Campaign Finance Debate in the House: Substitute Amendments to H.R. 2183 (105th Congress)

Campaign Finance Debate in the House: Substitute Amendments to H.R. 2183 (105th Congress)

98-494 GOV
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Campaign Finance Debate in the House: Substitute
Amendments to H.R. 2183
(105th Congress)
Updated June 10, 1998
Joseph E. Cantor
Specialist in American National Government
Government Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

ABSTRACT
This report provides a summary and comparison of the 11 substitute amendments to
H.R. 2183, a campaign finance reform bill offered by Representatives Hutchinson and Allen,
that, under H. Res. 442, will be in order for consideration by the House. The House began
consideration of the bill and these substitute amendments (as well as additional perfecting
amendments) on May 21, 1998. This report is intended for use by House Members and staff
in preparation for and during House debate and assumes basic familiarity with the
underlying issues. It may be updated to reflect further legislative actions.
For further discussion of the issues reflected in these proposals, see two CRS overview
issue briefs: Campaign Finance: Constitutional and Legal Issues of Soft Money (IB98025);
and Campaign Financing (IB87020). Two of the leading House reform bills are compared
with each other and current law in: Campaign Finance Bills in the 105th Congress:
Comparison of H.R. 2183 (Hutchinson-Allen), H.R. 3526 (Shays-Meehan), and Current Law
(CRS Report 98-409). The issue and express advocacy issues are discussed in: Campaign
Finance Reform: A Legal Analysis of Issue and Express Advocacy (CRS Report 98-282).
Finally, a discussion of the union dues issue is offered in: The Use of Union Dues for
Political Purposes and Agency Fee Objectors (CRS Report 97-555).

Campaign Finance Debate in the House:
Substitute Amendments to H.R. 2183 (105 Congress)
th
Summary
House consideration of campaign finance reform legislation began on May 21,
1998. The leadership had announced that H.R. 2183 (Hutchinson-Allen), the
freshman bipartisan bill, would be the base bill and that substitute and perfecting
amendments would be in order. As of the May 14 deadline, 16 substitute
amendments had been filed with the Rules Committee.
Under H. Res. 442, reported by the Rules Committee on May 20, 1998 (H. Rept.
105-545) and passed by the House on May 21, two measures will be considered: H.R.
2183, the freshman bill, and H. J. Res. 119 (DeLay), a constitutional amendment to
allow reasonable regulation of campaign contributions and expenditures. The rule
also makes in order 11 of the 16 submitted substitute amendments. They are listed
here with their numbers, in the order in which they will be considered: 16—White;
13—Shays/Meehan; 1—Bass; 7—Farr; 14—Snowbarger; 4—Obey; 2—Campbell;
15—Tierney; 12—Schaffer (CO); 5—Doolittle; and 8—Hutchinson/Allen.
This report offers a summary of the 11 substitute amendments (including
Amendment No. 8, the text of H.R. 2183), as well as comparative charts on their
provisions, by category (e.g., soft money, issue advocacy, etc.).
Three aspects of campaign finance are most prominently reflected in these
measures. The most commonly addressed issue is soft money—non-federally-
regulated funds that may arguably have an impact on federal elections. Nine of the
11 measures address party soft money, with eight of the nine proposing curbs on
parties’ raising or spending of soft money. Five measures propose restrictions on
non-party soft money, thus affecting its raising or spending by unions and
corporations. The second area of concern is issue advocacy, addressed in six of these
substitute amendments: five would broaden the current definition of express
advocacy to regulate certain activities now classified as issue advocacy, and one
would only require disclosure of such expenditures. Finally, seven measures contain
provisions to improve disclosure and enforcement under federal law. In addition, a
wide variety of proposals is also engendered in these measures, from a system of
voluntary spending limits and public benefits in House elections (in three measures)
to a proposed independent commission to study and make reform recommendations
(in one measure).

Contents
Section I. Checklist of Amendments by Types of Provisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Section II. Comparison Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Section III. Summary of Amendments in Chronological Order . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Amendment No. 1 (Bass) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Amendment No. 2 (Campbell) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Amendment No. 4 (Obey) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Amendment No. 5 (Doolittle) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Amendment No. 7 (Farr) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Amendment No. 8 (Hutchinson) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Amendment No. 12 (Schaffer, CO) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Amendment No. 13 (Shays) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Amendment No. 14 (Snowbarger) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Amendment No. 15 (Tierney) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Amendment No. 16 (White) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
List of Tables
Table 1. Checklist of Major Provisions in Amendments, by Type . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Table 2a. Soft Money Provisions: Party . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Table 2b. Soft Money Provisions: Non-party (Corporate/Labor) . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Table 3. Issue Advocacy and Independent Expenditures Provisions . . . . . . . . . . 8
Table 4a. Other Provisions: Amendments 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, and 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Table 4b. Other Provisions: Amendments 12-16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Campaign Finance Debate in the House:
Substitute Amendments to H.R. 2183
(105th Congress)
Section I. Checklist of Amendments by Types of
Provisions
This section provides an easy reference table to types of provisions in each of
the amendments summarized in this report, grouped into 15 categories (including
“misc.”). These categories are used in the comparative tables in Section II and the
summaries by amendment number in Section III. A checkmark (o) denotes features
that are contained in each amendment. For each category, reference is made to the
table number in Section II where comparisons of the relevant features are presented.
A caveat should be noted regarding the classification system used in this report.
For easy reference, arbitrary decisions were made as to the primary nature and goal
of a particular provision. Many provisions have multiple purposes, however. For
example, a bill that would raise the limit on an individual’s contributions to political
parties would empower both the individual and the political party. Such a provision
would be listed here under “Individual,” because it most directly affects what an
individual may do, even though the parties would derive an enormous benefit as well.
In two of the three measures that propose systems of voluntary spending limits
in House elections in exchange for certain benefits, some of their features are
contingent upon or conditions of that system. In order to distinguish such provisions
from those that would apply across-the-board to all candidates, an asterisk (*) is used
in this checklist to denote them.

CRS-2
Table 1. Checklist of Major Provisions in Amendments, by Type
Amend. No./
Spend./
In-
Indep.
Soft
Issue
Study
sponsor
Benefits
PACs
Indiv.
Party
Cand.
state
Exp.
Money
Advoc.
Bund.
Foreign
Comm.
FEC
Adv.
Misc.
See Table #
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
2
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
1 Bass
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
2 Campbell
o
o
o
4 Obey
o
o
o
o
o
o
5 Doolittle
o
o
o
o
o
o
7 Farr
o
o
o
o
*
o*
o
o
o
o
o
o*
o
8 Hutchinson
o
o
o
o
o
o
12 Schaffer,
o
CO
13 Shays
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
14 Snow-
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
barger
15 Tierney
o
o
o
o*
o
o
o
o*
o
16 White
o

CRS-3
Section II. Comparison Tables
This section presents several tables with comparisons of provisions of the 11
substitute amendments in side-by-side format. For ease of presentation, they are
organized as follows:
! Table 2a — compares party soft money provisions of all 11 amendments;
! Table 2b — compares non-party soft money provisions (affecting unions and
corporations) of all 11 amendments;
! Table 3 — compares issue advocacy and independent expenditures provisions
of all 11 amendments;
! Table 4a — compares all other types of provisions, for amendments 1, 2, 4,
5, 7, and 8; and
! Table 4b — compares all other types of provisions, for amendments 12-16.

