Press Conference on 527 Reform Act
Press Conference on 527 Reform Act
Copyright ©2007 by Federal News Service, Inc., Ste. 500, 1000 Vermont Ave, Washington, DC 20005 USA. Federal News Service is a private firm not affiliated with the federal government. No portion of this transcript may be copied, sold or retransmitted without the written authority of Federal News Service, Inc. Copyright is not claimed as to any part of the original work prepared by a United States government officer or employee as a part of that person's official duties. For information on subscribing to the FNS Internet Service at www.fednews.com, please email Jack Graeme at jack@fednews.com or call 1-800-211-4020.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
SEN. SCHUMER: Well, thank you, John. And it is good to be here.
I guess I'm here in sort of four capacities: one, as a cosponsor of the original bill and supporter of campaign finance reform under the great leadership of these four gentlemen who are here; second, as a member of the rules committee; third, as the Democratic chair of the DSCC, the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee; and fourth, as a member of the Democratic leadership on the floor. And I am glad to be here.
Now, Trent Lott's getting pretty good with the lines. That Groundhog Day one was pretty good. I had it on my sheet -- (laughter) -- Punxsutawney Phil, must be good; but it's gone. (Laughter.) That's a pretty good standard.
But what I'm saying is, some look for the predictions of Punxsutawney Phil on Groundhog Day, but I look to our own New York City groundhog, Staten Island Chuck, for his predictions. He's a real groundhog. He's there today. And today, Staten Island Chuck predicted that by the next election cycle, 527s will no longer pop out of their holes to use unlimited soft money for media smear campaigns. (Laughter.)
There is really a Staten Island Chuck; I am not making that up. (Laughter.) Excellent staff work back there.
In any case, the unintended consequences of the 1974 campaign finance law created the soft money honey pot. It took 30 years to clean it up. This year we have the opportunity to eliminate the next 527 soft money -- we have the opportunity to eliminate the 527 soft money honey pot before the next federal election. And that's what the voters want us to do.
Soft money will find its way and seep into the political system and corrode it unless we plug every hole. The biggest hole is the one dug out by the 527s. As a Democrat, as head of the DSCC, my view is 527s are a big problem regardless of party.
And it doesn't matter which party did better one year, or which party did better the other year in terms of how much money went into the 527s, whether they were the left ones or the right ones. It's just bad, and we ought to get rid of it regardless of the consequences politically.
On this Groundhog Day -- well, I've done that enough. (Laughter.) You know, you guys were good, but in the last election 527s with little regard for the rules let soft money contributions go sky-high. They once again turned our election process into sort of a wild, wild west. Anyone who watched TV last fall felt he had a front seat at the OK Corral when these groups battled it out. And despite the best efforts of so many in the Congress, including the people here today, millions of dollars in soft money from corporations, unions and wealthy individuals influenced the election. These groups have a right to play a role in federal elections. But there have to be limits, and those limits must be enforced.
We're not saying the 527s should be abolished; simply that they should be bound by the same laws everyone else is bound by, plain and simple. The bottom line is simple: it's time to pull in the reins on these 527 horses, and that's what our legislation sets to do. We need to hold the 527s in check and restore integrity to our campaigns. And that's what the bill does. I'm proud to be an original cosponsor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Q Is there any -- (off mike) -- that by further restricting 527s -- (off mike) -- 501(c) organizations -- (off mike)?
SEN. MCCAIN: We did not address the 501(c) issue, because the 501(c)s, by definition, are not engaged in partisan political activity in order to affect the outcome of election. As soon as they are, they fall under the '74 law. They can call themselves 501s, 999s, 205s, whatever they want to, but no matter what their label is or where they fall in the tax code, if they engage in partisan political activities, then they -- for the purposes of affecting the outcome of an election, then they fall under campaign finance laws.
The overwhelming majority of 501(c)(3)s are advocacy organizations for different causes, and that's fine. I mean, that's what our system should be all about. Organizations should form up, raise money and advocate and achieve the goals -- whatever goals they seek. But there's a dramatic difference between that and somebody who engages in the partisan political activity.
SEN. SCHUMER: Just one point with all this. What we're trying to do here is continue the same regime that has basically worked, just extend it to 527s. It's not to change 527s and make them any different than anyone else, not to allow 501s to do something that they weren't allowed before. It's worked. It has been proven to be constitutional. It makes the most sense to do it this way.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
SEN. SCHUMER: But one additional point: Each party has had a sour experience with these, whether it was the Republicans early on when the Democratic ones got started up or Democrats later on with the Swift Boat. And the stars are aligned much better for this legislation than for the previous bill that these four gentlemen so courageously pushed for for a very long time. I mean, when you have the president saying he's for it, when you have most of the leaders of the Congress, both parties, saying that they're for it, it's a lot easier.
That's not to say it's a done deal. The history of campaign finance reform is there's always things that get in the way. But I think it's a lot easier this time than last time. And no -- I know that some Democrats have said, hey, this is great for us, but I let it be known to my colleagues that I was going to do this and I didn't get much flack at all. A few years ago when I went on the -- (laughter) -- McCain-Feingold bill, it was a little different. (Laughter.)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Q But they're not the partisan plan for causes?
SEN. SCHUMER: The idea is not keeping the money out of causes; it's keeping the money out of politics, or at least soft money.
SEN. FEINGOLD: Out of campaigns.
SEN. SCHUMER: Out of campaigns.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source