House, $75,000 in each primary and tleneral election. Expenditure limit_ations would be increased by the cost of living escalation. There is a prohibition against a can(!idate spending more than $25,000 of l_is own funds in an election, That, of course, includes the candidate, his wife, fred members of his immediate family. We allow an exemption for slatecards and sample ballots being exempted from ttie reporting requirement. The reason I or that is that in very, very many geo¢raphical areas of this country there are [ounties with a population of 20,000, 20,000, and( 40,000 where the parties in tiae cour ty on both sides put out a sample ballot. I will use, for example, one county ia my district in Ohio which has a popu[;_tion of 16,000 people. You can buy 1_,000 sample ballots, even at today's _,rices, for less than $300 ff you buy them Mr. Rooney ,of New York with Mr. Hanna. Mr, Carey of New York with Mr. McSpadden. Mr. Biaggt with Mr. Hansen of Idaho. Mr. Mollohan with Mr. Rarlck. Accordingly tile House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill H.R.' 16090, with MI'. BOLLIN_ tn the chair, f)?Oln the people who print the ]_a Ohio the law requires l,:_.qed "sample ballot" to naraes cf every candidate for ties on it. Mrs. Chisholm 814 with Mr. Gray. FF. DERAL ELECTION AMENDMENTS CAMPAIGN OF 1974 ACT Mr. HAYS. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 16090) to impose overall The Clerk rea,_ th e title of the bill. Mr. Chairman, under the ballots. anything have the both parold law, ff August 7, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL that party spent $300 in tl_is year's election for sample ballots, which would be one for every household in the county, they would be forced, under the penalty of fine and imprisonment, whether they knew it or not, to report to the Federal Election Commission that they had spent $20 on my behalf, for instance, because there are 15 candidates this year in my district on the ballot, That is the kind of little thing that is one of the technical violations, of which there are literally thousands, that we are trying to eliminate by what seems to me to be a rather sensible exemption. Under the Disclosure Act we simplify the reporting requirements. We provide for a single 10-day preelection report instead of the 5-day and 15-day report that the present law provides. The reason we did that is simply because the 5-day provision was not realistic. By the time you got your books closed, got your report made, and got it down here and the clerk put it on his computer and it was recorded, it was difficult to get copies in by election day. So we did away with this. We now make one report mandatory 10 days before election and another 30 days after election, I think the Members are also going to be delighted to know that we have eliminated these reports which had to come quarterly, most of which said, zero, zero, zero, but which had to be notarized and sent in. In any quarter in any year in which you do not spend $1,000 in that quarter, you do.not make a report until the end of the year, when you make a cumulative report. If you spent over $1,000 in a quarter, you have to file a report, The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. HAYs) has expired, Mr. HAYS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 additional minutes, Mr. Chairman, we waive quarterly reports if they fall within the 10 days of a preor post-election report. In other words, if a quarterly report came within 10 days or 30 days after election, you just combine them and make one report, RECORD--- HOUSE pointed, two by the Speaker of the House and two by the Vice President of the United States. I wish to tell the Members that we included the Vice President of the United States in an effort to be eminen:tly fair to the minority side, because normally those appointments are made by the Speaker of the House and the President pro tempore of the Senate, and they are both Democrats. However, we stipulate that those appointees must be, one from each party in both cases, and to that are added the Clerk of the House and the Secretary of the Senate as fionvoting members of the Board, for the purpose of being there and being in on the promulgation of rules and regulations and being available for Members to consult as to what are the proper procedures so that one can make out his report and have some real feeling that he is within the law. We also have compromised another thing in the bill[ which will be offered as a committee amendment. Under the old bill the reporting authority got together and made rules and regulations and they changed the law. It was 5 days and 15 days, but by regulation they changed it to 22 days and 12 days. We do not think that ought to be done. W'e had in there that any rules or regulations they made could be vetoed by either cornmittee, but we decided that raised a constitutional question. So, by committee amendment, we will change that so that anything they promulgate can be vetoed within 30 days by a vote of either House of the Congress. In other words, it would probably be referred to the committee. ]if they thought it worthwhile, they would bring it to the House for a vote. In title II we amend the Hatch Act so as to allow State and local government employees to participate on a vohmtary basis in certain partisan political activities. We strengthen and expand the existlng dollar checkoffs now limited to the financing of Presidential elections. The gentleman from Indiana (Mr. BRADEMAS) will explain this later in detail. We make We require each candidate to have a the dollar checkoff self-perpetuating to, principal campaign committee. I am assure that the money may be used with_ going to take a little time to explain that. in the election, and we set aside $20 mil-. If you have nine counties in the district lion for each major political party. We or nine wards in the city and you want .define_major political parties and minor to have a committee in each ward, that political parties, and something will be is all right, but you have got to designate available for the minor political parties, one committee as your principal cornThe definition of a minor political par-. mittee. All of those country or ward ty is one that got 5 percent of the vote committees have to report whatever they in the last election. As I say, there is spend in your name to the principal eom$20 million for each major party in the mittee, and the principal committee is State, and they may not raise any money responsible and must make the report privately, and they may not spend more to the reporting authority, than $20 million, which must be spenl_ Mr. Chairman, we have agreed, by a again through a designated single com-'committee amendment, with the gentlemittee, which may be the national com-man from Minnesota (Mr. FSENZEL) and mittee or it may be another, but it musl_ the gentleman from Florida (Mr. FASbe one single committee, and they will C_.LT.), as well as other _lembers--the not be out running all over the country, committee agreed to it this morning_ raising money, that the committee will offer an amendFinally, we put in the law that political ment on the composition of the board, committees with no gross income for the which will be as follows: The board will taxable year would not be required to b_ composed of six people, four voting file income tax returns for that year. Th(: members and two nonvoting members. IRS rules that whether you made a nickel The four voting members will be apor not you had to file a return, H 7807 Well, I was chairman around here many years ago when the Committee on Excess Government Paperwork was formed, and I think this was excess gevernment paperwork. Anybody who does not have any income does not have to file a return, so why should a political committee which has no income be forced to file a return? We just wiped it out. That is one of the reasons of the waiver on point, s of order in the rule. Mr. Chairman, I have touched on the high points, and uther Members will explain in greater detail other sections. The members of the committee will be available to answer any questions that other Members may have. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. HAYS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself I additional minute. Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. HAYS. I yi_ld to the gentleman from Illinois. Mr. MICHEL Mr.. Chairman, the gentleman from Ohio serves as the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Com_rdttee, and the gentleman and I axe friendly adversaries in the sense that one of my responsibilities around here is cl_,irman of the l_epublican Campaign Committee. I have one que,,;tion. The gentleman stated that there is a $5,000 limitation on contrib_tio_ to candidates for Federal office by co_nmittees other than one's "principal _ campaign committees, and the gentleman from Ohio I t:hink in the course of hk_ general debate a moment ago likened t,he congressional cornmittees to some of the better known recognized special interest groups. V/hat was the rationale in the treatment of those kinds of c_)mmittees as though they are on a par with the respective congressional campaign committees we chair? I would like to think our respective national committees, senatorial and congressional campaign committees, could be looked upon iix a special way--even in this bill. Why could we not have been excluded from this limitation? The CHAII_MAN. The time of tlhe gentIeman has again expired. Mr. HAYS. Mr'. Chairman, I yield myself 1 additional minute in order to answer the question posed by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. MICHEL). Mr. Chairman,'I would say to the gerttleman from Illinois--and I understand that this is a complicated matter--that the rationale was in trying to :make a distinction between the different candidate committees--and it was not my contention, and I want to make a little legislative history here, and I do not think it was the intention of the committee, to include whatever services we give to any candidate as far as the $5,000 is concerned. In other words, if you furnish a candidate with a voting record, or my vetlng record, or if I furnish a candidate with the gentleman's, that is not ineluded. We were talking about the way I understood it, aJld I believe that is the i_tent---a cash co ntribution to the candidate's campaign. 815 H 7808 CONGRIS:SSIONAL Mr. MICHEL. Strictly a fur_acial contribution under an information and edueational allowance, or whatever we might call it; but the inhouse kind of contributions that our respective committees have been accustomed to making candidates or to incumbents would be excluded? The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired, Mr. HAYS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 additional minutes, It is my belief that they are not ineluded--just the cash contributions, Mr. MICHEL. I thank the gentleman. iVir. MATSUNAGA. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. HAYS. I yield to the gentleman from Hawaii. Mr. MAT,qUNAGA. I thank the gentleman for yielding, As the gentleman knows, when he appeered before the Rules Committee, I raised a question relative to the definition of the term "any election" as used in section 101. I raise the question for the reason that, while setting the limitstion on the amount that any person may contribute, the term "any election" is used, in setting the maximum for expenditures that any candidate may make, the term "any campaign for nomination for election, or for election" is used. Mr. HAYS. May I say to the gentleman I do not have the section at my fingertips, but there is a section in there defining elections, and in the definition of election as the term is used, it means any primary, any runoff, and aIkv general election, Mr. MATSUNAGA. That is fine. For the purpose of establishing legislative history, I thought I should raise the question. Mr. HAYS. lit is also in the bill in the definition, Mr. MATSUNAGA. I will remind the gentleman that the definition merely refers to existing law, which is not printed in the bill itself, Mr. HAYS. But in the Ramseyer report it is the_e, and it is defined that way. Mr. MATSUNAGA. I thank the gerttlema_. Mr. CONYF. RS. Mr. Chairman,. will the gentleman yield? Mr. HAYS. I yield to t_ gentleman from Michigan .... _-:=._ Mr. CONYERS. I appre(LL;_ _h.e chairman's yielding to me. I should like to have him explain, if he would, the question I raised with him before that a_pparently requires new political parties to have to accumulate 5 percent of the vote, which means that it would have, to go from 0 percent to in excess of 5 percent. I know that it is in existing legislation, and is continued in the bill. Mr. HAYS. Let me say that there is defined in there---and one of the other Members is going into it in depth_major party and minor party--and a minor party is one which accumulated 5 percent--and new parties. A minor party, to be called a ',minor party and to be eligible, must have gotten the 5 percent in the last election, but that is subject to amendment, That is in one of the sec- 816 RECORD --- H0,1:;5;,f! :Lions that is open, mid i_ co,_d be :_mended. Mr. CONYEttS. The gentleman iron _ Ohio perceives, then, the problem I am raising? Mr. HAYS. I do. Mr. CONYElqS. We are precluding ne_ parties from getting started. Both of thc: major parties in the United States pried themselves from splinter groups or from different political formations and ehtitles. What we are now requiring h_ tha_ these new part:les, to get the benefit el public financing.---as important and vibal :is it i_s--we ar(: now in effect reqtdrins bo grow to at :feast 5 percent or die. ] think that is a very serious situation that ought to be gone into very carefully by the Chail_nan and the Members. Mr. IIAYS. Let me, say to the gentle_ man that I respect his position. He and ][ :may have a fc.ndamental philosophical disagreement about this without affect:Lng our friendship. I personally would like to do anyttdng I can to protect the two-party system, because I am too familiar with too many European countries that have multiparty systems 'that have degenerat_d into almost anarchy_ 'Iq_ere will be provisions for debate on ih.is under the 5-minute rule. There will be provision for amendment, and I de not want to use more time because I have promised a lot of time; but I will be glad to discuss ii; further with the gentleman under the 5-minute rule. Mr. CONYER5. Before we get into the 5-minute rule, Lhe 5-minute rule, as I .';ee it practiced on the floor, is that after we start the 5-minute rule, a great humher of Members will decide that we ought to cut off the 5-minute rule---and I am referring to the $90 billion Department of Defense bill that was just considered yesterday. Mr. HAYS. I will assure the gentleman that he will ha_e 5 minutes if I have to get it and give it to him myself. Mr. CONYERS. I am not only conce:reed about getting the 5 minutes but I am equally concerned about the provisions that limit new and small parties which ought to be thoroughly consid~ ered in passing this legislation, 'Iqxe CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired, .¥Ir. ROUSSELOT. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman yielding. I wanted to ask my colleague, the gentleman from Michigan, did he vote for the closed rule? Mr. CONYERS. I think tha_ is an irrelevant question, Mr. ROUSSELOT. I do not think so. As a matter of fact, it is a most relevant question becaus,_ an open rule would have guaranteed the gentleman from l_[ichigan more adequate time for appropriate amendments. lVlr. FRENZEL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman fram Alabama (Mr. D_Cm:NSON),the ranking minority member of the Committee on 15louse Administration. Mr. DICKINSON. Mr. Chairman, let me say at the beginning that I want to oompliment the chairman of the coinmi_tee, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. HAYS) and the membership of our cornmi_;tee for the c_nscientious hard work August 7, 19 74 that t::_ey have put forth in bringing forward this bill. We had 21 different _;esslons on markup. We charged up the l-fill many times and charged back down again, a_ld we charged up on the same _'fitl age,in. There are many things in thi:; bill that are good, that are salutary, tha_ are needed. There are many things in this bill tha_ 1:object to that I would like very much t.a see removed from the bbl. For in-.tance, I favor some of the spendix_4; Limitat:ons, but on the question of cam:;reign expenditures for Members of Con._'ress I think that the amount is exces.;_ive. We voted I do not know how many :lifferexLt times on different figures and _:hey ra:nged anywhere from $150,000 per ,:,lc_ti0_L down to as low as $50,000 or c,ven le_s. We finally settled on the figure of $60,(;00 per election. We tried to take :nto account the differences in rural areas and metropolitan areas or indus:rialized areas and agricultural areas in ,;rying _o work some equity because we _:eallze the situation is different from _anha!,tan, say, to the rural areas of ,_y 13 counties, and it costs more in some _reas. I felt that $60,000 was the mostequita:,le figure we could have settled on..After '_'e voted on it, it came up again and _;hen w_ voted on $75,000. I can support i;he $75,000, but if an amendment is ofl!ered I will vote to go back to $60,000_ i:_ecause this means $50,000 per election, ,_,'hich means every time we vote. ]_t means that if there is a primary, i;hat is $75,000. Then if there is a runoff _ montli_ later, that is $75,000, or a total :_f $15£,,000.which we will have spent :,ight there. It is not a pass through and :t is net cumulative, but we can spend .i;75,000 per election there or $150,000 ::eta1 for the primary and runoff, and :.hen if _here is a general election, that is maother $75,000,and if there is a runoff _:fter that general election, as is per_ni_ted i.n some States, there is another _;75,000, and it is up to $300,000 for a ,';eat in the Congress, which I think is _:oo high. Mr. i_fATHIS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? _/fr. DICKINSON. I yield to the gentleman from Georgia. _Jr. ]_[ATHIS of Georgia. Mr. Chair_mn, I offered an amendment in the committee which reduced the amount of _xpenditure per election to $42,500. The _,,entleman supported that, and I would appreciate the gentleman's support in l _is ins!;ance as on that date. Mr. _[ICHEL. Mr. Chairman, will the ¢cntleman yield? Mr. D:_CKINSON. I yield to the gentle:_:_a:afrom Illinois. Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Chairman, I think it :_:dght be appropriate to make the obser_ _t:ion that in the last election the chal.t,mgers who defeated incumbents spent 0:_ the average, $120,000 to defeat the recumbents. I subscribe to the gentleman's personal view and hope that we c_u[d keep campaign expenditures down I;:_a minlimum in each one of our districts, b_t the _acts of life prove that the .only _,_y one can possibly unseat those of us _ho are incumbents with our built-in a:lvanta_i_es, and this was particularly August 7, 1'974 CONGRESSIONAL true in 10'/2, is to spend considerable sums of money. So the $42,500, while good talk for the folks back home, is one of those kinds of amendments I referred to (luring the consideration of the rule as rather ridiculous and it will put the Members unfairly to the mast on the floor when we get under the 5-minute rule. Mr. DICKINSON. I thank the gentleman for his observation, Mr. Chairman, moving right along now, there are other features of the bill I find most'repugnant and objectionable, For instance, on the financing of national conventions out of the public till, there is $2 million set aside here to finance the national conventions, .This is bad for many reasons. They say, "If you do not want it, we will make it optional." The Democrats say, "We want it. You don't have to take it if you don't want it." _Ne can find going through the whole tin'earl of this bill- the partisanship, I suppose, which is part of this ball game; but but let me remind all of us that with the pursestrings goes control. That is a simple axiom of life that we cannot change, When Federal funds go in, sooner or later we will have Federal control. We will find when the Federal Government starts financing purely partisan campalgns and elections, then they will start setting parameters of how many delegates we are going to have, the eomposition of the delegates. Ultimately we will find there are some disadvantaged ones that say, "We don't have the money to serve as a delegate." So we will see the Federal Government paying the salaries and transportation expenses of de:legates to go to national conventions, all out of the taxpayers' pocket. This is one of the things I am adamantly opposed to. I think it is wrong. The taxpayers of the United States should not finance national conventions, 'We heard the statement a bit earlier that do not let procedural purity keep ns from this historical chance. This historical chance to what, to free_.e in the incumbents? Procedural purity, and the thing I objected to when we were disCUSSing the bill and the reason I wanted to vo_e it down under the discussion of the rule, I wanted to vot'e down the rule, because for the first time we required a proposed amendment to be printed 24 hours or a calendar day in advance and then moved immediately into the bill without preserving that 24 hours for'the Members to avail themselves of the opportunity, This is