CRS-4
Table 2a. Soft Money Provisions: Party
No. 1
No. 2
No. 4
No. 5
No. 7
No. 8
No. 13
No. 14
No. 15
Bass
Campbell
Obey
Doolittle
Farr
Hutchinson
Shays
Snowbarger
Tierney
Bans any soft
money in conn.
with House
races
Bans national
Bans national
Bans national
Bans national
Bans national
Bans union/
Bans national
party raising
party raising
party raising
party raising
party raising
corp. money to
party raising
parties
Exempts
grassroots
activity and vote
drives only if by
volunteers
Restricts state
Restricts state
Restricts state
Restricts state
Restricts state
party spending
party spending
party spending
party spending
party spending
Finances
Finances
restricted state
restricted state
activity from
activity from hard
hard money
money
Grassroots Fund
Grassroots Fund
Bans inter-state
Bans inter-state
party transfers
party transfers
Bans use in
Bans use in
Bans use in
raising money
raising money
raising money

CRS-5
No. 1
No. 2
No. 4
No. 5
No. 7
No. 8
No. 13
No. 14
No. 15
Bass
Campbell
Obey
Doolittle
Farr
Hutchinson
Shays
Snowbarger
Tierney
Bans party
Bans federal
Bans party
Bans party raising
raising for or
candidates/
raising for or
for or giving to
giving to tax-
officials raising
giving to tax-
tax-exempts
exempts
for tax-exempts
exempts
they control that
do vote drives
Bans fed.
Bans fed.
Bans federal
Bans federal
Bans federal
Bans federal
candidates/
candidates/
candidates/
candidates/
candidates/
candidates/
officials from
officials from
officials from
officials from
officials from
officials from
raising soft
raising soft
raising soft
raising soft
raising soft
raising soft
money
money
money
money
money
money
Increases
Requires
Increases
Increases
Increases
disclosure
disclosure of
disclosure
disclosure
disclosure
party transfers
and copies of
state filings
Ends bldg. fund
Requires bldg.
Ends bldg. fund
Ends bldg. fund
exemption
fund disclosure
exemption
exemption
Exempts
donations to
party broadcast
facilities, but
requires
disclosure

CRS-6
No. 1
No. 2
No. 4
No. 5
No. 7
No. 8
No. 13
No. 14
No. 15
Bass
Campbell
Obey
Doolittle
Farr
Hutchinson
Shays
Snowbarger
Tierney
Bans non-
federal funds
for expenditures
by: federal
candidates,
parties,
lobbyists,
contributors in
affected race in
same election
cycle, and those
who commun-
icate with
candidates on
election plans,
raise funds, or
act in official
capacity for
candidates

CRS-7
Table 2b. Soft Money Provisions: Non-party (Corporate/Labor)
No. 1
No. 2
No. 7
No. 12
No. 13
No. 14
Bass
Campbell
Farr
Schaffer (CO)
Shays
Snowbarger
Requires written, prior
Requires written, prior
Requires written, prior
Codifies Beck decision:
Requires written, prior
authorization for union
authorization for union
authorization for union
require greater notice to
authorization for union
political use of member or
political use of member or
political use of member or
dues-paying non-union
political use of member or
non-member dues and for
non-member dues and for
non-member dues and for
members of rights to
non-member dues and for
corporate political use of
corporate political use of
corporate political use of
refund of money spent on
corporate political use of
dues, fees, or payments as
dues, fees, or payments as
dues, fees, or payments as
political purposes
dues, fees, or payments as
condition of employment
condition of employment
condition of employment
condition of employment
Requires annual notice of
Requires corporations to
expected political
give annual notice of
spending to corporate
proposed political
stockholders, who may
spending to stockholders,
then withhold percentage
allowing them to approve
equal to their share of
of such spending equal to
stocks
their percentage share of
stocks and prohibiting
corporation from spending
beyond the extent of
submitted approvals
Requires disclosure of all
Increases disclosure of
Requires disclosure of all
exempt activity, with
internal communications
exempt activity, with
$50,000 aggregate
and vote drives (exempt
$50,000 aggregate
threshold (including only
activities) in last 20 days
threshold (including only
internal communications
of an election
internal communications
referring to federal
referring to federal
candidates)
candidates)
Allows non-express adv.
public spending for
candidate appearances or
debates and non-partisan
voter guides

CRS-8
Table 3. Issue Advocacy and Independent Expenditures Provisions
No. 1
No. 4
No. 7
No. 8
No. 13
No. 15
Bass
Obey
Farr
Hutchinson
Shays
Tierney
Issue Advocacy
Defines express advocacy
Defines express advocacy
Defines express advocacy
Defines express advocacy
Defines express advocacy
(and hence triggers full
as a communication that,
as a communication that,
(and hence triggers full
communication as one
FECA coverage:
when taken as a whole
when taken as a whole
FECA coverage:
presented through public
disclosure, limits, source
and with limited reference
and with limited reference
disclosure, limits, source
communication media and
prohibitions) as
to external events,
to external events,
prohibitions) as
that:
communication for or
expresses support for or
expresses support for or
communication for or
* urges the election or
against candidate by:
opposition to (or urges
opposition to, or urges
against candidate by:
defeat of a clearly
* explicit language that in
action regarding) specific
action in support of or
* explicit language that in
identified federal
context can have no other
candidates (or groupings),
opposition to, specific
context can have no other
candidate by using explicit
reasonable meaning;
or that could be
candidates or group of
reasonable meaning;
phrases or by using
* paid broadcast citing a
reasonably construed as
candidates
* paid broadcast citing a
slogans and words that in
candidate within 60 days
seeking to influence an
candidate within 60 days
context can have no
of election; or
election; includes
of election; or
reasonable meaning other
* unambiguous advocacy,
communications that
* unambiguous advocacy,
than election advocacy; or
taken as whole with
identify a federal
taken as whole with
* refers to a clearly
limited reference to
candidate (by name,
limited reference to
identified candidate, is
external events
image, or likeness) within
external events
made within 60 days of a
90 days of a general
general election, and is
election
not solely devoted to a
pending leg. issue

