|
Campaign Finance
With Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.)
House Budget Committee Member
Wednesday, Feb. 13, 2002; 1:30 p.m. EST
On Tuesday the House started debate on the Shays-Meehan bill which would overhaul current campaign finance laws. A vote on the bill is expected Wednesday.
Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.) was online to discuss the bill, the mood in the House and campaign finance reform.
A transcript follows.
Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control
over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.
Washington, D.C.:
Where in the Constitution is Congress empowered to pass a bill like Shays-Meehan?
I realize the Supreme Court discovered the "appearance of impropriety" clause behind a mysterious penumbra seen only by select Justices, but is there a bona-fide power Congress is attempting to exercise here?
Rep. Bob Barr: I believe the proposed legislation is unconstitutional; and since there is no explicit or implied authority for the Congress to enact unconstitutional legislation, I believe there is no legitimate authority for the Congress to enact Shays-Meehan.
Macon, Ga.:
What do you think of the President's latest comments on the campaign finance you all are looking at? Have you seen it? He says both forms of legislation would improve the system. washingtonpost.com:
Bush Indicates Finance Proposals 'Make Progress' (Post, Feb. 13, 2002)
Rep. Bob Barr: Regardless of the Administration's position, I believe this legislation is bad legislation. It will weaken -- not strengthen -- the ability of citizens and grassroots-based organizations to influence the political arena; even as it grants more power to radio and TV, and to wealthy individuals.
Duluth, Ga.:
Do you support Congressman John Linder's bill which would be a REAL campaign finance reform bill? Why or why not?
Rep. Bob Barr: Congressman Linder apparently believes all "soft" money -- that is, monies voluntarily donated by citizens to educate voters, register voters, and support generic political activities -- is bad and all of it ought to be outlawed. I disagree with that approach; as did Mr. Linder previously, for example, when he raised large amounts of so-called "soft" money as head of the NRCC.
Washington, D.C.:
I recognize there are tremondous direct adverse effects for the AFL-CIO, RNC, DNC, and politicians; however, what are the specific direct adverse effects of Shays-Meehan on me, a working class American?
Rep. Bob Barr: It will silence your voice, for example, that you would gain through making a modest contribution to a grassroots-based organization such as the NRA, that would then use those dues to educate voters in support of pro-Second Amendment candidates, because the bill severely limits how and when those organizations can use those dues.
Pittsburgh, Pa.:
Rep. Barr, I enjoy your frequent radio appearances here in Pittsburgh.
Whether it's purposeful or not, isn't the effect of this bill to limit the challenge a challenger can pose to an incumbent within a certain time period of an election?
Seems to me it limits the right of free speech of people and organizations on both sides of the aisle. Would you agree?
Rep. Bob Barr: You are correct.
Atlanta, Ga.:
Do you believe there should be limitations on the amount of money a candidate can raise from out of state?
Rep. Bob Barr: If a candidate wishes to so limit their fund raising, they ought to be able to do so.
Reston, Va.:
Congressman,
Is the Republican's objection to Shays/Meehan based on their belief that it is intrinsically unfair, or is it based on the belief that it doesn't really achieve the reforms it says it does -- or both?
Rep. Bob Barr: Both.
Indianapolis, Ind.:
Rep. Barr I'm confussed. Shays-Meehan restricts soft money which restricts free speech. The GOP supported alternative limits soft money donations which restricts free speech. Aren't both unconsitutional? If so, why should anyone condemn Shays-Meehan when the alternative violates free speech?
Rep. Bob Barr: Some Members make a tactical decision to vote for an amendment with which they may not fully agree, in an effort to amend the bill sufficiently from its Senate counterpart,so it goes to conference where it can be improved.
Virginia:
What about local, county and state elections? Will this be affected?
Rep. Bob Barr: Yes, but not as severely and directly as national politics.
Reston, Va.:
Congressman,
It seems to me that Republicans have long claimed that both McCain-Feingold and Shays-Meehan do not go far enough in preventing labor unions from having a disproportionate advantage over other interest groups in elections. Both bills claim to stop union soft money, so what is the basis for the Republican concerns about the influence of big labor?