ludicrous. This means anybody that did not guess or hear or pick up a rumor yesterday that we were golng to pass this rule today, if he did not have inside information and get his amendment in the RECORD' yesterday, even though it is germane, even though it is acceptable in every other way, he cannot offer it today, I think this is bad procedure. I think we are setting a bad precedent. I cannot imagine the Committee on Rules setting UP this rule without at least guaranteeing 24 hours to a person to avail himself of this opportunity, but they did RECORD--HOUSE so. That was one good reason: think for opening up the rule. Mr. Chairman, I think we need cainpaign reform. I think there are many good areas in here. I was very pleased to hear the chairman of our full committee in the colloquy with the gentleman from Illinois saying it was not intended that the overhead expense of the two campaign committees, such as salaries, rent and heat and So forth, be prorated in donations and given to the various incumbents that they serve, but only the cash contributions were to be intended; but as I pointed out in my special views in the report, in setting up the authority, whatever the authority there is to oversee and carry out the aims and wishes of this bill, we must be careful that in the name of reform we do not drive out and scare people away good dedicated honest people who are interested in the Governmerit of this country, scare them out of polities by stringing so many trip wires that they do not know if they are going to jail or not if they are a candidate or even helping a candidate, I did serve on the special subcommittee that was set up to monitor elections by the Congress. The Clerk of this House certified over 5,000 violations of the last election law of the House of Representarives alone, over 5,000 violations to the Justice Department for investigation and/or prosecution, I am very fearful if we are not careful in setting up whatever authority is to control this, if we do not get somebody knowledgeable and sympathetic and with commonsense, if we set up a Commission that is going to be headhunters, we are all going to be in danger of what the gentleman from Louisiana said earlier. We will be serving two sentences, one for 2 years in the Congress and one for 2 years in jail. So, let us be very careful in considerlng what we are doing here. I am anxious to get a good campaign bill, and I hope I can vote for this on final passage. But, some of the abuses in here, some of the things provided for such as public financing of some of these elections, make the bill ridiculous, in my opinion, To think the taxpayers should finance me in my campaign, or my opponent and considering the proliferation of candidates that are going to emerge as soon as they find out there is tax money inyelped, is staggering, I cannot think of a better business to go into than the public relations business for political campaigns, (Mr. DICKINSON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. M_ISH). Mr. MINISH. I thank the chairman for yielding. Mr. Chairman, under the Campaign Reporting Act of 1971, the American Federation of Teachers filed a report showing they distributed close to $70,000 to different Members of Congress and to certain other groups. I was charged with that entire amount, I brought it to the attention of' the Clerk of the House, and he said the reason they did that was because in the H 7809 report that they filed, they said they were supporting Senator MONnALW., and myself, so I was credited with the ehtire amount. My question is this: Could that happen under this legislation? Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, I will say absolutely not. It should not have happened under the old legislation. There were' many eases exactly like this in the country. Certain groups wonld make contributions to mox_ than one candidate, but the candidates in turn would say they received money but :had not named, that group as their contributor. The gentleman evidently named the Federation of Teachers and he probably turned the name in showing ,that the organization had contributed to hhn. However, they also sent in a report stating the amount of money they have spent. Having no other names, and the gentleman having admitted that was his contributor, they turned it all into his account. This happened in many situations ail over the country. Mr. MINISH. Mr. Chairman, as I look around the floor, there are at least eight Members here who received money from the American Federation of Teachers AFL-CIO that I was credited with. I only received $250. Mr. DENT. The only advice I can give the gentleman is to go see the Clerk. Mr. Chairman, I yield 11 minutes to t:he gentleman from Indiana (Mr. BRADr_S). (Mr. BRADEMAS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. BRADEMAS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 16090, the Federal Elections Campaign Amendments of 1974. I would first like to take this opportunity to pay special tribute to the distinguished chairman of the committee, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. ttAYs). Mr. HAYS worked diligently day after day in the markup sessions on the bill and if major campaign reform leglslation is passed by Congress this year, much of the credit will be due to WAYNE HAYS. Because the gentleman from Ohio has been subjected to considerable criticsm on this matter, I believe it only fair to make the point I have just made. Mr. Chairman, members of the House Administration Committee have worked long and hard on this bill. We considered almost 100 amendments, offered by both Republicans and Democrats, and we ha.ye reported to the House what I believe to be a very sound campaign reform bill-one which will significantly improve and strengthen current law. TO quote from a letter to me of July 25, 1974, from the able dodirectors of t/he Center for Public :Financing of Ele_:tions, Susan B. King and Neal Gregory, followlng the action of the House Administration Committee in reporting II.It. 16090--We would like to commend you and your colleagues on the ]_[ouse Administration for the months of work :in yesterday's reporting ou_which of the resulted Campaign Reform Bill . . . Your action in moving to clean up '_he way in which we filxance Federal elections 817 It 7810 CONGRESSIONAL wasa very p(xMtive respo.nao to _£_aeurzent crisis of confidence in government. This is a good bill of which the Com__lttee eau be proud. Mx-. Chairman, the extstlng camloaign _,mance laws include the Federal l!aections Campaign Act of 1971, the Presidential Election Campaign Fund Act, and certain portions of the United States Criminal Code. The. most significant of these is, of course, the Federal Elections Campaign Act, which calls for the disclosure of campaign expenditures and contributions, Although 'the Federal Elections Campaign Act has only been in effect for little over 2 years, it has become apparent that certain pro_ksions of the law need to be strengthened. Further, the law rafted to reach one of the most serious campaign finance problems--the excessive infiuence of big money in political campaigns. Mr. Chairman, the committee bill meets these problems by improving the disclosure requirements Act of and the by Federal Elections Clm_paign providing for a Board of Supervisory Officers to strengthen the enforcement of campaign finance laws. _ meet the problem Of spiraling campaign expendltures and the excessive influence of big money, the bill sets strict limits on cam- RECORD --- HO ,.', :;E 7, 19 7/_ _:),_o oF SUPERVISORy' OFFICERS To :assure full compliance with' and ,t'ffective enforcement of .the electica_ laws, the committee bill establishes an indepmldent Board of Supervisory Offi.. :.'ers. The Board would be composed of tt_ three existing supervisory officers---the {:,'lerkof the House, the Secretary of the _];enate, and the ComptroLler General--::_nd four public members appointed by the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate. To assure that the members of the Board are selected on a bipartisan basis, one of the Speaker's a!c_poin[;ments shall be made from a list cfi rec:)mmendations provided by the PIouse majority leader, and one from a list of }:'ecommendations provided by the ]Kouse ,minority leader. Similarly, one of the Pr_._sident of the Senate's appointments ,:_ould be made from a list of rec- would be able to spend only $20 milUon; candidates for the nomination to the office of President could spend a total el $].0 million, Senate candidates would be able lc. strand the higher of either $75,000 or 5 cents times the, population in the candidate's State in each. of the p_ma_y and gcmeral elections. And House candidates would be able _mamer.dations provided by the Senate majority leader and one from a list of resommendations provided by the Senate minority leader. Under the bill, the supervisory officer-s would :_:etain their existing authority to maintain disclosure reports and other _'ecords. Any apparent violation of elec:r,ionlaws which they discover would have to be r_¢'erred immediately to the Board. The Board would be responsible for ':eviewiag the actions of the individual ;m:pervisory officers, supervising devel-opment of rules and regulations, and the oreparation of forms to assure they are at,form, to the extent practicable. To _ssure bhat the regulations developed by :he Board and the supervisory officers :.o:rfform to the law, all regulations would :':rove to be submitted to congressional :_ommittees with election law responsi:)fifties for review. 'The :Board would have the authority :o investigate possible violations of the _w, subpena records and witnesses, hold hearings, and refer appropriate apparent dotaticns of the election laws to the I_:partment of Justice for criminal and c,ivll enforcement action. To avoid refer::ir[g technical and minor violations to _he Department of Justice, the Board _Fould be authorized to encourage volun-. {;al_o rcompliance through informal means. .And _x)assure expeditions enforcement .action by the Justice Depa_ment, the :dll requ.ires the Attorney General to re-. port to the Board on the status of refer-. ::'als--6[) days after the referral and at ';he close of every 30 day period there:_,fter. ]gr. Chairman, I would like here to acre that I will later be offering a com-. mittee _mendment to this section of the :,ill which will modify the composition :ff the Board. Very briefly, the amend-. ment will provide for a six-member il3oard composed of four public members ,,zho will be appointed by the Speaker >f the ttouse and the President of the 5;enate, on a bipartisan basis, and the Clerk of the House and the Secretary of i:he Senate, both of whom will serve as :_onvoting members. The amendment will also amend the 'review of regulations" provision in the ,_mmit_ee bill to provide that all rules md reg_dations be submitted to the _en- palgn and contributions, to in each of the primary And to expenditures limit the influence of big money and spend general$75,000 elections. tn the area which, I believe, offers the In addition to the_'_e general expendi_ greatest pofamtial for abuse-all phases lure limits, th,e committee bill allows of election to the office of President--the candidates to spend up to 25 percent committee bill strengthens the existing above the limits to meet the costs of fund dollar check.