CRS-9
No. 1
No. 4
No. 7
No. 8
No. 13
No. 15
Bass
Obey
Farr
Hutchinson
Shays
Tierney
Requires disclosure of
Requires FEC disclosure
expenditures on radio/
of House candidate-
TV communications
related issue ads (i.e., that
referring to House/Senate
are not contributions or
candidates (by name,
independent expenditures,
representation, or
that refer to House
likeness), once over
candidates, that are made
$25,000 for 1, or
in election year, and that
$100,000 for all,
recommend issue
candidates per year
positions), including
amount spent, contributors
of $1,000+, sponsor ID,
and purpose of ad
Exempts corporate/union
Exempts nonpartisan voter
member communications
guides
and nonpartisan voter
drives
Amends expenditure
definition to incl. payment
for message with express
advocacy, or that refers to
clearly identified
candidate, is coordinated,
and seeks fed. election
influence

CRS-10
No. 1
No. 4
No. 7
No. 8
No. 13
No. 15
Bass
Obey
Farr
Hutchinson
Shays
Tierney
Provides fallback
definition if held
unconstitutional: that part
of definition not held
invalid, plus, a
communication that refers
to a clearly identified
candidate and taken as a
whole and with limited
reference to external
events expresses
unmistakable election
advocacy
Independent Expenditures
Prohibits independent
expenditures in
connection with House
elections
Defines independent
Defines independent
Defines independent
Defines independent
Defines independent
expenditures as containing
expenditures as containing
expenditures as containing
expenditures as containing
expenditures as containing
express advocacy and
express advocacy and
express advocacy and
express advocacy and
express advocacy and
made without
made without candidate
made without
made without
made without
coordination with
involvement, or which
coordination with
coordination with
coordination with
candidate or agent
identify fed. candidates
candidate or agent
candidate or agent
candidate or agent
within 90 days of gen.
election (counts payments
for latter as contributions)

CRS-11
No. 1
No. 4
No. 7
No. 8
No. 13
No. 15
Bass
Obey
Farr
Hutchinson
Shays
Tierney
Tightens definition of
Tightens definition of
Tightens definition of
Tightens definition of
what constitutes
what constitutes payments
what constitutes
what constitutes payments
coordination and
in coordination with
coordination and
in coordination with
cooperation, and renders
candidate
cooperation, and renders
candidate
such activities to
such activities to
constitute FECA
constitute FECA
“contribution” or
“contribution” or
“expenditure”
“expenditure”
Increases frequency of
Increases frequency of
Increases frequency of
Increases disclosure in
disclosure of large
large amount disclosure,
disclosure of large
connection with House
amounts close to election
especially close to election
amounts close to election
Clean Money system
Includes in “contribution”
Includes in “contribution”
definition anything of
definition anything of
value, coordinated with
value, coordinated with
candidate, whether or not
candidate, whether or not
it has express advocacy
it has express advocacy
Bans parties from making
Raises party coordinated
Bans parties from making
Bans party independent
both coordinated and
expenditure limits to
both coordinated and
expenditures for a general
independent expenditures
match independent
independent expenditures
election candidate in cycle
for a general election
expenditures against
for a general election
if party makes $5,000+ in
candidate
party’s candidates
candidate
coordinated expenditures
for that candidate
Requires advance ad
script be given to all
candidates in race
(In voluntary limits/
(In voluntary limits/
benefits system, raises
benefits system, provides
spending limits of House
extra subsidies to House
candidates opposed by
candidates opposed by
independent expenditures)
independent expenditures)
Note: Common abbreviations used in this table: FEC (Federal Election Commission); FECA (Federal Election Campaign Act); ID (identification); PAC (political action committee)

CRS-12
Table 4a. Other Provisions: Amendments 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, and 8
No. 1
No. 2
No. 4
No. 5
No. 7
No. 8
Bass
Campbell
Obey
Doolittle
Farr
Hutchinson
Spending Limits/Public Benefits
* Voluntary limits in
* Voluntary limits in
House general election
House elections on
* Only public funds and
election cycle and
limited party money for
personal spending
general election
* Discount postal/
candidates
broadcast rates to
* Funded by tax add-on
participants
and tax on large
* Limits raised for
corporations
runoffs, close primaries,
* Double subsidy if major
independent expenditures,
party opponent does not
and opponent excesses
participate
* 35% tax on campaigns
that exceed limits
PACs
Bans PAC contributions
Removes PAC
Lowers PAC contrib. limit
Indexes PAC
to federal candidates
contribution limits
for House candidates:
contribution limits, as of
$8,000 per cycle
1999
Imposes 20% aggregate
Imposes $200,000
limit on “large donor
aggregate PAC receipts
PAC” money to non-part.
limit for House candidates
House general election
candidates
Bans leadership PACs
Raises limit on PAC
Raises limit on PAC
contributions to national
contributions to national
parties: $25,000 per year
parties: $20,000 per year

CRS-13
No. 1
No. 2
No. 4
No. 5
No. 7
No. 8
Bass
Campbell
Obey
Doolittle
Farr
Hutchinson
Individual Citizens
Raises aggregate annual
Removes individual
Raises aggregate limit:
Raises aggregate annual
limit: $30,000
contribution limits
$100,000 per cycle
limit: $50,000 ($25,000
($25,000 a year to
maximum to parties;
candidates; $20,000 a year
$25,000 to candidates and
to state parties)
PACs)
Raises limit to state
Imposes $200,000
parties: $10,000
aggregate receipts limit on
large donors ($200+) for
House candidates
Indexes contribution
limits, as of 1999
Political Parties
Removes party
Counts state and local
Removes coordinated
contribution limits
party contributions under
expenditure limits
single aggregate limit
Designates congressional
Indexes contribution
campaign committees as
limits, as of 1999
coordinated spending
agents
Allows merchandising
card proceeds

CRS-14
No. 1
No. 2
No. 4
No. 5
No. 7
No. 8
Bass
Campbell
Obey
Doolittle
Farr
Hutchinson
Candidates
Bans party coordinated
(Imposes $50,000 limit on
expenditures for House
spending from personal
general election
and family funds, under
candidates who exceed
voluntary spending
$50,000 voluntary limit on
limits/public benefits
personal/family funds;
system)
fines candidates who
pledge to abide by limit
and exceed it
Specifies permissible
uses, bans personal use of
campaign funds
In-State/District Provisions
Lowers limit on
contributions to
congressional candidates
(to $100) for donors who
cannot vote in election
Bundling
Bans bundling by
connected PACs, parties,
corps., unions, national
banks, partnerships, sole
proprietorships, lobbyists,
and their agents

CRS-15
No. 1
No. 2
No. 4
No. 5
No. 7
No. 8
Bass
Campbell
Obey
Doolittle
Farr
Hutchinson
Foreign Nationals
Bans direct or indirect
Codifies regulations
contributions, including
banning foreign nationals’
soft money, to candidates
directing, controlling, or
and parties (retains green
influencing any election
card exemption)
(retains green card
exemption)
Study Commission
FEC Disclosure and Enforcement
Requires electronic filing,
Requires electronic filing
Requires electronic filing,
over threshold amount
over $50,000 per year
Requires FEC Internet
Requires FEC Internet
posting within 24 hours
posting and public
viewing within 24 hours
Requires 24 hour notice of
Requires monthly
all donations in last 90
candidate disclosure in
days of election
election years
Bans candidate deposits
Revokes “best efforts”
Revokes “best efforts”
of $200+ without required
exemption for identifying
exemption for identifying
information
$200+ contributors
$200+ contributors
Allows random audits
Lowers itemization
threshold: $50
Increases and schedules
penalties

