Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?

106th Congress                                            Rept. 106-296
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                     Part 1

======================================================================



 
             CITIZEN LEGISLATURE AND POLITICAL FREEDOM ACT

                                _______
                                

                 August 5, 1999.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______


 Mr. Thomas, from the Committee on House Administration, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 1922]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

  The Committee on House Administration, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 1922) to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act 
of 1971 to reform the financing of campaigns for election for 
Federal office, having considered the same, report without 
recommendation.

                       Purpose of the Legislation

    In order to provide the House with an opportunity for 
debate on a range of approaches to the campaign finance issue, 
the Committee is submitting without recommendation one of the 
more thoughtful measures which has garnered substantial support 
in the 105th and 106th Congresses.
    H.R. 1922 features the removal of all contribution limits, 
an end to the current system of public financing for 
presidential election campaigns, a requirement for national 
parties to disclose soft money transfers to state and local 
parties, mandatory electronic filing and expedited reporting 
within 90 days of an election, and a waiver of the Federal 
Election Campaign Act's ``best efforts'' exception for 
reporting the identity of those who contribute more than $200 a 
calendar year.

                       Summary of the Legislation


                     section-by-section description

Section 1. Title

    (a) Entitles bill ``Citizen Legislature and Political 
Freedom Act''.

Section 2. Removing limitations on federal election campaign 
        contributions

    (a) Abolishes all limits on contributions (to and from 
candidates, parties, and PACs), after 2000.

Section 3. Terminating taxpayer financing of presidential election 
        campaigns

    (a) Ends tax checkoff that finances public funding system, 
for tax years beginning after 1999.
    (b) Ends Presidential Election Campaign Fund and 
Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account, after 2000.
    (c) Provides for transfer of funds remaining after 2000 to 
the general fund of the Treasury.

Section 4. Requiring disclosure for certain political party soft money 
        expenditures

    (a) Requires disclosure of all national party transfers to 
state and local parties, regardless of whether the funds are 
otherwise regulated by federal election law.
    (b) Requires state and local parties to file copies with 
the FEC of any disclosure reports required under state and 
local law.
    (c) Makes this section effective for election after January 
2001.

Section 5. Promoting expedited availability of FEC reports

    (a) Requires electronic filing of reports by all 
committees.
    (b) Requires committees to notify FEC within 24 hours of 
all donations in last 90 days of an election, including the 
name of the candidate and office, identification of the 
contributor, and date of receipt and amount of the 
contribution.
    (c) Requires posting of information contained in disclosure 
reports within 24 hours on Internet and at FEC.
    (d) Makes this section effective on January 1, 2001.

Section 6. Ending ``best efforts'' exception for information on 
        contributor's identity

    (a) Ends ``best efforts'' exception for identification of 
contributors, for itemized donations of over $200.
    (b) Makes this section effective after January 2001.

               Committee Consideration of the Legislation


                       introduction and referral

    On May 25, 1999, Mr. Doolittle (for himself, Mr. DeLay, 
Mrs. Cubin, Mr. Shadegg, Mr. McIntosh, Mr. Sam Johnson of 
Texas, Mr. Dickey, Mr. Paul, Mrs. Chenoweth, Mr. Largent, Mr. 
Tancredo, Mr. Taylor of North Carolina, Mr. Peterson of 
Pennsylvania, Mr. Knollenberg, Mr. Tiahrt, Mr. Skeen, Mr. Barr 
of Georgia, Mr. Hansen, Mr. Crane, Mr. Armey, Mr. Calvert, Mr. 
Cannon, Mr. Nethercutt, Mr. Lewis of California, Mr. McInnis, 
Mr. Young of Alaska, Mr. Linder, Mr. Spence, Mr. Dreier, Ms. 
Pryce of Ohio, Mr. Pombo, Mr. Radanovich, Mr. Lewis of 
Kentucky, Mr. Traficant, Mrs. Fowler, Mr. Wicker, Mr. Camp, Mr. 
McKeon, Mr. Collins, Mr. Cunningham, Mr. Baker, Mr. Sessions, 
Mr. Burton of Indiana, Mr. Cook, Ms. Dunn, Mr. Hunter, Mr. 
King, Mr. Norwood, Mr. Packard, Mr. Rohrabacher, Mr. Tauzin, 
Mr. Whitfield, Mr. Gary Miller of California, Mr. McCrery, Mr. 
Miller of Florida, Mr. Jones of North Carolina, Mr. Hall of 
Texas, Mr. Coble, Mr. Bliley, Mr. Salmon, Mr. Ballenger, Mr. 
Mica, Mr. Weldon of Florida, Mr. Sweeny, Mr. Rogan, Mr. 
Simpson, Mr. Hayes, Mr. Hoekstra, Mr. Callahan, Mr. Everett, 
and Mr. Herger) introduced the following bill; which was 
referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in 
addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.