-off law with resl._ct to the raising. This provision is particularly iraPresidential general elections and au:pm_tant in view of the cost of raising thorizes the use of checkoff funds for campaign fund_ through small contribupresidential nominating conventions and lions. Presidential primary elections. Mr. Chairman, these expenditm'e liraMr. Chairman, although I would like J.t_ were adopted after extensive and briefly to summarize the major provithorough debate in ()ur committee, and sions of the bill, I would like to focus :I believe the limits we have recommendmy remarks on two i_ features of ed are low enough to prevent excessive the bill--the Board of Supervising] Ofi5- campaign expenditures, yet high enough cers and the sections dealing with public . 'b0,allow challengers 'to mount meaning-, financing of Presidential elections, ful campaigns and to permit both in-. cc,_m_rm_r _r_xrs eumbents and challengers to comnmnicate their positions on campaign issues Mr. Chal_nan, the committee bill 'l;othe voters. limits contributions to candidates by PRINCIPAI.CA_rAXC_CO_Mrx'rE_s ^no persons to $I,000 per election--prhnary, rmCLOSUR_REPOI_TS runoff, special election, and general To simplify reporting requirements election, and facilitate the dissemination of camThe bill '.permits committees which paign finance irfformation, the bill elimhave: First, been registered for 6 :inates unnecessary disclosure reports an_ months pursuant to the Federal .Elections provides for the designation of principal Campaign Act of 1971; second, which csgnpaign committees to make all eomhave received contributions from more mittee expenditures on behalf of a canthan 50 persons; and third, which have didate and to file a consolidated _port of contributed Ix) at least Ii candldat_ for all sucl_ expenditures and all contribu-, Federal office to contribute to candidates ti0ns of committees which support the up to $5,000 per electiom This limit on candidate. contributiorm by so-called multicandi-_ Mr. Chairman, the committee bill date committees applies equally to the el:iminates the 15- and 5-day preelection Republican and Democratic Oongre_ionreports required by existing law and real Campaign Committees and to the Naquires instead a single preeleetion retional, State. and local _ommil_tees of the lx_rt 10 days before each election. In political parties as well as to broadbased addition, the hill requires a report 30 citizens grou_ps which sulaport candidates days after each election. Quarterly refor Federal o_Ilce, t×_rts would still be requh-ed, but a canBy providi_lg higher limits OMconta'ibudidate would not have to file a quarterly tions by multicandidate committees, x'eport if it falls within 10 days of the our commlt_*e.reeognim_!-_he important pre- or post-election report or if in that role of br_m_l-bas_ 'cilium Interest qua_er neither contributions or e×peagroups--whether conservative, ouch as ditures exceed $1,000, 818 _ugust lille Americans for Constitutional Action. 0]' liberal, such as the National Commitf_ee fei' an Effective Congress. TO curtail the inlluence of excessive political contributions by any single per-_ son, the bill establishes a $525,000 limit on the amount any ir,dividual can give to, all candidates for Federal office in a single year. Mr. Chairma:a, these limits were subject to lengthy debate in the committee and I believe we haw,, provided for 'iimit_ which are low enough to bar excessive, contributions, yet not so low so that i1; would be impossible for candidates to, raise adequate campaign funds without h_.curring exorbitant funch'aising costs, rXrES,XTVR_.LXmTS Mr. Chairman, the biU would cm'b spiraling campaign expenditures by setting strict limits on campaign spending Candidates fa) the office of President 7l,u.gus_ 7, 197._ CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--HOUSE H 781£' ate and the House for re_ie._, rather than to the House Administration Cornmittee or the Senate Rules and Administration Committee. I will provide a more complete explanation when 'the amendment is considered, but I would like :to observe that this amendment received the unanimous support of the House Administration Committee and will, I 'believe strengthen the enforcement of campaign finance laws. rUSLXC mNANczNa or rREsmE_c_a_ XLe.CT_O_S thorizing matching payments from the dollar checkoff fund for small contributlons, Candidates would receive matching payments for the first $250 or less received from each contribution. The maximum amount of public money a candidate could receive would be one-half the expenditure limit for Presidential primerles. Under this bill, that means each candidate could receive up to $5 million, To prevent public financing of frivolous candidates, the bill would require a can- maining i,701 apparent violations were either not committed or not uncovere_ by audit until after the general election,s. Each report filed with the Clerk by a candidate or political committee wa.x audited. Each apparent violator was contacted separately on the deficiency by both the Clerk of the House anti the Special Committee To Investigate Campaign Expenditures prior to being re_ ferred to the Justice Department. This dual investigatory procedure by the Cqerk and ttxe special committee And finally, Mr. Chairman, the bill provides a full package for public financlng of Presidential elections. First, the bill strengthens existing law with respect to public financing of Presidential general elections. As you are aware, the dollar checkoff law, first passed in the 92d Congress and amended last year, allows individuals to designate on. their annual tax return ttxat a dollar be paid to the Presidential Election Campaign Fund, or the so-called dollar checkoff fund. The amount of money avaMable for Presidential general elections is limited to the amount voluntarily designated by individual taxpayers that candidates may use public funds, or they may continue to finax_ee their campaigns through private r esouroes, The committee bill amends cmrent lagto provide that the amount of public money available from the checkoff ftmd co:tfforms to the spending' limit for Presldential general elections--S20 million and to provide that the dollar checkoff fiind be self-appropriating to assure that the dollars checked off by individual taxpayers are actually available. lin addition, the bill authorizes the use of dollar checkoff funds .for l_residential nominating conventions, 'Mr. Chairman, I think it is important to note that the current system Gl convention financing is a de facto public financing scheme. The national nom'matlng conventions are zu)w paid for principally by corporate and union advertisements in the convention programs. And much of the cost of this convention advertising is passed on to each taxpayer by mea_xs of tax deductions for these ads. 'this section of the bill is based on a recommendation of the bipartisan Cornmission on Convention Public Fnancing, composed of top officials of both the Republican and Democratic national cornmittees. It repeals the provision authorizing tax deductions for convention advertising and provides up to $2 million for major parties and proportionately smaller amounts for minor parties to defray the costs of conductir_g Presidential nominating conventions. The bill specifitally prohibits, however, the use of public funds for direct cash pa;v_ents to delegates and candidatem Public financing would be voluntary and any political party that wished to continue to finance its convention with private resources could continue to do so. However, overall expenditures from both public and private sources would, under ordinary cireumstances,.be limited to $2 million, :Finally, Mr. Chairman, the bill r_rorides fox' limited public financing of Presidential prirr_,ry elections 'by _u_ didate to accumulate at least $5,000 in matchable contributions in each of 20 States. All public funds would come from the surplus in the dollar checkoff fund after funds have been set aside to meet the estimated obligations of Presidential general elections and nominating conventions. Since experts estimate that the checkoff fund will contain approximately $64 million by 1976 and that some $46 million would be used for general eleclions and conventions, approximately $18 _ million should be available for primary elections, Mr. Chairman, this Presidential public financing package is one of the most tmportant features of the bill. Clearly, the potential for the abuse of big money is the greatest in the area of Presidential elections, and public financing would, iix my view drastically reduce this potential. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 16090 is a solici piece of campaign reform legislation, one which if passed, will prove to be a major advance in the financing of campaigns for Federal office, Some critics have charged that the bill is loophole ridden and that it fails to provide an effective enforcement mechanism. These critics allege that the ehforcement entity in the bill builds on a system of nonenforcement by the Clerk of the House and the other supervisory officers, and they infer that these deftciencies can never be corrected under the present approach because of the "appearance" of a conflict-of-interest situation. To support their case, they cite a _qlole litany of alleged shortcomings of the Clerk and the other superviso15' officers, Mr. Chairman, I have gone to some trouble to review the criticisms of this bill to determine if there is any solidity to these charges. And I must say that after investigation, there appears to be no basis for these allegations, Take, for example, the charge that "the Clerk of the House waited until after the election to forward many of the violations to the Justice of Department. The Clerk reported 5,000 unprocessed violations (most of them trival GL' minor) . The Clerk did notactively search for and investigate incomplete filings." From April 7, 1972, the effective date of t,_le 1971 elections law, throughout the 1972 election year, the Clerk made 15 separate referrals of violations to the Justice Department. The Clerk averaged making such a referral once e;'ery 16 days during 1972. Of the 4,893 referrals of apparent violations made durlng 1972, 3,192 or approximately twothirds were made before the general elections of 1972. A goodly per,ton _f the re- averaged approximately 40 days from the time an apparent violation was uncovered by audit until it was referred to the Justice Department. None of these referrals were for trivial or minor violations such as forms not being signed, or forms not being notarized. These referrals included failure to file, late filing, corporate contributions, union contributions, contributions from Government contractors, exceeding candidate's spending limitations, and other apparent violations of Federal election laws. Under section 308 of the election law, the Clerk's responsibility was to refer apparent violations to the Justice, De~ partment. Under the law the Attorney General has prosecutorial discretion Ga which cases he chooses to prosecute and it is his responsibility to perfect each case prior to trial. Or take the charge that "since the Clerk apparently did not conduct, an_ field investigations, the Justice Department was forced to reexamine and reinvestigate many of the complaints reported by the Clerk." The Clerk has regularly condtlcte4 numerous field inve,;tigations and hearings on complaints. Some of these investigations and hearings were held jointly with the bipartisan House Special Committee To Investigate Campaigll Ex_ penditures. During the 1972 election.a, the Clerk of the House has been the only supervisory officer to hold field in vestigations and hearings on eiectiotx campaign complaints--and all of these hearings have been open to the public. In fact, a review of the record of the Clerk of the House and the other supervisory officers shows that overall they met their election law responsibilitie:._ fairly and efficiently. And the enforcement entity in the bill builds on this expertise by creating a Board compost4 of these supervisory officers and fou_ public members of national prominence. I am certain that both the high qualit!/ of these public members and the scrutiny of the Board by the public will remov_ any taint of an apparent conflict of interest. l_'Ir. Chairman, the House AdminiStration Committee ha,; labored long anc[ hard on this measure, and has deve]opel what I believe is a most significant piec_ of campMgn finance legislation, end [ would urge all my colleagues to give _t their full support. Mr. Chairman, I want to add just ort_ word to what was observed by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. UDaLL), who baa conLributed so significantly to the shaping of the climate for the kind of legk.;lation we are today considmqng. Time i ru._nfi'_g out. There is scheduled to .co,mz 819 'H 7812 CONGRt:SSIONAL RECORD --. HO O':!;E before the HoUse in a few days, a very alan. And I believe I can respond to hie: major piece of business which wfil prequestion more fully, and simply, by referu occupy us all and, presumably, the other ring him to page 42 of the committee rebody as well, and then there will be a port on H.R. 16_90, and the definition oi brief recess. "candidate" in section 591(b) of title 18, Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that it United States Code, which reads as fol-. would be tragic if we were to fail in our lows: obligation to the American people to proCb) "candidate" means an individual v:ho duce a campaign reform bill in :1974that seeks nomination for election, or election_ to can respond to the abuses of which we Federal olT_ce, whether or not such individua; are all now too painfully aware, is elected, and, for purposes of this para.. I-[.R. 16090, with the committee amendgraph, an individual shall be deemed to seek nomination election, or electlon, to Fed-. merits to which I have already alluded eral office, if for he h_s (1) taken the action necand with certain other committee essary under the law of a State to qualify amendments to which the gentleman himself for norn,inatior._ for election, or elee. from New Jersey (Mr. THOMPSON) and _ion, or (2) received eontributimm or made other Members will address themselves, expenditures, or has given his consent for represents a solid; substantial campaign any other person to receive contributions or reform bill around which Members of the make expenditures, with a view to bringing about his nomination for election, or election, House, both :Democrats and Republicans, to such Office; of every point of view, can rally. The time to act is now, 1974, not 1975. Mr. BELL. Se that the $25,000, or even So I urge adoption of H.R. 16090, I hope above that, could be., spent without the with overwhelming support from both person running or apparently not run.. sides of the aisle, ning publicly, at least.'? Mr. BELL, Mr. Chairman, will be genMr. BRADEMAS. I believe that the tleman yield? definition of "candidate" I have just The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gencited will answer the gentleman's ques-, tleman has expired, tion. Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, X yield i I hope I haw_ responded satisfactorily additional minute to the gentleman from to the gentleman's question. Indiana (Mr. BRADEMAS). Mr. B_.r,. I than}: the gentleman, Mr. BRAJDEMAS. Mr. Chairman, I Mr. FRENZEL. Mr'. Chairman, I yiel(_ yield to the gentleman from California. myself 1 minute. Mr. BELL. Mr. Chairman, I want to Mr. Chairma:n, in response to the in-. ask a question of the gentleman. It is a quiry made by the gentleman from Cali-. technical one, but I think perhaps the fornia (Mr. BEL'.) I might state that the gentleman knows the answer, and I want law says a candidate is a candidate when-, to make a little legislative history on the ever he or she .raises or expends money in floor. Itm_halfof a candidacy, or when a commit-, Let us take an off election year. And I tee does so for them. In addition, oJ_ might say this happened in California a course, ff he or she is a declared candi-, year or so ago. It was an off year, and a date, or a candidate under the particular candidate who had not declared himself State law at that time, he or she is aisc, to be a candidate, but he goes around the a candidate under our law. State. He makes airplane trips. He has Mr. BELL. Mr. Chailunan, will the gen-. dinners and meetings, and so forth. And tleman yield? this runs up to a considerable amount of Mr. FRENZEL. I yield to the gentleexpense, and[ yet at the time he was not man from California, a candidate because it was an off election Mr. BELL. What the gentleman from year, and he was not a declared candi:indiana (Mr. ]_.aADE_nS) said, was thai date. He may spend over $25,090. so long as they are not a declared candi-, My question is: Would that $25,000 be date, or because you cannot exactly considered as an expenditure for his elecp:rove that they are, then he or she tion ff he was not at that time himself could continue the expenditures as long an announced candidate for office, and as they are not declared candidates, it was an off election year? Mr. FRENZEL. If it was for a good-, Mr. BRAK)EMAS. In response to the will trip, yes, but if the expenditure one gentleman's inquiry, I would say that he made was for a sign that said "Vote. must declare himself a candidate to be a for Jones for Congress," then maybe candidate, they would come under the definition, Mr. BELL.. But the gentleman from Mr. BELL. In other words, if word Indiana knows there have been a num'were mentioned that he or she were a ber of candidates for statewide office who candidate. have made speeches and made public Mr. FRENZEL. Exactly; then he o_ appearances who have not announced as she would be a candidate under the law. to whether they were or were not Mr. BELL. I thank the gentleman, candidates. Mr. FRENZEL. Mr_ Chairman, I yield Mr. BRADEMAS. I understand. But if 5 minutes to the distinguished gentle., we were to take California, if I were to man from Illin3is (Mr. CnANE), a :mem-, cite an example I_;r of the Committee on House AdminThe CHAIRMAN. The time of the gert- tstration, and whose amendments arc tleman has again expired. :not allowed under the dosed rulm Mr. BRAE)EMAS. Mr. Chairman, will (Mr. CRANE asked and was given per-. the gentleman yield an additional mission to revise and extend his re.. minute? marks.) Mr. DENT. I yield 1 additional minute Mr. CRANE. Mr. Chaix'man, I _:hank to the gentleman from Indiana. my distinguished colleague from MinneMr. BRADEMAS. I thank the gentlesota ;cz yielding this time t_ me. 82O August 7, 1974 Mr. ,Chairman, for openers, I would tike to extend my congratulations to my :'_olleag_es on the Committee on House ,:kdministration for the 'time ak_d energy they have put into preparing this rather orolix campaign "reform" bill. I put the word "reform" into quotation marks, Mr. C_hairman, because, unfortunately, my :mlleag(les h_ this body saw fi_ earlier this afternoon under our vote on the rule [;0 pro)fibit me from introducing some m_endments which I had anticipated I might have the opportunity to present [or consideration, andwhich, in my judgi:tlellt, represent the real substance oi campaign reform, while much of that ',ontained in the proposed legislation I cio not view as reform at all. On the contrary, I[ think it is going to set our political ._ystem back rather considerably. ()ne of the areas (_f concern that many people have touched upon in the past _;everal months in connection with the revelations accompanying Watergate and related matters is influence peddling in pc litic_. We are all too familiar-with the role of the milk lobby, and the question of whe5her in fact contributions from the milk lcbby had any impact on decisionmakinl_' in the White House. In ti:is connection we had an amendment introduced before our committee by the distinguished gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. PaOEHMCH)which would have dealt with this question Of infiu_mce-!