CRS-16
No. 1
No. 2
No. 4
No. 5
No. 7
No. 8
Bass
Campbell
Obey
Doolittle
Farr
Hutchinson
Expedites enforcement
near election
Allows referrals to Justice
Allows FEC to appear in
Dept. at any time
court as amicus curiae
Changes standard to start
proceedings
Requires candidate reports
on election cycle basis
Requires disclosure of
secondary payees
Requires simultaneous
candidate and principal
campaign committee
registration
Advertising
Augments disclaimer rules
Augments disclaimer rules
Changes terms for lowest
unit rate
(Under voluntary limits/
benefits system: lowers
broadcast and postal rates
for participants, denies
lowest unit rate to non-
participants, and requires
equal response time to
those opposed)

CRS-17
No. 1
No. 2
No. 4
No. 5
No. 7
No. 8
Bass
Campbell
Obey
Doolittle
Farr
Hutchinson
Miscellaneous
Ends pres. public funding
Bans franked mailings in
election year
Includes soft money in
bans on solicitation from
government buildings
Bans false representation
Bans false representation
to raise money
to raise money
Curbs candidate name use
Curbs candidate name use
Bans contributions from
Counts contribution by
minors
minor to parents’ limits
Bans $100+ cash receipts
Allows volunteer money
advances to campaigns
Bans money raising in or
near House chamber
If any part of act or
If any part of act or
If any part of act or
amendments is struck
amendments is struck
amends. is struck down,
down, remainder of act
down, requires fast-track
rest of act/amends. is
and amendments is
consideration of con-
unaffected, except if part
unaffected
stitutional amendment to
of voluntary limit/benefit
restrict express advocacy
section is voided, none of
and “independent
that section or PAC/large
expenditures” near
donor rects. limits applies
election
Common abbreviations used in this table: FEC (Federal Election Commission); FECA (Federal Election Campaign Act); ID (identification); PAC (political action committee).

CRS-18
Table 4b. Other Provisions: Amendments 12-16
No. 12
No. 13
No. 14
No. 15
No. 16
Schaffer, CO
Shays
Snowbarger
Tierney
White
Spending Limits/Public Benefits
* Voluntary limits in House
elections for election cycle
* Full public funding, and free/
discount broadcast time to
participants in primary and
general election
* Extra subsidies for
independent expenditures and
opponent excesses
* Financed with appropriated
and other specified campaign
funds
PACs
Removes PAC contribution
limits
Individual Citizens
Raises aggregate annual limit:
Removes individual contribution
Imposes sub-limits in annual
$30,000
limits
aggregate limit: $25,000 to
candidates; $20,000 to state
parties
Raises limit to state parties:
$10,000
Political Parties
Removes party contribution
Limits party spending in
limits
publicly-funded races

CRS-19
No. 12
No. 13
No. 14
No. 15
No. 16
Schaffer, CO
Shays
Snowbarger
Tierney
White
Candidates
Bans party coordinated
expenditures for House
candidates who exceed $50,000
voluntary personal fund limit,
with fines if they violate pledge
In-State/District Requirements
Bundling
Foreign Nationals
Bans direct or indirect
Bans election contributions by
contributions, including soft
foreign nationals or anyone not
money, to candidates and parties
qualified to register to vote
(retains green card exemption)
(including green card holders)

CRS-20
No. 12
No. 13
No. 14
No. 15
No. 16
Schaffer, CO
Shays
Snowbarger
Tierney
White
Study Commission
Sets up commission to recom-
mend campaign finance
changes: 12 members appointed
by President within 15 days (3
each from lists by House
Speaker & minority leader and
Senate majority & minority
leaders; 1 of 3 an independent);
proposals with 9-member vote
within 180 days of 105th Cong.
adjrn.; fast-track consideration
FEC Disclosure and Enforcement
Doubles FEC budget
authorization
Requires electronic filing, over
Requires electronic filing
Requires electronic filing, and
threshold amount
allows FAX filing
Requires FEC Internet posting
Requires FEC Internet posting
within 24 hours
within 24 hours
Requires 48 hour notice of
$100+ contributions in last 60
days of election
Bans candidate deposits of
$200+ without required
information
Lowers itemization threshold:
Removes itemization threshold
$50
for contributions

CRS-21
No. 12
No. 13
No. 14
No. 15
No. 16
Schaffer, CO
Shays
Snowbarger
Tierney
White
Increases and schedules
Increases penalties, including
penalties
mandatory jail time for
knowing/willful violations
Allows random audits
Allows random audits
Expedites enforcement near
Expedites enforcement near
election
election
Allows referrals to Justice
Allows Justice Department to
Gives FEC authority to seek
Department at any time
initiate criminal actions
injunctions and petition
Supreme Court
Changes standard to start
Changes standard to start
proceedings
proceedings
Adds 7th FEC Commissioner, to
be recommended by other 6
Allows subpoenas without chair
or vice-chair signature
Requires simultaneous candidate
and campaign committee
registration
Advertising
Augments disclaimer rules
Augments disclaimer rules
Bans preemption of House ads,
unless beyond broadcaster
control

CRS-22
No. 12
No. 13
No. 14
No. 15
No. 16
Schaffer, CO
Shays
Snowbarger
Tierney
White
(Under voluntary Clean Money
system: provides free and
reduced rate broadcast time to
participants, and denies lowest
unit rate to non-participants)
Miscellaneous
Bans franked mailings within
Bans franked mailings in
180 days of general or 90 days
election year
of primary
Bans contributions to candidates
for 6 months after election, not
including debt repayments
Includes soft money in bans on
solicitation from government
buildings
Bans false representation to
Bans false representation to
raise money
raise money
Restricts use of candidate names
Restricts use of candidate names
Bans contributions from minors
Counts minors’ contributions
toward parents’ limits
Bans receipts of cash over $100
Allows volunteer money
advances to campaigns
Bans money raising in or near
House chamber

CRS-23
No. 12
No. 13
No. 14
No. 15
No. 16
Schaffer, CO
Shays
Snowbarger
Tierney
White
If any part of act or amendments
If any part of act or amendments
is struck down, remainder of act
is struck down, remainder of act
and amendments is unaffected
and amendments is unaffected,
except for fallback definition
provided under issue advocacy
section (see Table 3 above)
Note: Common abbreviations used in this table: FEC (Federal Election Commission); FECA (Federal Election Campaign Act); ID (identification); PAC (political action committee)

