Posted on 01/18/2007 7:47:15 AM PST by neverdem
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) has told conservative activists that he will vote to strip a key provision on grassroots lobbying from the reform package he previously supported.
The provision would require grassroots organizations to report on their fundraising activities and is strongly opposed by groups such as the National Right to Life Committee, Gun Owners of America, and the American Civil Liberties Union.
While grassroots groups on both sides of the political spectrum oppose the proposal, social conservative leaders such as Dr. James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, who broadcasts a radio program to hundreds of thousands of evangelical Christians, have been its most vehement critics.
McCain sponsored legislation last Congress that included an even broader requirement for grassroots lobbying coalitions to reveal their financial donors. But now he will vote to defeat a similar measure.
It would be politically dangerous for McCain to support disclosure because it would anger many conservative activists, including those who advocate against abortion rights or for gun ownership rights. He is courting many of them for his 2008 presidential campaign. McCain’s presidential exploratory committee announced yesterday that Maxine Sieleman, a socially conservative leader who founded the Iowa chapter of Concerned Women for America, had joined its camp.
In letters circulated on Capitol Hill this week, the National Right to Life Committee and Gun Owners of America warned senators that votes on the grassroots lobbying provision would affect legislative scorecards they tabulate for each lawmaker.
Sen. Bob Bennett (R-Utah) has sponsored the amendment to the lobbying reform package that would strip the provision. His amendment is expected to come to the floor for a vote today, said advocates opposing it.
Bennett said he was “a little” surprised to hear that McCain would support him but was “delighted.” McCain is considered one of the most authoritative voices on ethics- and lobbying-related issues in the Senate.
“It’s a very high priority,” said Douglas Johnson, director of legislative affairs for the National Right to Life Committee. Johnson said ordinary grassroots activists from Arizona who had called McCain’s office were told by aides that he would support Bennett’s amendment.
Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the conservative American Center for Law and Justice, told The Hill that he had received confirmation from McCain’s staff yesterday that he would oppose the disclosure proposal.
“It’s huge,” Sekulow said of the issue’s importance. “It’s the most significant restriction on grassroots activity in recent history. I’d put it up there with the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act.”
McCain was the chief sponsor of the landmark 2002 campaign finance bill, a history that still angers many conservatives. They cite McCain’s sponsorship of that legislation as something that makes them wary about supporting his presidential bid. But McCain’s recent action could redefine him.
“He’ll do everything he can to appeal to conservatives he has already tried to silence,” said John Velleco, director of federal affairs at Gun Owners of America, referring to McCain’s support of campaign finance reform. “I think he’s trying to gain the support of conservatives as much as he can.”
“Romney’s doing the same thing,” Velleco added, explaining that McCain’s rival for the nomination, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, is re-evaluating his past positions on gun ownership rights.
While McCain has privately told conservative groups that he will side with them, he was not ready to reveal his position yesterday. He opened yesterday’s floor debate with a 15-minute speech on the lobbying reforms under consideration. While he urged his colleagues to support the creation of an office of public integrity, he made no mention of grassroots lobbying.
Immediately afterward he declined to state his position on grassroots disclosure.
“I’ll address it when it comes up,” he told The Hill.
But McCain’s spokeswoman, Eileen McMenamin, confirmed that he would support the Bennett amendment.
“Initially when Sen. McCain introduced legislation last year it had a grassroots provision,” she said. “Subsequent to that that he got a lot of feedback from groups that the requirements would be too onerous on them because of the reporting requirements.”
McMenamin added that a grassroots lobbying disclosure requirement was not included in reform legislation McCain introduced at the beginning of this month.
Johnson, of the National Right to Life Committee, said that there is confusion about which groups would be affected by the pending regulation.
“Under Section 220, anyone who is paid anything by an organization that spends any money at all to encourage more than 500 members of the general public to communicate with members of Congress, if he or she also has contacted congressional offices directly as few as two times, and has spent as little as 20 percent of his or her time on such direct lobbying and grassroots-motivating activities, would be required to register with Congress as a ‘lobbyist’ and file detailed quarterly reports,” wrote Johnson in a letter to Senate offices, adding, “If enacted, it will disrupt the constitutionally protected activities of thousands of issue-oriented citizen groups from coast to coast. …”
McCain’s past allies in battles to reform government strongly support disclosure and were surprised to discover his position had changed.