                                hearings

    The Committee on House Administration held four days of a 
hearing on Campaign Reform over two months in 1999.
    On June 17, 1999, the Committee held the first day of the 
hearing on Campaign Reform. Members present: Mr. Boehner, Mr. 
Ehlers, Mr. Mica, Mr. Ewing, Mr. Hoyer, and Mr. Davis. 
Witnesses: Gilchrest testified on H.R. 593 and 594. Mr. Calvert 
testified on H.R. 1880. Mr. Sabo testified on H.R. 1171.
    On June 29, 1999, the Committee held the second day of the 
hearing on Campaign Reform. Members present: Mr. Thomas, Mr. 
Boehner, Mr. Ney, Mr. Mica, Mr. Ewing, Mr. Hoyer, Mr. Fattah, 
and Mr. Davis. Witnesses: Mr. Shays testified on H.R. 417, Mr. 
Hutchinson testified on H.R. 1867, Mr. Regula testified on H.R. 
1641, Ms. Mink testified on H.R. 399 and H.R. 400, Mr. Gillmor 
testified on H.R. 1778 (sharing time with Mr. Tanner), and Mr. 
Andrews testified on H.R. 331.
    On July 13, 1999, the Committee held the third day of the 
hearing on Campaign Reform. Members present: Mr. Boehner, Mr. 
Ney, Mr. Ewing, Mr. Hoyer, and Mr. Davis. Witnesses: Mr. Dreier 
submitted written testimony on H.R. 32, Mr. Doolittle testified 
on H.R. 1922, Mr. Burton testified on 1747, Mr. Bereuter 
testified on H.R. 69, Mr. Pitts testified on H.R. 223, Mr. 
Goodling testified on H.R. 2467, Mr. Price testified on H.R. 
227, Mr. Paul testified on H.R. 2026 and H.R. 2027, and Mr. 
Watkins testified on H.R. 696.
    On July 22, 1999, the Committee held the fourth day of the 
hearing on Campaign Reform. Members present: Mr. Thomas, Mr. 
Boehner, Mr. Ehlers, Mr. Hoyer, Mr. Fattah, and Mr. Davis. 
Witnesses: Roger Pilon, Director, Center for Constitutional 
Studies, CATO Institute; Laura Murphy, Legislative Director, 
American Civil Liberties Union; Don Simon, Acting President, 
Common Cause; Jim Miller, Author of Monopoly Politics, Former 
Director OMB; Burt Neuborne, Director, Brennan Center for Law 
and Justice; James Bopp, James Madison Center for Free Speech; 
Bob Dahl, Fair Government Foundation; Paul Sullivan, Americans 
Back in Charge Foundation; David O'Steen, Exective Director, 
National Right to Life Committee; Cheryl Perrin, Executive 
Director, Campaign for America; Amy Kauffman, Research Fellow, 
Hudson Institute; and Kathleen Hall Jamieson, Dean, the 
Annenberg School of Communication.

                                 markup

    On Monday August 2, 1999 the Committee met to mark up H.R. 
2668, H.R. 417, H.R. 1867, and H.R. 1922. The Committee 
reported H.R. 1922 without recommendation by a show of hands a 
quorum being present. During the markup one amendment was 
offered by Mr. Fattah to H.R. 1922 (Doolittle) to add the 
language of H.R. 2668 to H.R. 1922. Rejected by a show of 
hands.

             Matters Required Under the Rules of the House


                         committee record votes

    Clause 3(b) of House rule XIII requires the results of each 
record vote on an amendment or motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and against, to be printed in the 
committee report. No recorded votes were requested during 
consideration of H.R. 1922.

                      committee oversight findings

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee states that the 
findings and recommendations of the Committee, based on 
oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the 
descriptive portions of this report.

          oversight findings of committee on government reform

    The Committee states, with respect to clause 3(c)(4) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives that the 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight did not submit 
findings or recommendations based on investigations under 
clause 4(c)(2) of rule X of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives.

                        constitutional authority

    In compliance with clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII, the 
Committee states that Article 1, Section 4 of the U.S. 
Constitution grants Congress the authority to make laws 
governing the time, place and manner of holding Federal 
elections.

                            federal mandates

    The Committee states, with respect to section 423 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, that the bill does not 
include any significant Federal mandate.

                        preemption clarification

    Section 423 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 
requires the report of any committee on a bill or joint 
resolution to include a committee statement on the extent to 
which the bill or joint resolution is intended to preempt state 
or local law. The Committee states that H.R. 1922 is not 
intended to preempt any state or local law.

            statement on budget authority and related items

    The bill does not provide new budget authority.