CRS-25
Section III. Summary of Amendments in Chronological
Order
Section III is a chronological listing and summary of each substitute
amendment. For each, the listing provides the amendment number, sponsor, title,
and a detailed summary of provisions arranged by the categories used in Sections I
and II.
Amendment No. 1 (Bass)
Campaign Reform Act of 1998.
Individuals. Would raise aggregate individual limit to $30,000 per year; would
raise limit on individual contributions to state parties to $10,000 per year;
Candidates. Would specify permissible uses and prohibit personal use of
campaign funds; would prohibit a party from making coordinated expenditures on
behalf of a House general election candidate who does not abide by a voluntary limit
of $50,000 in total contributions and loans from personal and immediate family funds
(in the primary or general election);
Independent Expenditures. Would define independent expenditure as
containing express advocacy and made without coordination with a candidate, a
candidate’s agent, or someone coordinating with a candidate; would increase
disclosure of independent expenditures; would prohibit parties from making both
independent and coordinated expenditures for a general election candidate; would
amend definition of “contribution” to include anything of value provided in
coordination with a candidate to influence a federal election, regardless of whether
it contains express advocacy; would define “provided in coordination with a
candidate” to include payments made: (1) in cooperation or consultation with or at
the request or suggestion of a candidate; (2) using candidate-prepared materials; (3)
based on information provided by a candidate’s campaign for purposes of
expenditure; (4) by a spender who during that election cycle has raised funds or acted
in some official position for a candidate; (5) by a spender who has used the same
consultants as an affected candidate during an election cycle; (6) in coordination with
a candidate to influence an election regardless of whether message contains express
advocacy; (7) in communication about campaign plans; or (8) for in-kind
professional services; would render such payments or communications in
coordination with a candidate to be a “contribution” or “expenditure” under Federal
Election Campaign Act (FECA);
Soft Money. Would prohibit national party committees from soliciting,
receiving, directing, or spending soft money; would prohibit state and local party
committees from spending soft money for federal election activity, including: (1)
voter registration drives in last 120 days of a federal election; (2) voter identification,
get-out-the-vote drives, and generic activity in connection with an election in which
a federal candidate is on the ballot; and (3) communications that refer to a clearly
identified federal candidate with the intent of influencing that election; would allow

CRS-26
state parties to spend money on specific activities exclusively devoted to non-federal
elections; would prohibit party committees from using soft money to raise funds;
would prohibit party committees from raising money for or giving to tax-exempt
groups; would prohibit federal candidates and officeholders from raising soft money
for any federal election activity; would increase disclosure requirements for party
soft money; would remove building fund exemption from FECA “contribution”
definition; would require unions, corporations, and national banks to disclose
promptly all exempt activities (but only internal communications referring to federal
candidates) once threshold level is reached; would require written, prior authorization
from employees and stockholders of corporations and national banks before any
money from dues, fees, or payments as a condition of employment could be used for
political purposes; would require such authorization for unions’ political use of dues,
fees, or payments from members or non-members; would require corporations to give
annual notice of proposed political spending to stockholders, allowing them to
withhold approval of such spending equal to their percentage share of stocks;
Issue Advocacy. Would define “express advocacy” communications as
advocating the election or defeat of a candidate by: (1) using explicit phrases, or
words or slogans that in context can have no other reasonable meaning than election
advocacy; (2) referring to a candidate in a paid radio or TV broadcast ad that appears
in the affected state within 60 days of the election (or, for President and Vice
President, within 60 days of a general election, regardless of where the ad appears);
or (3) expressing unmistakable, unambiguous election advocacy, when taken as a
whole and with limited reference to external events; would exempt from express
advocacy definition, educational voter guides and records that cover at least two
candidates, contain no express advocacy, and are not coordinated with a candidate
or party; would amend definition of expenditure under FECA to include a payment:
(1) for a communication containing express advocacy, and (2) for a communication
that refers to a clearly identified candidate, in coordination with a candidate or his or
her agent or party, for the purpose of influencing a federal election;
Foreign. Would ban direct or indirect contributions, including soft money, by
foreign nationals to candidate, party, or committee in connection with any election
(retains green card exemption);
FEC. Would require electronic filing of disclosure reports by any committee
exceeding a threshold level of financial activity; would require Federal Election
Commission (FEC) to post disclosure information on Internet within 24 hours of
receipt; would prohibit candidates from depositing contributions over $200 unless
required itemized information is complete; would allow random audits of campaigns
within 12 months after an election; would lower threshold for itemizing contributions
to $50; would increase penalties for knowing and willful violations, add automatic
penalties for late filing, and provide equitable remedies in conciliation agreements;
would expedite enforcement; would allow FEC to refer suspected violations to
Attorney General at any time; would reduce standard for enforcement proceedings;
Advertising. Would augment ad disclaimer requirements;
Miscellaneous. Would prohibit false representation to raise funds; would
restrict non-candidate committee use of candidate names; would ban franked mass

CRS-27
mailings in Member’s election year; would ban solicitation of contributions,
including soft money, by federal government officials from any government building
used to discharge official duties; would ban contributions by minors to candidates or
parties; if any part of act or amendments is struck down, remainder of act and
amendments is unaffected.
Amendment No. 2 (Campbell)
Can’t Vote, Can’t Contribute Campaign Reform Act of 1998.
PACs. Would prohibit federal candidates from accepting PAC contributions;
In-state. Would lower limit on contributions to House and Senate candidates
by individuals who are ineligible to vote in that election, to $100 per election;
Soft Money. Would prohibit national party solicitation, receipt, direction, or
transfer of funds not subject to FECA; would prohibit state and local parties from
spending soft money on mixed activities, aimed at influencing federal and non-
federal activities (e.g., voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, and general
political advertising); would ban soft money transfers between state parties; would
prohibit federal candidates and officeholders from raising soft money in connection
with a federal election, money from sources beyond federal limits and prohibitions
in non-federal races, and soft money on behalf of federal candidates or for
communications that identify federal candidates; would require written, prior
authorization from employees and stockholders of corporations and national banks
before any money from dues, fees, or payments as a condition of employment could
be used for political purposes; would require such authorization for unions’ political
use of dues, fees, or payments from members or non-members; would require
corporations to give annual notice of proposed political spending to stockholders,
allowing them to approve of such spending equal to their percentage share of stocks
and prohibiting corporation from spending beyond the extent of submitted approvals.
Amendment No. 4 (Obey)
Let the Public Decide Campaign Finance Reform Act.
Spending/Benefits. Would set voluntary limits on House general election
spending based on median household income per district, with maximum of $1
million for all major party candidates in highest level district and 50% of district limit
per major party candidate; would set minor party and independent candidate limits,
based on previous vote records or petition signatures; would allow participating
general election candidates to make expenditures from two sources: (1) a Grassroots
Good Citizenship Fund—financed by voluntary taxpayer donations of between $1
and $10,000 (doubled on joint returns) and promoted by public service
announcements, and by a tax on large corporations, and (2) limited party
contributions; would double amount of subsidy to a candidate if a major party
opponent did not participate;
PACs. Would distinguish between large and small donor PACs (based on
whether they received contributions of more than $200 from any source), placing an