Rep. Bob Barr: Its ability to used mandatory dues for political and politically-related activities without the consent of the members themselves.
Allen, Tex.:
You might want to ask Mr. McCain that if he is in favor of campaign reform. The only group being limited are the Republicans, while people that derive payments from the government (ie:welfare, ADC and SSI recipients) are essientially being paid to vote. If Sen. Mc Cain is serious about stopping free speach the Democrat party should not be allowed to buy these votes. This amounts to direct payments to buy votes.
Thanks
Rep. Bob Barr: Of course, McCain, who is personally wealthy, would not be limited in how he uses his money; nor would the media, who fawn over him.
Harrisburg, Pa.:
I know you are not a friend of labor organizations, yet with union membership falling over time and with declining union influence in fund raising, isn't political fund raising becoming more and more a game of competing business interests?
Rep. Bob Barr: It is extremely expensive to run effective political races; not just federal, but state and local races as well. However, there are many true, grassroots-oriented organizations that are very effective at helping define and win political debates, that would be harmed by this legislation. Remember, too, not all businesses that are involved in supporting candidates and incumbents behave like Enron.
Bridgewater, N.J.:
Sir, I'm glad to hear that you are opposed to this legislation. I am as well. What are you doing or what CAN be done to prevent this from passing?
Rep. Bob Barr: We'll likely vote on it tonight sometime. The Senate has done so previously. Hopefully, if it passes the House, it will be sufficiently different from the Senate version, to go to conference; where there will be opportunity to improve it. In that case, your remedy would be to contact the conferees named to work it in conference. Ultimately, I hope the President will veto any legislation like this current bill, and the President needs to hear your voice.
Omaha, Neb.:
Congressman Barr -- Isn't it disingenuous for the proponents of Shays-Meehan to be delaying the IMPLEMENTATION of the bill until following the next election? If it's so important and causing such a drain on the American way of life, wouldn't IMMEDIATE implementation be in order? Thanks.
Rep. Bob Barr: You've put your finger on one of the many disingenuous provisions in the Shays-Meehan bill.
Annapolis, Md.:
The list in today's Post of soft money contributions was very interesting. The top two labor union donations were greater than any of the top corporate donations, but we always hear about the corrupting influence of corporate donations. It seems to me that everyone spending taxpayers' time on this is simply trying to hurt their opponents more than themselves. What I would like to see is more accessible information on who gives what, how much and to whom. I'm sure that information is available, at least to the media. Why isn't there a common sense approach to this being the answer to "reform?" Citizens who care could easily deduce the amount of influence by comparison of a donations list and votes.
Rep. Bob Barr: Your point is very well taken. This legislation does not really open up the reporting process for more transparent and quicker reporting of all contributions, because its authors and those who signed the discharge petition forcing a floor vote apparently were not concerned about disclosure.
Thomasville, Ga.:
I read an AP story that a vote on an admenment to challenge the rates TV stations can charge as being a victory for the broadcast industry. Why is having this amendment considered a victory for them?
These companies get the airways free so I think they should offer the lowest rate possible for political ads. Don't they have a patriotic duties to attend to just like any other citizen? They are considered the same as citizens according to the constitution.
Although I'm interested in your opinions, I think Zell Miller is being more honest in this debate.
I attended Zell Miller's town hall meeting during the reccess and he called the current campaign funding system was equivalent to bribery. I know we Republicans just love Zell when he's saying what we wanna here but maybe he's right this time also.
Rep. Bob Barr: I always enjoy politicians who take money or raise money from the system in Washington, and then rail against that system back home.
Dallas, Pa.:
Will my $25.00 donation to your campaign give me the same access as these companies had?