                        committee cost estimate

    Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII requires each committee report 
that accompanies a measures providing new budget authority, new 
spending authority, or new credit authority or changing 
revenues or tax expenditures to contain a cost estimate, as 
required by section 308(a)(1) of the Congressional Budget Act 
of 1974, as amended and, when practicable with respect to 
estimates of new budget authority, a comparison of the total 
estimated funding level for the relevant program (or programs) 
to the appropriate levels under current law.
    Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII requires committees to include 
their own cost estimates in certain committee reports, which 
include, when practicable, a comparison of the total estimated 
funding level for the relevant program (or programs) with the 
appropriate levels under current law.
    The Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared 
by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office, pursuant to 
section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

               CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee sets forth, with 
respect to the bill, the following estimate and comparison 
prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office 
under section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                    Washington, DC, August 4, 1999.
Hon. William M. Thomas,
Chairman, Committee on House Administration,
House of Representatives, Washington DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1922, the Citizen 
Legislature and Political Freedom Act.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are John R. 
Righter (for federal costs) and John Harris (for the private-
sector impact).
            Sincerely,
                                         Dan. L. Crippen, Director.
    Enclosure.

    Following the 2000 election cycle, H.R. 1922 would 
eliminate the Presidential Election Campaign Fund (PECF) and 
remove limitations on the amount of contributions individuals 
can make to candidates in federal elections. The bill also 
would require additional disclosure for certain expenditures of 
so-called ``soft money'' by political parties and require 
increased electronic filing by political committees with the 
Federal Election Commission (FEC). Finally, the bill would 
require that political committees report within 24 hours all 
contributions received during the 90 days preceding an 
election.
    By eliminating any public funding for the quadrennial 
presidential election campaign, CBO estimates that H.R. 1922 
would decrease direct spending by $260 million over the 1999-
2004 period and by $585 million over the 1999-2009 period. 
Implementing the bill would affect the collection of fines and 
penalties, but CBO estimates that the annual change in 
governmental receipts would not be significant. Because the 
bill would affect direct spending and receipts, pay-as-you-go 
procedures would apply.
    Subject to the availability of appropriated funds, CBO 
estimates that implementing H.R. 1922 would cost the FEC about 
$1 million in fiscal year 2000. In future years, the bill might 
increase or decrease costs to the FEC. We estimate that the net 
change in costs would be less than $2 million a year.
    H.R. 1922 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined 
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would impose no 
costs on state, local, or tribal governments. The bill would 
impose new private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA, but CBO 
estimates that there would be no net costs for complying with 
those mandates.

Estimated cost to the Federal Government

    CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 1922 would decrease 
direct spending, increase governmental receipts, and increase 
discretionary spending for administrative costs at the FEC. The 
costs of this legislation fall within budget function 800 
(general government).
            Direct spending
    H.R. 1922 would eliminate the PECF after the 2000 election 
cycle. The PECF finances a large share of the costs of 
Presidential election campaigns. It matches dollar-for-dollar 
contributions of up to $250 made by individuals to eligible 
primary candidates, provides payments to major political 
parties to cover the costs of their nominating conventions, and 
provides payments to eligible nominated candidates to cover 
campaign costs associated with the general election. Taxpayers 
finance the fund by voluntarily designating on their income tax 
forms a portion of their annual tax liability--$3 for 
individual filers and $6 for joint returns--to be paid into the 
PECF. The voluntary earmarking of a portion of taxpayers' tax 
liability does not affect the amount of taxes owed to the 
federal government or the amount of any refund owned taxpayers. 
Thus, the fund is not a source of income for the federal 
budget. In 1998, taxpayers designated $63.3 million for deposit 
in the PECF; for the 1996 Presidential campaign cycle, the fund 
made payments of $234 million to eligible candidates and 
political parties.
    Based on our estimate of the amount of voluntary 
designations that taxpayers will make for tax years 1999 and 
2000 and the amount of public funding that will be required for 
the 2004 and 2008 Presidential election cycles. CBO estimates 
that eliminating the PECF would decrease direct spending by 
$585 million over the 1999-2009 period. That amount includes 
reductions in outlays of $269 million and $298 million, 
respectively, from notproviding public funding for the 2004 and 
2008 elections, and a reduction in outlays of $18 million in 2001 
related to the 2000 campaign. (The year-by-year impact on outlays is 
shown in the pay-as-you-go table in the following section. Budget 
Authority would decline by $65 million a year starting in 2001.)
    CBO estimates that the fund's current balance plus 
designations for tax years 1999 and 2000 would be insufficient 
to fully fund the cost of the 2000 campaign. Current law 
provides that payments cannot be made to eligible candidates 
and parties except to the extent that sufficient funds exist in 
the PECF to make such payments. Thus, the FEC would be required 
to provide pro-rata payments to first the primary candidates 
and then the general election candidates to ensure that total 
payments for the 2000 campaign do not exceed the fund's balance
            Governmental receipts
    Enacting H.R. 1922 would affect the collection of fines and 
penalties for violations of campaign finance law. CBO estimates 
that any change in the amount of annual payments from penalties 
and fines would not be significant.
            Discretionary spending
    After the 2000 cycle for federal elections, H.R. 1922 would 
require that political committees electronically file their 
reports with the FEC and report daily on any contributions 
received during the last 90 days of an election, and would 
require that the FEC process and post such information on its 
Internet site within 24 hours of receiving it. Based on 
information from the FEC, and subject to the availability of 
appropriations, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 1922 would 
cost the FEC about $1 million in fiscal year 2000. This cost 
would cover the one-time expenses of reconfiguring the FEC's 
information systems to handle the increased workload from 
accepting and processing daily reports, as well as writing new 
regulations implementing the bill's provisions and printing and 
mailing materials informing candidates and political committees 
of the new requirements.
    In future years, the FEC would have to monitor political 
parties' compliance with the bill's provisions. Requiring that 
political parties disclose certain soft money expenditures and 
that political committees file daily during the last 90 days of 
an election would add to the FEC's costs, but eliminating 
limitations on the amount individuals could contribute to 
federal campaigns would reduce them. Whether the result would 
be a net increase or decrease in costs is difficult to 
determine, but CBO estimates that the net change in such costs 
would be small (less than $2 million a year).