CRS-28
aggregate limit on non-participating House general election candidate receipts from
large donor PACs of 20% of participant spending limit;
Independent Expenditures. Would prohibit independent expenditures in
connection with House elections; would define independent expenditure as a
communication containing express advocacy and made without a candidate’s
involvement, or which identifies a federal candidate (by name, image, or likeness)
within 90 days of a general election; would amend definition of “contribution” to
include payments for messages that identify federal candidates within 90 days of a
general election but that do not contain express advocacy (as defined);
Soft Money. Would prohibit soft money in connection with House elections;
would prohibit use of non-federally-permissible funds for expenditures by federal
candidates, parties, lobbyists, persons making contributions in an affected race in the
same election cycle, and persons who communicate with candidates about election
plans or who raise funds or act in some official capacity for such candidates;
Issue Advocacy. Would define “express advocacy” as a communication that,
when taken as a whole and with limited reference to external events, expresses
support for or opposition to (or urges action regarding) specific candidates (or
groupings), or that could be reasonably construed as seeking to influence an election;
would include communications that identify a federal candidate (by name, image, or
likeness) within 90 days of a general election;
Miscellaneous. If any part of the act or these amendments is ruled
unconstitutional, would provide for expedited (fast-track) consideration by Congress
of a constitutional amendment to allow reasonable restrictions on express advocacy
communications and “independent expenditures” in last 90 days of a general election.

Amendment No. 5 (Doolittle)
Citizen Legislature and Political Freedom Act.
PACs/Individuals/Parties. Would abolish all contribution limits;
Soft Money. Would require disclosure of all national party transfers of funds
to state and local parties; would require state and local parties to file copies with the
FEC of any disclosure reports required under state law, regarding disbursements to
state and local government entities;
FEC. Would require electronic filing of all disclosure reports; would require
committees to notify FEC within 24 hours of all donations in last 90 days of
election; would require FEC to post disclosed information within 24 hours on
Internet and at FEC; would revoke “best efforts” exemption for identifying
contributors of more than $200 in a year;
Miscellaneous. Would terminate presidential public funding system.
Amendment No. 7 (Farr)
American Political Reform Act.

CRS-29
Spending/Benefits. Would require discounted broadcast rates (50% of lowest
unit rate for non-preemptible time in last 30 days before a primary and 60 days before
a general election) and postal rates (nonprofit third class bulk rate) for House
candidates who raised 10% of cycle limit (in $200 or less individual contributions)
and who abided by limits on overall campaign spending ($600,000 per election cycle)
and on spending from personal and family funds ($50,000); would raise limits to
compensate for runoffs or for closely contested primaries (by $200,000), and for non-
participating opponents and independent expenditures in opposition to them (to the
extent of such spending); would impose 35% tax on receipts by campaigns that
exceed spending limits; would prohibit non-participants from receiving lowest unit
broadcast rate; would require broadcasters to give participating candidates opposed
by independent expenditures equal opportunity to respond;
PACs. Would lower limit on PAC contributions to House candidates to $8,000
per election cycle (with no more than $5,000 per election); would impose a $200,000
aggregate limit on House PAC receipts; would prohibit leadership PACs; would
increase limit on PAC contributions to national parties to $25,000 per year;
Individuals. Would impose a $200,000 aggregate limit on House campaign
receipts from large (over $200) individual donors; would raise aggregate individual
limit to $100,000 per election cycle, with up to $25,000 per year to candidates and
$20,000 per year to state parties;
Parties. Would designate congressional campaign committees of national
parties as principal agents responsible for coordinated expenditures; would aggregate
state and local party contributions to candidates under a single limit; would allow
parties to derive proceeds from merchandising and affinity cards;
Candidates. (Under limits/benefits voluntary system, would impose candidate
personal and family funds limit of $50,000);
Independent Expenditures. Would define “independent expenditure” as
containing express advocacy and made without coordination with a candidate; would
define “payment made in coordination with a candidate” as made if any arrangement
occurs between candidate and spender, where during that election cycle the spender
has raised or spent funds or acted in some official position for a candidate, or where
the spender has used the same consultants as an affected candidate during an election
cycle; would increase reporting requirements for independent expenditures; would
require independent spenders to provide all candidates in the affected race an advance
script; would allow party coordinated expenditures beyond limits to match
independent expenditures against its candidates; (under voluntary limits/benefits
system, would raise limits on those opposed by independent expenditures);
Soft Money. Would permit exemption from FECA definitions of “contribution”
and “expenditure” of grassroots activities and materials and voter and registration
drives only if conducted by volunteers; would prohibit national parties from soliciting
or accepting soft money, except for transfers to state parties for strictly non-federal
activities; would prohibit spending of soft money by any party committee on get-out-
the-vote drives in a presidential election year or in other years not exclusively aimed
at non-federal elections, any generic activity, any activity that identifies or promotes

CRS-30
a federal candidate, voter registration, voter files in an even-numbered year, or any
activity that significantly affects a federal election; would require such activities to
be funded through hard-money State Party Grassroots Funds; would allow
individuals and PACs to contribute $20,000 and $15,000 a year, respectively, to a
Grassroots Fund or to all state party committees including such a fund; would allow
presidential candidate committees to transfer up to $20 million to national party for
transfer to Grassroots Funds; would exempt donations to party broadcast facilities
from FECA “contribution” definition; would prohibit federal candidates and
officeholders from raising soft money in connection with a federal election or from
sources beyond federal limits and prohibitions in non-federal elections; would
prohibit federal candidates and officeholders from raising money for a tax-exempt
group under their control and involved significantly in voter registration or get-out-
the-vote drives; would increase party soft money disclosure, including building and
broadcast facility funds; would allow unions and corporations to make non-express
advocacy public expenditures for certain candidate appearances and debates or
nonpartisan voter guides; would increase reporting requirements on union/corporate
internal communications and voter drives in last 20 days of election;
Issue Advocacy. Would define “express advocacy” as a communication that,
when taken as a whole and with limited reference to external events, urges support
for or opposition to (or action in support of or opposition to) specific candidates or
group of candidates;
Bundling. Would ban bundling by connected PACs, parties, corporations,
unions, national banks, partnerships or sole proprietorships, lobbyists, or their agents;
Foreign. Would codify regulations banning foreign nationals from directing,
controlling, or influencing any U.S. election (retains green card exemption);
FEC. Would change candidate reporting from calendar year to election cycle
basis; would require reporting by consultants to secondary payees; would require
simultaneous registration by candidates and principal campaign committees; would
allow FEC to appear in Court as amicus curiae;
Advertising. Would change terms for granting candidates lowest unit rate;
would enhance disclaimers on broadcast ads; (under limits/benefits voluntary system,
would offer lower broadcast and postal rates to participants, deny lowest unit rate to
non-participants, and require equal response opportunity to those opposed);

Miscellaneous. Would count contributions of minors towards parents’ limits;
would prohibit candidates’ acceptance of cash contributions over $100; would
prohibit false representation to raise funds; would allow volunteers to make limited
monetary advances to campaigns; would restrict committees’ use of candidate names;
would prohibit House Members from raising money in or around House chamber; if
any part of act or amendments is struck down, the remainder of the act and its
amendments is unaffected, except if part of voluntary limits/benefits section is
voided, none of that section or PAC and large donor receipts limits would apply.