_ddiing by special-interest groups, and which would remove any doubt in artyone's mind as to whether any vestedinteres_ group was exercising undue influence on the decisionmaking of a Memher. Ti:tis amendment that the gentleman ;::-om Wisconsin (Mr. t_OF_tICH) had h!ltially proposed before the cornm:[ttee, and was defeated in the commiti:e,e,I intended to bring before the whole House. It would have prohibited contributi0n,_; from poIitical committees to _,'andidates except for contributions from the respective congressional campaign committees of the Democratic and Republican Parties, and the Senate campaign committees. As the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Y':_OEHLXCH)very capably explained to the committee at the time he introduced _his amendment, this would have had the effect of removing any area of doubt as to whether the realtors through __2F, AL_:'AC, or business and industry through BIPAC, or the Ammfican Medicai Association through AMPAC, or for that matter, even the American Conse:rvati,le Union through its Conservative Victory Fund. Also the Political Education Committee of the AFL-43IO--was exercising undue iiffluence over Members through e.ampa__g_ contributions. That, in my esi;hnation, was a salutary amendment. It was one that I think should have been adopted by the committee and incorpo~ rated rotc this bill. The second amendment I intended to offer Seals with contributions in kind. This has been an area where we are all tog a_are of a number of abuses--and they a_:e not confined exclusively to un_o:ns. _;lxen corporations provide, for example, unreported aircraft travel, that August 7, 19 7g, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- HOUSE sm'ely is an abuse as ,much as .when unions engage in the :providing of services of a similar nature. Such contributions should have an appropris;te fair market value attached to them and classified and reported as in-kind contributions, That was the second amendment that I had hoped to bring up before this eommittee, The third is one that I introduced first before the committee at the time we had our Reporting Act legislation 2 years ago. This would have prevented the use of involuntarily raised union moneys for political purposes, whether those were voter registration drives or get-out-thevote drives. I do not think there is any question in anyone's mind that these have distinctly partisan overtones. I can understand so long as silence in the law permits this injustice to continue, that those people who are so inclined will exploit this deficiency in the law. I have been waiting vainly for the American Civil Liberties Union to get involved in the fight on behalf of the civil liberties of these people whose invohintartly raised union moneys, which must be paid frequently as a condition for employment, are being used to subsidize political objectives contrary to their own. Mr. DENNIS. Mr. Chairman, win the gentleman yield? The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired, Mr. FRENZEL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 additional minutes to the gentleman from Illinois. Mr. CRANE. I yield to the gentleman Government in Washington is too vast and too sweeping in its powersand exercises life and death control over too many aspects of American life. When we address ourselves to this Problem, we win have begun the most meaningful campaign reform and not before. Mr. FRENZEL. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. SYa_Ms). (Mr. SYMMS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. SYMMS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I would like to associate myself with the remarks of the gentleman from Illinots (Mr. CRANE). Mr. Chairman, one way or auothex, this Congress soon win act on campaign spending reform. I am sure all my colleagues will want to be on record back home as being solidly on the side of representative government, and solidly opposed to special interests, However, unless the campaign reform legislation we enact covers inkind--noneash--15olitical expenditures by special interest groups, we will be doing more harm than good. Dave Broder of the Washington Post recently addressed that point: If access to large sums (of cash) is elimihated as a potential advantage for one candidate or party by the provision of equal pubitc subsidies for all, then the election outcome will likely he determined by the ability to mobilize other forces. The most important of these factors are probably manpower publicity. Legislation that eliminates the and dol- from Indiana. Mr. DENNIS. I thank both of the gentlemen for yielding, I simply want to say that in my judgmcnt the gentleman from Illinois in the well[ is making a very important contribution to this debate, although unfortunately there are very few people here to hear it. The essential cynicism of the process we are going through this afternoon is illustrated by the consideration of this so-called reform bill, which is being considered under a rule where the three important amendments mentioned by the gentleman, indeed, essential amendments for any real campaign reform, to anyone who knows anything about the subject realistically cannot even be considered by this body, cannot even be voted upon. The essential cyrilcism of this situation is a sad cornmentary on our whole operatio_ here, and I am glad the gentleman at least is still allowed to point out the need, even though in this body we are not allowed to have a vote. 1ar influence on politics automatically ehhances the influence of those who can provide manpower or publicity for the campaign, forMr. his CRANE. Comments. I thank conclusion oneIn final note. the gentleman IIn would like to with add this connection the abuses we have thought about and heard reported in theit media over for the us pastto year or so, I think is essentiai bear in mind that there is one overriding reason for abuse that this body ought to consider, for it gets to the nub of the problem. In answering the question why people are willing to spend millions of dollars and wining to circumvent the law as a means of obtaining influence here, 1 think the answer is that the Federal Such nonreform legislation would by definition leave virtually unchallenged the bosses of big labor in the political arena--making a mockery of the politicai ambitions of the estimated 16 million wage earners who must pay union officials for.. representation they do not want or lose their jobs. Like most Americans, we recognize the serious need for further careful examination and reform of the practices under which political campaigns are financed, That is why we are supporting efforts in this House to address thc reform issue to "in-kind" as well as direct financial aid. Thereisnot one of us who canhoncsbly deny the excessive influence union officials exert in this Congress, because of the political support they provide. Support which Mrs. Helen Wise, the recent past president of the teachers union, says will amount to "millions and millions" this year. Twelve years ago, Justice Hugo Black in his dissent in IAM against Street said: There can be no doubt that the-federally sanctioned union-shop contract hero, as it actually takesturns a partit of thetoearnings of some works, men and over others, who spend a substantial part of the funds so received in efforts_to thwart the political, economic and ideological hopes of these whose money has been forced from them under authority of law. That situation has not changed. The use of compulsory union dues for politicai purposes seriously jeopardizes our H 7813 sySbeui of representative governme_t..It dilutes every citizen's political freedom and outrageously violates thebasic_q_ht,s of workers whose money is being 'misused. We believe that there can be no :meaningful campaig_l reform legislation 'unless it contains provisions which win /put a stop to these political spending abuses. A recent public: opinion study by Opinion Research Corp. showed that 78 percent of all union members--and a :greater majority of the general public want union due_ kept out of politics. Can we deny them and still claim to be representatives of the people? Mr. FRENZEL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 4 minutes. Mr. Chairman, we have reported this bill at great length :in the RECORD, and in the committee report, which of course, will stand for itself. Like the chairman of the coramittee, I hope we do not use ali of our time in the sched.uled debate and that we do proceed on a prompt basis to the amendments allowed. Our job has been rendered a great deal easier by the passage of the closed rule, which we on this side disagreed with. But since the vote has gone agairr_t us we must proceed as that restrictive rule directs. Mr. Chairman, the bin before us is a mixed bag. The committee labored mightily, and diligently, and produced a good vehicle, but an imperfect one. The has been considerably strength.ened bill within the last 24 hours due to the hard work on the part of the chair.- man of the committee in constructing what I think are important compromises to be reflected in the committee amendments. These wilt do a great deal to shore uP what I think are some of the weak spots in the bin that is before us. There are many strengths in the bill and the committee is to be commended for those strengths. For instance, the limitations on contributions and expenses, while all of us may disagree with the various leveis, ih_ve got to be something that is necessary and something the people want. The single committee, the limitation on cash, the preemptions of State rules, the restoration of reasonable rights under chapter 611 for Govei'nment contractors the removal of State and local employees from um'easonable Hatch Act restrictions, the redefinition of restrlc.tions on foreign nationals, the restrictions on honorariums are ail imlaortant features of this bill. All of us win undoubtedly agree to the merits of these features even if we might have some complaints with some of the particulr,: numbers involved. I am particularly pleased with the committee amendment which will relate to the board of supervisory officer8 be-cause I think it answers a number of the complaints I had about the committee bill. I am pleased that the compromise has been able to worked out. W'hat has not been worked out Lq the subject of public financing of elecLion_; 'which in my judgment is destructive to our election processes and will reduco 821 H 7814 CONGR[SSIONAL fndividual participation and reduce party strength in this countx-y, The bill itself is restiSctive to political party actfvities because it equates a broad-based national political party with any small special interest group of 50 :persons. :E',ach is able to contribute _5,000 to may campaign, and in my judgment trds particular facet of the bill makes a special interest, a single tiny special interest, the equivalent of a poli_ tical party. It renders violence to the concept that political parties are importent and necessary to our system of gov_ eminent, It is also my regret that the cleari_house function, which was previously provided by the General Accounting .Office, has been dispensed with in this particular bill. It may be possible to re_ surrect it now that we have a new board of supervisory' officers. It is the one e!ement in the Federal Government that renders some good to State governments. We seem to have plenty of interest in telling the States how to run elections, but no interest in helping them with the elections. The clearinghouse served in that function and it is my hope that will be restored to the bill. Mr. Chairman, I hope we adopt some of these