On the recordJune 10, 1998
I ask the gentleman, he has made a fundamental confusion here. The constitutional amendment and the Shays-Meehan bill do different things, and no one has been arguing, prior to the gentleman from Texas, and I do not underestimate the novelty of the arguments he brings to us from time to time, but no one has argued that nothing is constitutional. The constitutional amendment would allow us to go further; but, for example, one of the major parts of the Shays-Meehan bill is the ban on soft money. Would the gentleman tell me if he thinks that is unconstitutional, and would he tell me which decision of the Supreme Court makes banning soft money? ... If the Shays-Meehan bill was not unconstitutional, then you would not need the Gephardt constitutional amendment.
Source
govinfo.gov