CRS-31
Amendment No. 8 (Hutchinson)
Bipartisan Campaign Integrity Act of 1998.
PACs. Would increase limit on PAC contributions to national parties to
$20,000 per year; would index contribution limits, beginning in 1999;
Individuals. Would increase aggregate annual contribution limit to $50,000,
with a maximum of $25,000 in donations to parties and another $25,000 in donations
to candidates and PACs; would raise limit on donations to national party committees
to $25,000 per year; would index contribution limits, beginning in 1999;
Parties. Would repeal coordinated expenditure limits; would index contribution
limits, beginning in 1999;
Soft Money. Would prohibit national party committees from raising, soliciting,
directing, or spending soft money; would prohibit federal candidates and
officeholders from raising soft money in connection with a federal election, money
from sources beyond federal limits and prohibitions in non-federal elections, or soft
money in connection with a federal candidate or for a communication that identifies
a federal candidate (would exempt candidate attendance at state party fundraisers in
home state); would prohibit state party non-federal transfers to other state parties;
Issue Advocacy. Would require disclosure (to Clerk of the House or Secretary
of the Senate) of communications relating to federal candidates, including the amount
spent and identification of spender; would trigger disclosure once spending on
broadcast communications referring to federal candidates—by name, representation,
or likeness—exceeds $25,000 a year for one or $100,000 for all federal candidates;
FEC. Would require monthly disclosure by committees during election years;
would require electronic disclosure by all committees with receipts or expenditures
of at least $50,000; would remove “best efforts” exemption from disclosure
requirements for donations of more than $200.
Amendment No. 12 (Schaffer, CO)
Paycheck Protection Act.
Soft money. Would require written, prior authorization from employees or
stockholders of corporations/national banks before any dues, fees, or payments as
condition of employment are used for political purposes, and require pre-
authorization for union political use of dues, fees, or payments from members or non-
members.
Amendment No. 13 (Shays)
Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 1998.
Individuals. Would raise aggregate individual limit to $30,000 per year; would
raise limit on individual contributions to state parties to $10,000 per year;

CRS-32
Candidates. Would specify permissible uses and prohibit personal use of
campaign funds; would prohibit a party from making coordinated expenditures on
behalf of a House general election candidate who does not abide by a voluntary limit
of $50,000 in total contributions and loans from personal and immediate family funds
(in the primary or general election);
Independent Expenditures. Would define “independent expenditure” as
containing express advocacy and made without coordination with a candidate, a
candidate’s agent, or someone coordinating with a candidate; would increase
disclosure of independent expenditures; would prohibit parties from making both
independent and coordinated expenditures for a general election candidate; would
amend definition of “contribution” to include anything of value provided in
coordination with a candidate to influence a federal election, regardless of whether
it contains express advocacy; would define “provided in coordination with a
candidate” to include payments made: (1) in cooperation or consultation with or at
the request or suggestion of a candidate; (2) using candidate-prepared materials; (3)
based on information provided by a candidate’s campaign for purposes of
expenditure; (4) by a spender who during that election cycle has raised funds or
acted in some official position for a candidate; (5) by a spender who has used the
same consultants as an affected candidate during an election cycle; (6) in
coordination with a candidate to influence an election regardless of whether it
contains express advocacy; (7) in communication about campaign plans; or (8) for
in-kind professional services; would render such payments or communications in
coordination with a candidate to be a “contribution” or “expenditure” under FECA;
Soft Money. Would prohibit national party committees from soliciting,
receiving, directing, or spending soft money; would prohibit state and local party
committees from spending soft money for federal election activity, including: (1)
voter registration drives in last 120 days of a federal election; (2) voter identification,
get-out-the-vote drives, and generic activity in connection with an election in which
a federal candidate is on the ballot; and (3) communications that refer to a clearly
identified federal candidate with the intent of influencing that election; would allow
state parties to spend money on specific activities exclusively devoted to non-federal
elections; would prohibit party committees from using soft money to raise funds;
would prohibit party committees from raising money for or giving to tax-exempt
groups; would prohibit federal candidates and officeholders from raising soft money
for any federal election activity; would increase disclosure requirements for party
soft money; would remove building fund exemption from FECA “contribution”
definition; would require unions, corporations, and national banks to disclose
promptly all exempt activities (but only internal communications referring to federal
candidates) once threshold level is reached; would require unions to give reasonable
notice to dues-paying non-members of rights to disallow political use of their funds;
Issue Advocacy. Would define “express advocacy” communications as
advocating the election or defeat of a candidate by: (1) using explicit phrases, or
words or slogans that in context can have no other reasonable meaning than election
advocacy; (2) referring to a candidate in a paid radio or TV broadcast ad that appears
in the affected state within 60 days of the election (or, for President and Vice
President, within 60 days of a general election, regardless of where the ad appears);
or (3) expressing unmistakable, unambiguous election advocacy, when taken as a

CRS-33
whole and with limited reference to external events; would exempt, from “express
advocacy” definition, educational voter guides and records that cover at least two
candidates, contain no express advocacy, and are not coordinated with a candidate
or party; would amend definition of “expenditure” under FECA to include a payment:
(1) for a communication containing express advocacy; and (2) for a communication
that refers to a clearly identified candidate, in coordination with a candidate or his or
her agent or party, for the purpose of influencing a federal election;
Foreign. Would ban direct or indirect contributions, including soft money, by
foreign nationals to candidate, party, or committee in connection with any election
(retains green card exemption);
FEC. Would require electronic filing of disclosure reports by any committee
exceeding a threshold level of financial activity; would require FEC to post
disclosure information on Internet within 24 hours of receipt; would prohibit
candidates from depositing contributions over $200 unless required itemized
information is complete; would allow random audits of campaigns within 12 months
after an election; would lower threshold for itemizing contributions to $50; would
increase penalties for violations, add automatic penalties for late filing, and provide
for equitable remedies in conciliation agreements; would expedite enforcement
procedures; would allow FEC to refer suspected violations to Attorney General at any
time; would reduce standard to begin enforcement proceedings;
Advertising. Would augment ad disclaimer requirements;
Miscellaneous. Would prohibit false representation to raise funds; would
restrict non-candidate committee use of candidate names; would ban franked mass
mailings within 180 days of Member’s general election and 90 days of Member’s
primary election; would ban contributions by minors to candidates or parties; would
ban solicitation of contributions, including soft money, by federal government
officials from any government building used to discharge official duties; if any part
of act or amendments is struck down, the remainder of the act and its amendments
would be unaffected.
Amendment No. 14 (Snowbarger)
Fair Elections and Political Accountability Act.
PACs. Would remove PAC contribution limits;
Individuals. Would remove individual contribution limits;
Parties. Would remove party contribution limits;
Soft Money. Would prohibit any donations from unions, corporations, or
national banks to political party committees; would require pre-authorization before
unions and corporations could use dues money or payments from employees or
stockholders for political purposes;
Foreign. Would prohibit election contributions by any foreign national or
anyone not qualified to register to vote (including green card holders);