BOB BARR (R-GA)
Top Contributors
PRIVATE
1 Lockheed Martin $10,500
2 AFLAC Inc $10,000
2 American Medical Assn $10,000
2 Associated Builders & Contractors $10,000
2 Citizens for the Republic $10,000
2 Citizens United $10,000
2 Credit Union National Assn $10,000
2 Loose Group $10,000
2 National Assn of Realtors $10,000
2 National Auto Dealers Assn $10,000
2 National Beer Wholesalers Assn $10,000
2 Wine & Spirits Wholesalers of America $10,000
13 National Rifle Assn $9,900
14 Majority Leader's Fund $9,000
14 National Assn of Home Builders $9,000
14 Rome Radiology Group $9,000
17 Americans for a Republican Majority $8,709
18 Phoenix Air $8,000
19 Glock Inc $7,800
20 American Dental Assn $7,500
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.asp?CID=N00002526&cycle=2000
Rep. Bob Barr: Is this a hypothetical or a factual question?
New York, N.Y.:
I assume you would be in favor of some campaign reform, given the vastly flawed system under which we operate now. What type of reform would you support?
Rep. Bob Barr: Stricter prohibitions on foreign moneys, which still seem to work their way in. More open, more comprehensive and more timely reporting. Requirements for ads to more truthfully and fully disclose who or what organization is paying for them.
Alexandria, Va.:
Please enlighten me. How would recipients of ADC, SSI, and welfare be getting "paid to vote?"
Rep. Bob Barr: I'm not sure I understand the question.
What a Joke:
From all I can gather about "campaign finance reform," it's a joke.
It will never pass both houses, and if it does, parts of it will be struck down by the Supreme Court as being unconstitutional.
So isn't easy for Members of Congress -- particularly John McCain -- to push a bill and a concept that in the end will never last? Especially if you can blame its demise on a veto by the president or a ruling by the Supreme Court?
Rep. Bob Barr: The problem will be if there is a so-called "severability" clause in the final bill, which means even if some part(s) are held to be unconstitutional, other parts survive; and, so far, the Administration is not indicating a veto threat.
Indianapolis, Ind.:
Mr. Barr you did not answer my question. I wanted to know why the amendment regarding rates broadcast system charge is considered a victory for them? Is it a victory or not? And where are you on this issue of broadcast rates.
Rep. Bob Barr: Excuuuuse me.
The bill forces broadcasters to charge lower rates, I believe. I'm not sure what you mean when you ask whether this is a "victory" for the media.
The media would remain free to take whatever positions they want, however they want, even as political parties and other groups are limited. That may be a "victory," but it has nothing to do with rates.
College Park, Md.:
Give me a break, Allen, Tex., with this nonsense about "welfare recipients... getting paid to vote" by the Democrats. A case can be made that it works opposite of this, e.g., Enron (who paid no taxes!) pays politicans for their support. My wife used to work in a U.S. Senator's office and told me that the only event never to be moved was a fund-raising one. Congressman, is funding for campaigns too much of what drives our elections and the attention of our elected representatives, or is that just the way of the world? Are any new rules needed?
Rep. Bob Barr: It's a very delicate balance to have elections and allow citizens and organizations to have access, without corrupt linkages between that and official acts of the officeholder. That's why we need disclosure laws, and laws against corruption, and consistent, effective enforcement of those laws by the Department of Justice, United States Attorneys, and state prosecutors.
Bellevue, Neb.:
Congressman Barr: I can't understand how this legislation will be legal -- especially forcing broadcast entities to provide services at discounted rates. What's next -- requiring gas stations to provide discounted fuel for campaign vehicles, airlines to provide discounted tickets for airline travel, etc. Thanks for being here today.
Rep. Bob Barr: Very good point.
Mt. Vernon, Va.:
How much money have you taken in campaign donations from Enron and accounting firms? What about other revenue from these sources?
Rep. Bob Barr: We don't show any record of any money from Enron. I'm not sure what you mean by "other revenue from these sources."
Wasington, D.C.:
Congressman how can anyone, especially a Republican, support eliminating soft money without making any changes to the indivdual contributions limits?