amendments, but certain'_,y not the 2Mlderson-Udall amendment, and that we move this bill along and pro_ duce for the American people a good election reform bill at a time when confidence in otrc Government is threatened. Mr. HAYS. Mr. Chairman, ][ yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Penusylvania (Mr'. GAYDOS), (Mr. GAYDOS asked and was gixen permission to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. GAYDOS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this bill. Mr. Chairman, the Committee on House Administration has spent many hours in marking up this bill and, at this time, I want to congratulate both the Chairman, Mr. Hays, as well as my collea_,mes on the committee for their dillgent efforts in drafting the legislation which is now befm'e the House. It was evident to all the members of the cornmittee that there was no easy answer to the many problems that were raised. I do think, however, that the bill before us is a good one. It reflects an attempt to meet the problems arising out of the 1972 elections and to provide a means of preve,__tlng their repetition in future elections. We must bear in mind the fact that .many'of the abuses of the 1972 elections which have 'been exposed, were brought tolight only because of the disclosure requirements of the Federal :Elections Campaign Act of 1971. Furthermore, we mttst not lose sight of the fact that many of those responsible :for those abuses have been and are still being prosecuted under existing law. So I submit that we do have e×isting law that has been beneficial, z. LI_rZTaTIO_o_ rxrENrI_s A_n CONTa_U_XONS The purpose of the bill before us is to add to the 1971 act by providing addi-, tional restrictions on campai_ activities. The 1971 act established limitations on the amount that a candidate co,_d 822 RECORD--HC ::;l:,end.,on "communication media." The substa:-Jtial sums spent in the 1972 Presi.. dentia! campaign, namely $54 million by Mr. N:xon and $28 million by Senator McGov_gm_, as well as some House cam-. paigns involving expenditures by indi-, vidual candidates in excess of $100,000, and even a few Jn excess of $200,000 have demon_ti'ated tlnat a limitation on only a port_on of the total campaign expendi-, '(;ures i; inadequate. Accordingly, Lhe bill before us would ::laee sn overall ceiling on campaig:n ex.gendit _res. For Presidential campaigns il:is would be $20 million in the precon-. ventio]_ period and ,';20 million in the _;_eneral electiort. When compared with t;l:.e ex!_enditures on i:.he 1972 election, it is; abm,_dantly clear that it is the intent ,:):fthe _fil that the tide must be reversed and al owable Presidential campaign expenses must be substantially reduced. Witl respect to senatm_al campaigns 51:.elinfits are 5 cents multiplied by the populai:ion of the State--but in no ce,se '.ess than $75,000---for each election; pri_ mary snd general, For House campa:igns the limi_ are $'_5,00_ for each elec,tion; primary and _:,_enera!--and runoff i.f needed. Admittedly the $75_000 limitation has :[:obe acbitrary as ma_?y candidates spent ',_;t.bsta _tially less while others spent more, but in order to 'Lake into consider al;ion variations between congressional distric':s, the committee concluded that $;'5,00( was an-appropriate. · limitation. The bill does contain two provisions ;hat c_uld affect these limitations. One 0rovisJ..;,n allows an increase in the ceil-, :ing based on an increase in the price inalex from the base period of 1973 and the :?car l_receedin[, _ the election. Xq_e sec ,:md p_ovision does allow a candidate to e×clud_, from ::he limitation any exu)enses- -not to exceed 25 percent of the !imitation--for the costs entailed in fundraising. These provisions apply to Mi Fecm'al elec;ions. Muc:. has been made about the exist-, e]aee o[ the few v'm_y large contributors who a_pear to play a disproportionate ::ole in the elec':ions of Federal officials, The p:.'ovisions of this bill setting very low co _tribution limits sl_ould elnninate [;].:.epo :ential for abuse by the yew large donors. No individual can contribute more t:[an $1,000 to st candidate for each e][,_tio:_ma total of $2,000 for primary and g_neral, or $3,000 if a runoff is in,:fiaded ..-and no individual can contribute more _'lmn $25,000 to all candidates for all Federal elections m a single year. Stri(:t enforcement of these provisions should both eliminate the undue infiuene_ of the very l:Jrge contributor to )ast el,:ctions as; well as encourage many mm'e _:_dividuals to contribute '_o the candid:tes of _heir choice. No hinter will a_ individual be discouraged from makings' a modest con'!:ribution to an elec-, i;ion campaign because of his feeling that his cor tribution wilt mean nothing eom-. 9ared ;_o_he substantial contribution of the ve:y affluent individual. The Jack of partici!pation and apathy oi suci[ a large segment of the elector-. ate is :': problem that concerns all of uso Tine setting of ver2g low limits on individual vontributions should serve to con- J ;t: August 7, 1974, /inee ti_ese individuals that they should :eke a :more active part in election camreigns,, to educate themselves as to the ::andid_,tes and issues involved and to o:atribtate to those candidates who pro-. aote tLeir interests. With respect to contributions by or-. :anizations, the bill provides a limit :,f $5,0(,0 on contributions by a "political ommittee" to any candidate for any :lectiort. A candidate cannot contribute more hen $25,000 from his personal funds or he pecsonal funds of his immediate :amily in connection with his own cam,aign. 'rher_ are additional provisions which wohib:i_ contributions by foreign neidnals and cash contributions in excess _:f$100 ri. VXSCLOSUEE :tn o:tder to make the disclosure pro,'is;ions of the 1971 act more effective, he bill requires that each candidate de-. ignate a "principal campaign commitce" to make expenditures on behalf of he cartdidate and to be responsible for :he pr_paration and filing of reports to effect the activities of all committees :hich _;upport a candidate. This should nhibit 'the proliferation of campaign ommiltees and provide a single report o reflect all activities in support of the a:ndidate. 'Iqle bill amex_ls existing law by repeal-. :'xg the, provision requiring the 15-day ,nd 5-day report and instead requiring :[0-d_y report which would have to be :rafted no later than the 12th day prior o the ulection. Experience has indicated hat the 5-day report has been of little a;:ue because the short time span inJlved between filing and the election ,revents the most effective use of the inormat:on contained therein. _r. FI:_ANCINGOFPRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS The bill contains provisions which :'m::k a :radical change from the present ,mvate system of financing presidential dectior_s. It expands on the dollar check:ff procedure which was adopted in 1971. y prcviding each major party with unds _[_1_to $2 million to cover the ex-. ,crises :)f the party's nominating conven-. :ion. Minor parties would be eligible for , ]csse:t sum based on their past vote or o be xeimbursed on the basis of their :_resent vote in the general election. ?'ayrr_ent for convention expenses ._ould :_e the first claim on the funds vailabie from the checkoff procedure. The :najor parties would be eligible to -eceive 'up to $20 million to cover ex-,enses incurred in the general election. ,,_rinor }:,arties would be eligible to a less-. :c amomt. If a party chooses to use this ::tethod and funds available from the o:[lar ::heckoff fund are insufficient to over t}_,, entire' $20 million then the par.. ies wo_ld be allowed to raise the differ-n2e fr:)m private sources. With respect to presidential prenomi_ation activities, the bill provides for unds lrom the dollar checkoff fund to :e available on a matching basis. This _:; to assure that a candidate for nomi[ation i:ms sufficient nationalsupport and s P.ot :_;.frivolous candidate. The use of funds from the dollar, _'.neckof_ are limited only to the Presi-. August 7, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL dential elections. Experience to date indicates that the overwhelming number of instances of election campaign abuses involved the recent Presidential campaign, ! am not presently convinced that the use of the checkoff system is going to be a complete solution to this problem, but ! do support this approach with the hope it will be a viable solution, On the other hand, ! am not convinced at this time that the dollar checkoff system should be applied to other Federal elections. There is a substantial difference both in the magnirude and the process of Presidential elections as compared to elections to congressional office which make the former more appropriate for the use of public rather than private funds. The problem of frivoloug candidates alone i._ one that could be a nightmare in the case of public funding of congressional elections. · Furthermore, I am quite optimistic 'that the limitations on contributions and expenditures provided in the current bill when combined with the disclosure provisions of the 1971 act as amended by the bill before us will eltrairate the opportunity for campaign abuses in congressional elections, We must not be unmindful of the fact that the constitutionality oI' funding Federal elections from the dollar checkoff system is far from clear, Accordingly, I support the approach of the btu before us which limits the dollar checkoff system to the Presidential election. CONCLUSXO_ The bill that the House Administration Committee has reported to the full House is a sound and workable approach to a very complex problem, I sincerely urge my colleagues to give their full support to it. Mr. FRENZEL. Mr. Chairman, I yield minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. ARMSTRONG). Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Chairman, it is my purpose to ask some questions about provisions of the bill which trouble me. I refer to language on line 21 of page 6. I would like to read it and put it in perspective: "(e) (1) No person may make any expenditure (other than an expenditure made by or on behalf of a candidate under tho provlsions of subsection (c)) relative to a clearly identified candidate during a calendar year wlhich, when added to all other expenditures made by such person %luring the year advocating the election or defeat of such candldate, exceeds $1,000. I would like to inquire o_ the floor manager of this legislation whether or not I correctly understand that this seetion limits not just the right of candidates or their supporters, but other persons who are in no way related to the campaign or the candidates on either side. Mr. FRENZEL. It is my impression that this $1,000 limitation was the cornmittee's response to the question of free speech, which was at least hinted at in the ACLU-Jennings case. We decided we should let an individual spend $1,000 to defeat or to elect the candidate, which RECORD -- HOUSE I-I 78][5 amount would be not spent through the while such issues as busing or anmesty particular candidate's campaign corn- may be clear cut, other issues are less mittee or through the candidate persharply defined. I feel that we will find sonally. What we are doing, I think, in a oUrselves in a quagmire of litigation as short phrase, is to allow every individual committees try to determine where this a thousand dollars' worth of free speech, line is. Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Chairman, the May I sck a further related question gentleman from Minnesota has come · of the gentleman? SUpposing a commitquickly to the heart of my concern. We tee seeks to advocate the election of 10 are talking about other persons, not cancandidates and buys a $10,000 _1. Is didates or their committees, it then to be prorated among the 10 of The thing I do not underStand, and I them? wish we could have some explanation, is Mr. FRENZEL. That is my understandhow we can limit the right of free speech int. to $1,000 worth. T he first amendment Mr. ARMSTRONG. May I ask, if the says we may not abridge free speech; we money is spent for an organizational elmay not curtail; we may not diminish; fort not directly related to a candidate; we may not shorten. Is that not exactly for example, suppose to hire poll watchWhat we are doing by this amendment? ers or campaign workers, which in tho Mr. FRENZEL. Mr. Chairman, if the end may be the most effective poUtical gentleman will yield further, the gentleexpenditure of campaign funds, does it man is cocrect. We are at least modifyescape this limitation and other similar lng or containing the right of free speech limitations in the bill? exactly as the Supreme Court said, that Mr. FRENZEL. In my judgment, that one can shout "Fire" anywhere he wanted expense would have to be prorated also, to except in a closed building. We are depending on the number of candidates. saying that a person can have $1,000 Mr. ARMSTRONG. Suppose it is not worth of free speech to elect a candidate for a candidate, but simply an expendior to defeat him. ture for this purpose in the area? We chose $1,000 because that was the Mr. FRENZEL. We can think 'ap all limit we put on individual contributions kinds of situations that are difficult to to the committees. We said there ought explain. I think we have to take each one to be a limit which would be similar for on its face. If there is a party expense independent expenditures. The constiwhich is pure overhead and is not djtutionality may be doubtful, but if so, rected at any single candidate, o:r may then the individual limitation is also flow over to non-Federal type candidates, doubtful, we will simply have to interpret those as Mr. ARMSTRONG. I thank the gentlethey come up. man for his explanation. That is one of the reasons the comBut let me make it clear my concern mittee wrote into the bill the advisory is not primarily legalistic, but simply to opinion section, which I hope will be draw attention of the Members to the helpful to candidates of ail parties. fact that we are tampering in a very unMr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Chairman, in fortunate way with free-speech rights, the brief time remaining, I would like to not of candidates or their supporters, but again thank the gentleman from Minother persons, persons who may be ennesota for his explanations and to, corntirety unrelated to the candidates, who ment the gentleman and others who may be citizens' groups, as was the cornworked on this legislation for their sinmittee in the New York decision--Americerity of purpose. But I think they have can Civil Liberties Union against Jengone far astray. I think they are making rings, a terrible mistake which will be ultiMay I now ask whether or not this mately invalidated by the courts, but $1,000 limitation would apply to adwhich will in the meantime cause a great vertisement or advocacy of the pros harm. and cons of issues which may be clearly I hope that there may yet be a way to identified with the candidates, even amend the bill to strike out this prothough the candidates are not clearly identified within the meaning of the deftnition which follows this paragraph? For example, if we have two candidates clearly defined on an emotional issue such as busing, inflation or amnesty, can citizens go out and advocate one side or the other of the issue and not mention candidates and escape this limitation? Mr. FRENZEL. Ial my judgment, they cannot. This particular amendment was proposed by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. NEBZr). The gentleman will find in our committee records that gentleman's explanation. I think he intended to cover by the words "clear and una. mbiguous' reference to a candidate the kind of thing the gentleman is discussing, One cannot by subterfuge or indirection escape that description if in fact the candidate, opposed or proposed, is apparent, Mr_ ARMSTRONG. Let me suggest that vision. Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. ARMSTRONG. I will yield if I have any time left. Mr. FRENZEL. Mr. Chairman, l: yield the gentleman 1 additional minute. Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Ohio. Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman. I wish to associate myself with the gentleman's concerns. I think there is a real question as to whether or not we can put a quantified limit on the individual's constitutional rights of free speech, whether it is about, political campaigns or anything else, but in particular politicai campaigns, which strikes at the heart of the operation of our Government. I think the gentleman has raised a substantial point which, if this lcgislation is thoughtfully considered, will susrain his viewpoint. (Mr. BROWi_ of Ohio asked and was 823 H 7816 CON'GRESSIONiLL given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. HAYS. Mr, Chairman_ I yield § mimes to the gentleman from New Jersoy (Mr. T_o_Pso_). (Mx. THOMPSON of New Jersey asked and. was given permission to revise and ext_md his remarks.) Mr. THOMPSON of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman arid members of the committee, I do not :intend to use 5 minutes, but I cannot let this opportunity pass without commending, in particular, the chairman of the committee (Mr. HAYS) and the members of the committee, I have heard virtually innumerable attacks on the chairman and on members of the committee for being dilatory, for not wanting legislation, and for stalling, all of which attacks which have been unfair and uritrue. This is enormously complicated legislation, and I would expect that of the members of the committee, there were at least an average of 10 amendments in the hands of each one of them. The gentleman fl_m Minnesota (Mr. FRENz_) himself must have had 50 amendmerits. I had about 12 or 14. We operate under the 5-minutes _le, and everyone was given every possible opportunity lm be heard and to :have his amendments voted upon. Virtually innumerable w)tes were taken, and in the course of tJais we _aw a committee operate in the best possible and most democratic fashion in terms of give and :take. The gentleman from Minnesota referred to the committee amendments which were agreed upon a bipartisan and unanimous basis. I shall present 4 of them. They :are not long, nor are they complicated, but their effect is to tighten up what we consider to be loopholes in this very excellent legislation, Groups from outside this body, with They were pz_sent have particular interests, at the have markups, been heard. had their input, and have been paid attention to. ]£n many cases their suggests have b_en accepted, In the final analysis, the votes of the committee, despite individual differences on individual sections or words or interprorations, were agreed upon almost totally unanimously in order to get this legislation to the floor. I simply wtmt to reiterate my confidence In the chairman and in my colleagues on the committee and to suggest to the Members that it is absolutely irapossible to _raft a perfect piece of leglslation which is as complicated as is this. We thlrt that we voted as well as can be done, and there may be subsequent changes necessary, but nevertheless, we are answering to art honest and much-needed response from the American public for meaningful election reform. That is the essence of this leglslation, We shall achieve the desires of the American public, and we shall do so honorably in this process today, Mr. FRENZEL. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as ]he may consume to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. BAKER). (Mr. BAI_]R asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remar'ks.) 824 RECORD -- HO1..I,.,L August 7, 19 74 Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, in the catalog of abuses, compulsory political donations by union members rank .right up there with the worst, Absolutely no one argues against union officials' right to assist their political _[r:Lends. It is precisely the same right onjoyed by business groups. The trouble begins when un:ions take dues money to Iinance that assistance. How do they do this? Mostly through the services they perform for prounion candidates. Uniim political front organizations, notably the Committee on Political Education, COPE, conduct get-.outthe-vote drives i:a neighborhoods likely to go for right-th:'riking candidates; they turn over buildings, trucks, telephones, and computers to friends of the union viewpoint. ;Now if the dues-paying union man happerm to like the candidate his union is helping, he may not; Woru_ymuch about where his dues are going. But what if he hates the fellow, cannot stomach his views for a minute? It is too bad, but there is no help for him: Like it or not, he is going to subsidize a candidate for whom he refuses to vote. The issue, then, is one of political freedom. Either the union member has the right to withhold support from a given omedidate or he :has not the right. There is no other way cf looking at it. _[n 1972 the anions spent some $50 million on their political friends, only about 10 percent: of which, according to labor columnist Victor Riesel, came from volunta_y giving, Accordingly, I would have been supporting the proIx)sed amendments to curb 'qn kind" as well as directed donations, As the Dallas Morning News wrote in a recent editorial, we can-Wake it from George l_:eany: "Existing laws aren't nearly strong enough to prevenz the use of union dues for political purposes." The bart, as the AFL_:[O chieftain puts it, everybc