John Tierney: “I respectfully depart from some of my colleagues here who think that this rule is a fair rule. I suggest that this rule…”

“I respectfully depart from some of my colleagues here who think that this rule is a fair rule. I suggest that this rule is, in effect, a somewhat hidden attempt to kill the only campaign finance reform proposal that probably has a chance of passing this year. We know that because last year when it was presented, it passed by 252 votes to 179. It had 61 Republicans on it. It was, in fact, a bipartisan effort. This year, instead of showing a willingness to either take a stand and be counted on the issue of banning unregulated soft money donations to parties, of regulating phony issue ads on television, and imposing new fund-raising disclosure rules, some are trying to use the rules, I believe, to obfuscate the issue, take 10 swipes either killing it with a poison pill or killing it by substituting suggestions that are unpalatable to most of the Members of this Congress. In fact, the New York Times, in an editorial on September 13, I think, justifiably called these junkyard tactics of 1998. It is essentially the same tactics that we saw last year. This rule, in a good world, would be defeated; but apparently it is going to pass because people fear that without this rule we will have no chance at campaign finance reform at all. We should have that chance. We should vote for Shays-Meehan without all the other shenanigans.”