CRS-34
FEC. Would require electronic filing of disclosure reports and require FEC to
post information on Internet within 24 hours; would require 48-hour notice of all
contributions of $100 or more within 60 days of an election; would remove threshold
for itemizing contributions; would double FEC budget authorization; would increase
penalties, including mandatory jail terms, for knowing and willful violations; would
allow Justice Department to initiate criminal actions for violations;
Miscellaneous. Would prohibit contributions to a candidate for six months after
that candidate’s election, except to pay off campaign debts.
Amendment No. 15 (Tierney)
Clean Money, Clean Elections Act.
Spending/Benefits. Would provide full public subsidies, 30 minutes of free
broadcast time in a primary and 75 minutes in a general election, and additional
broadcast time at 50% of the lowest unit rate for House candidates who participate
in Clean Money system and spend no private funds beyond the subsidy amount once
qualified; prior to qualification, would allow candidates to raise up to $35,000 in
contributions of $100 or less for “seed money,” for specified uses, but not for
broadcast communications; major party candidates would qualify by raising $5
donations from 1,500 state voters; minor party candidates would have to collect
2,250 donations; spending limit for election cycle would be 80% of the national
average of winning candidates’ expenditures in last three House elections; primary
subsidy would be 40% of cycle limit for major party and 25% of the cycle limit for
minor party candidates; general election subsidy would be 60% of cycle limit for all
candidates; unopposed candidates would receive 40% of amount otherwise specified;
additional subsidies would be provided to candidates opposed by independent
expenditures and by non-complying opponents once such spending reached 125% of
spending limit, with maximum amount of additional funds equal to 200% of such
limit; non-participants would be denied existing lowest unit rate benefit; would
finance benefits by House of Representatives Election Fund through appropriated
funds, qualifying contributions, and unused seed money;
Individuals. Would establish sub-limits within $25,000 annual aggregate limit
of $25,000 for donations to candidates and $20,000 for donations to state parties;
Parties. In House races with at least one participating candidate, would limit all
party spending on behalf of a candidate to 10% of the amount allotted to a clean
money candidate in the general election;
Independent Expenditures. Would increase disclosure of independent
expenditures involving candidates participating in clean money system; would
prohibit a party from making independent expenditures for a candidate for whom it
has made coordinated expenditures of more than $5,000 in that election cycle; would
define “independent expenditure” as containing express advocacy and made without
coordination with a candidate; would define “payment made in coordination with a
candidate” as in cooperation or consultation with or at the request or suggestion of
a candidate, where candidate-prepared materials are used, where the payment is based
on information provided by a candidate’s campaign for purposes of expenditure,
where during that election cycle the spender has raised funds or acted in some official

CRS-35
position for a candidate, and where the spender has used the same consultants as an
affected candidate during an election cycle; (under voluntary limits/benefits system,
would provide extra subsidies to candidates opposed by independent expenditures);
Soft Money. Would prohibit national party committees from soliciting,
receiving, or spending soft money, except for activity exclusively devoted to non-
federal elections; would prohibit state and local party committees from spending soft
money in a federal election year for activities that may affect a federal election,
including voter and registration drives, generic activity, and any communication that
identifies a federal candidate; would require such activities to be funded through
State Party Grassroots Funds; would allow individuals to contribute $20,000 a year
to a Grassroots Fund or to all state party committees including such a fund; would
prohibit party committees from using soft money to raise funds; would prohibit party
committees from raising money for or giving to tax-exempt groups; would prohibit
federal candidates and officeholders from raising soft money in connection with a
federal election, money from sources beyond federal limits and prohibitions in non-
federal elections, or soft money in connection with a federal candidate or a
communication that identifies a federal candidate; would increase disclosure
requirements for party soft money, including for state parties; would remove building
fund exemption from FECA “contribution” definition;
Issue Advocacy. Would define “express advocacy” communication as one
presented through public communication media and that: (1) urges the election or
defeat of a clearly identified federal candidate by using explicit phrases or by using
slogans and words that in context can have no reasonable meaning other than election
advocacy; or (2) refers to a clearly identified candidate, is made within 60 days of
a general election, and is not solely devoted to a pending legislative issue [fallback
definition if this provision is held unconstitutional: that portion of definition not held
invalid, plus, a communication that refers to a clearly identified candidate and taken
as a whole and with limited reference to external events expresses unmistakable
election advocacy]; would require FEC disclosure of issue advertisements involving
House candidates, including amount spent, contributors of $1,000 or more, sponsor
identification, and purpose of ad; issue ad would be defined as public communication
which is not a contribution or independent expenditure, refers to House candidate,
is made in election year, and recommends issue position;
FEC. Would add a seventh commissioner to FEC, as recommended by other
members; would allow post-election random audits of campaigns; would give FEC
authority to seek injunctions; would ease standard for opening investigations; would
allow FEC to petition the Supreme Court; would expedite FEC enforcement
procedures; would require electronic filing of disclosure reports and allow filing by
FAX; would allow issuing of subpoena without signature of chair or vice-chair;
Advertising. Would prohibit preemption of House campaign broadcast ads,
unless beyond broadcasters’ control; would augment ad disclaimer requirements;
(under voluntary limits/benefits system, would provide free and reduced rate
broadcast time to participants and deny lowest unit rate to non-participants);
Miscellaneous. Would ban election year franked mass mailings by a Member,
unless Member is not a candidate or mailing promotes a public meeting and only

CRS-36
mentions the candidate’s name; if any part of the act or its amendments is struck
down, the remainder of the act and its amendments would be unaffected, except for
fallback definition provided under issue advocacy section.
Amendment No. 16 (White)
Independent Commission on Campaign Finance Reform Act of 1998.
Commission. Would establish temporary commission to study campaign
finance issues and recommend changes, based on goals of encouraging fair and open
elections, eliminating disproportionate special interest election financing, and
creating greater incumbent-challenger equity; commission would comprise 12
members appointed by President within 15 days of enactment, including three names
each from lists submitted by the House Speaker and minority leader and Senate
majority and minority leaders (one of each three selected names must be a political
independent, as defined), with one of the 12 designated as chairman by President;
proposals must be approved by at least nine members, submitted (in legislative form)
within 180 days of adjournment of the 105 Congress, and considered under fast
th
-
track (base-closing) rules.