Rep. Bob Barr: It's pretty stupid, especially for House Members to vote for such a bill that increases limits for Senators, as if they're in some special class, while not increasing limits for Members of the House.
Alexandria, Va.:
One of the Republicans' arguments against the bill is the fact that Democrats have the "luxury" of union support. Using the last Presidential election as an example, wouldn't you agree that the days of union bloc voting are over?
Rep. Bob Barr: Certainly, in may area, union workers frequently vote split tickets, based on substantive issues they support for candidates in both parties; issues such as support for the Second Amendment that cuts across party lines.
Washington, D.C.:
Again, Mr. Barr, a redirect of my question:
Isn't it easy for MOC's to push a bill that will in the end, die? Isn't it easy to bet that the bill will die in Conference?
Rep. Bob Barr: I would not bet it will die in conference; it might, or it might be changed and brought back out. But I understand your point.
Dallas, Pa.:
Teh donation question is FACTUAL. This came from your campaign information that you reported -- these are your numbers, your donors.
Here is the link--
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.asp?CID=N00002526&cycle=2000
Rep. Bob Barr: What about your donation, are you speaking hypothetically?
Groton, Conn.:
Why is it unconstitutional to prevent organizations from having more say in the political process, based on their financial state?
Rep. Bob Barr: For one thing, the US Supreme Court has ruled that campaign donations are a form of free speech, and cannot be silenced without trampling the First Amendment.
Harrisburg, Pa.:
In order to get then Governor Bush to run for President, a group of wealthy people got together and raised $50 million to guarantee his campaign would not only get off the ground yet be recognized as the front running campaign. Did these wealthy people do so out of their consideration for the future of this nation, or might there be legislation that will prove to be of benefit to them?
Rep. Bob Barr: I truly find the vast majority of Americans, whether from Texas or Georgia, support and contribute to a candidate because they agree with the candidate's philosophy and hope that, be electing people to public office that reflect their philosophy, they will in fact improve our public institutions and the future of our nation.
Omaha, Neb.:
Congressman Barr -- I heard about this internet appearance from a posting on FreeRepublic.com yesterday. What would happen to Internet sites that have open discussions of political issues -- would they be regulated like other free speech is going to be under Shays-Meehan? Thank you.
Rep. Bob Barr: I certainly hope not, and would join in any fighting any effort to do so. It's great to hear about FreeRepublic.com once again.
Indianapolis, Ind.:
If donations are "speech" why are there hard dollar limits. Isn't that unconstitutional as well?
Rep. Bob Barr: good point. The answer is the US Supreme decided there could be "reasonable" limits thereon, in the same way there are other limits on unfettered free speech.
Culpeper, Va.:
What would be wrong with returning the country to the system we had prior to 1975, but with full disclosure? It seems to me that prior to this time, a lot of progressive legislation was passed that helped the average person, and since that time there has been nothing but gridlock.
Rep. Bob Barr: You're essentially espousing Congressman Doolittle's position which is a sound one.
Rep. Bob Barr: This has been a great exercise. Thanks to everyone for participating, and thank you for allowing me to participate.
Dallas, Pa.:
Why are you avoiding my question?
Would a $25.00 donation to YOUR campaigns give the same amount of access as someone donating $1,000, $2,000 or $10,000.
This is a simple question -- why are you being flippant?
Rep. Bob Barr: The dollar amount has nothing to do with who sees me, or why.
washingtonpost.com:
That wraps up today's show. Thanks to everyone who joined the
discussion.
Stay tuned to Live Online:
Michelle
Singletary: Love and Money at 2 p.m. EST
Live Online Special Coverage: America
At War
Did you know that you can follow more than one Live Online discussion at
the same time? Just open another browser window and toggle back and
forth between discussions! And, if you miss one, catch up with the Live
Online transcripts.
Keep up with the latest in news, sports, politics and entertainment with
washingtonpost.com
e-mail newsletters.
NEW! Personalize your Post with mywashingtonpost.com.
Get customized news, traffic, weather and more.
| |
© Copyright 2002 The Washington Post Company | 
