Campaign finance is back in the spotlight after New Hampshire Congressman Charlie Bass '74 crossed party lines to sign a controversial petition on the issue.
On Jan. 24, a discharge petition in the House gained the 218 necessary signatures to force the Speaker of the House to create a spot for campaign finance reform on the legislative agenda.
A discharge petition is a mandate of the members of the House to put an issue on the floor to be debated and put up for a vote. It must be signed by a majority of the 435 members of Congress.
Three congressmen signed the petition along with Bass, raising the number of signatures from 214 to 218 and prompting the leader of the house to promise that the Shays-Meehan bill will be brought onto the floor before Feb. 20.
"If it has enough votes to force it out of committee that means it has a lot of support, but it isn't as good as passed, especially since the House leadership wasn't happy with it," government Professor Matthew Lebo said.
Bass, a Republican, went against his party leader's preferences and became one of the last four to sign the petition. Bass commented on the workings of the House.
"The committees rule," he said. "The speaker has almost no power ... only to schedule. The committees are very powerful, but if the speaker doesn't want to schedule a bill, he doesn't."
Lebo also commented on the role of committees in the house. "If a committee doesn't like a bill, the committee can make it so bad that it won't pass or they can just sit on it. The discharge petition brings the issue out of committee."
The Democrats of the House started the discharge petition in July 2001 with 157 signatures. Gradually through the year different members of Congress added their signatures. Bass was the 216th signer.
Bass didn't sign the petition when it was introduced, because he wanted to give the speaker a chance to "reschedule the bill in the second session." When the bill wasn't put on the agenda, "I spoke to the speaker in January, and he said no [that it wouldn't be on the agenda] so I signed the discharge petition."
"My interest was in giving the speaker the opportunity to schedule the issue. The speaker has the right to develop the schedule," Bass said, noting that discharge petitions are not common. "I, personally, would think carefully about signing any discharge petition."
Bass observed that parties played a strong role in the situation. "When a party is in power, they don't want to change the rules. If the Democrats were in power, you would see an entirely different dynamic," Bass said.
Most Democrats "immediately signed the petition without trying to intellectualize" its effects, according to Bass, who added that when a party is the minority, "you are there to disrupt."
As for what motivated him to take the politically-risky step of signing the petition, Bass said, "I have been consistent in my support of meaningful campaign finance reform."
Only 20 other Republicans have signed the petition.
"I believe that campaigns should be run as locally as possible. Candidates that aren't personally wealthy or don't have connections to large companies should be able to run and have a chance," Bass. He noted that the growing "ability of parties to collect huge sums of money" has led to their domination of elections.
If passed, the Shays-Meehan bill basically would do two things, banning "soft money contributions" and limiting the time frame in which issue advertisements including a candidate's name may be run.
Bass also brought up the Enron issue, noting that for some, it "has created impetus. The press likes it", but asserting that "it didn't have any impact on my decision. It was not my reason for being involved. The issue is far more profound that just Enron."
According to Bass, 214 of the 218 signatures were signed before Enron, further discrediting the notion that the Enron scandal caused the completion of the discharge petition.
Lebo gave a few further insights as to why politicians may vote for or against campaign finance reform.
Campaign finance reform "will make it much more difficult for them to be reelected" if it is passed, but since most of the public supports campaign finance reform to some degree, by voting against it, politicians may "lose their popularity," he said.
