Chenoweth Votes For Smaller Portions Of Campaign Reform But Changes Mind On Bill Restricting Use Of Union Dues, Corporate Funds

Inland Northwest Republicans helped their party’s leaders reject a plan for campaign reform this week. But they did support two smaller revisions that passed.

“It’s a step,” Rep. George Nethercutt, R-Wash., said of the changes that did pass.

One proposal would require faster reporting of contributions, using the Internet; the other reiterates a ban against foreign citizens contributing to federal campaigns. Both go to the Senate, where their prospects are uncertain.

Nethercutt joined Reps. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., and Helen Chenoweth, R-Idaho, in voting for both proposals.

Hastings and Nethercutt voted for a defeated proposal that would have kept union dues and corporate funds from being used in political activity without written permission from members or stockholders.

But Chenoweth, who originally had co-sponsored that proposal, voted against it.

She said Tuesday she recently became concerned that the definition of political activity was too broad.

“It went too far and violated workers’ First Amendment right to lobby members of Congress,” she said.

The bill, swamped on a vote of 337 to 74 was offered by GOP leaders to curtail political activity by unions and ban so-called soft money, unlimited contributions businesses and unions can make to political parties. It also would increase the amounts individuals and political action committees can contribute to candidates.

The bill required a two-thirds majority and was not subject to amendment or debate.

Nethercutt said he had constitutional questions about the bill, and worried that it would set up a “nightmare of bureaucracy” for reporting and tracking contributions. But he disagreed with the proposal’s harshest critics, who labeled the bill a cynical ploy to kill any campaign reform.

The Republican leadership proposal was a substitute for a more popular, bipartisan bill that seeks to ban soft money contributions and control campaign attack ads not covered by current law.

Supporters of that bill, sponsored by Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn., are now trying to force a vote by gathering signatures on a petition that would bring the bill to the floor despite leaders’ opposition.

Nethercutt and Chenoweth both said through spokesmen that they would not sign the petition.

Chenoweth supports a different bill, one that requires more reporting of contributions but does not place new restrictions on amounts, press aide Chad Hyslop said.

, DataTimes