“We saw him supporting it last year,” said Craig Holman, a lobbyist for Public Citizen.
“It surprises me and it will surprise the rest of the reform community. I was really expecting him not to get involved in that provision and I had received no indication from his office that he was leaning against it.”
No, they are not on the same side.
They may be now that Dodson has mounted a massive campaign against this bill - but he knows McCain for what he is.
Nevermind - you won - we have no conservative party, we have no conservative representatives in Washington. The one we had doing all our fighting for us - has given up. One man can not do much in Washington.
Not true? Just listen to the news daily, just read FR and see how many hate Bush.
So - just forget about it - you won.
Just don't get used to it.
I don't expect to do so.
One more reason why this man can NOT be trusted.
True, and good research. I should have been a bit more clear. I think that McCain sees the system as much of the reason he made his mistake. If the system hadn't been flawed, he thinks he wouldn't have been tempted to do this.
McCain really is a true whore. Nobody is going to respect him. He is caving for votes period. Nobody believes he has had a change of heart. He has a change in needing to target primary voters.
If he actually saw the light, it would be one thing. I would rather have an honest opponent than a weasel coming to my side just to kiss my tushy. McCain will flop right back the other way if ever elected President.
Duh, McCain; this man is extremely dangerous to this country and our freedoms.
And that makes much more sense... :)
Reagan talked about the fact that, in his late life, the younger generation never knew the freedom that he knew. Let us not make it, that future generations will know even less freedom.
"Doesn't matter. The Constitution is what some judge says it is..."
Heh. This is the time for my favorite Andrew Jackson quote. When faced with a Supreme Court ruling he disliked, he said, "Fine. Let's see the Court enforce this ruling--because I'm not going to."
The Executive Branch, as an equal Branch of government with the judicial and legislative, does not, and must not enforce laws that are contrary to the Constitution.
It's not unheard of for me. The problem with Crazy McCain is that what he does too often seems to be based on the mood he woke up in that morning.
Brave Sir Robin ran away.
Bravely ran away, away!
When danger reared its ugly head,
He bravely turned his tail and fled.
Yes, brave Sir Robin turned about
And gallantly he chickened out.
Bravely taking to his feet
He beat a very brave retreat,
Bravest of the brave, Sir Robin!
"He was for the provision before he was against it."
Drat! You beat me to the kerryism.
"Perhaps the message of the people is starting to sink in. One can only hope."
I doubt it. But look on the bright side; the new political party that eventually replaces the GOP might actually turn out to be conservative.
Let me rewrite one sentence
"McCain (one of the Keating 5) is considered one of the most authoritative voices on ethics."
There. That's a tad better.
Here's an excerpt from wikipedia on the Keating 5 scandal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keating_Five
"In 1989, the Lincoln Savings and Loan Association of Irvine, Calif., collapsed. Lincoln's chairman, Charles H. Keating Jr., was faulted for the thrift's failure. Keating, however, told the House Banking Committee that the FHLBB and its former chief Edwin J. Gray were pursuing a vendetta against him. Gray testified that several U.S. senators had approached him and requested that he ease off on the Lincoln investigation. It came out that these senators had been beneficiaries of $1.3 million (collective total) in campaign contributions from Keating.
... After months of testimony revealed that all five senators acted improperly to differing degrees, the senators continually said they were following the status quo of campaign funding practices ...McCain also remained in the Senate and he made campaign finance reform a key legislative interest. The scandal was followed by a number of attempts to adopt campaign finance reform -- "
Does "McLame" actually think us conservatives will change our "McMinds"....
As far as I am concerned, he is forever on my RHINO List....Like Dobson there is no way he will EVER garner any votes from me or mine.
"I hope all the people that have bashed Dobson and Christians (the Armey's of the world and certain people selfishly only concerned with their wants and needs mostly on the fiscal side) are taking note the ONLY reason McCain has reversed his stance (temporarily as it'll flip eventually) is because DOBSON spoke out against him and he wants the Christian Right's vote. Take note of who your real enemies are."
Interesting perspective. Thanks for the post.
"Not true? Just listen to the news daily, just read FR and see how many hate Bush."
That's an interesting point of view, and it has the painful sting of the truth. It's also somewhat ironic for me because while I'm no fan at all of the GOP, I voted for President Bush. And I've never regretted it.
It's interesting when one of the few open and notorious Democrats on FR is more of a President Bush supporter than many of the Republicans. Strange days, no?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.