Pay-as-you-go considerations

    The Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act sets 
up pay-as-you-go procedures for legislation affecting direct 
spending or receipts. The net changes in outlays and receipts 
that are subject to pay-as-you-go procedures are shown in the 
following table. For the purposes of enforcing pay-as-you-go 
procedures, only the effects in the current year, the budget 
year, and the succeeding four years are counted.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                       By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
                                                             -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               1999    2000    2001    2002    2003     2004    2005    2006    2007      2008     2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes in outlays..........................................       0       0     -18       0     -29     -213     -27       0     -32       -201     -65
Changes in receipts.........................................       0       0       0       0       0        0       0       0       0          0       0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Estimated impact on state, local, and tribal governments

    H.R. 1922 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined 
in UMRA and would impose no costs on the budgets of state, 
local, or tribal governments.

Estimated impact on the private sector

    H.R. 1922 would impose new private-sector mandates on 
political parties, other political organizations, and 
candidates for federal office. Section 4 would require the 
national committees of political parties to include information 
on the transfer of funds to state and local party organizations 
in their post-election reports to the Federal Election 
Commission. Section 4 would also require state and local party 
organizations to submit copies of their reports to state 
election authorities to the FEC. Section 5 would require 
political committees, including party organizations, advocacy 
groups, and the election committees of candidates for federal 
office, to submit reports to the FEC in electronic format. The 
bill would more than offset the costs of these mandates, 
however, by abolishing existing statutory limits on campaign 
contributions by individuals. Based on information from the 
FEC, CBO expects that increased receipts from individuals' 
contributions would be significantly larger than the cost of 
the new reporting requirements.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: John R. Righter; 
Impact on the private sector: John Harris.
    Estimate approved by: Robert A. Sunshine, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

  In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law 
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new 
matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is 
proposed is shown in roman):

                FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT OF 1971

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



                  organization of political committees

    Sec. 302. (a)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    [(i) When the treasurer] (i)(1) Except as provided in 
paragraph (2), when the treasurer of a political committee 
shows that best efforts have been used to obtain, maintain, and 
submit the information required by this Act for the political 
committee, any report or any records of such committee shall be 
considered in compliance with this Act or chapter 95 or chapter 
96 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.
  (2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect to information 
regarding the identification of any person who makes a 
contribution or contributions aggregating more than $200 during 
a calendar year (as required to be provided under subsection 
(c)(3)).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                                reports

    Sec. 304. (a)(1)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    [(6)(A) The principal campaign committee of a candidate 
shall notify the Secretary or the Commission, and the Secretary 
of State, as appropriate, in writing, of any contribution of 
$1,000 or more received by any authorized committee of such 
candidate after the 20th day, but more than 48 hours before any 
election. This notification shall be made within 48 hours after 
the receipt of such contribution and shall include the name of 
the candidate and the office sought by the candidate, the 
indentification of the contributor, and the date of receipt and 
amount of the contribution.
    [(B) The notification required under this paragraph shall 
be in addition to all other reporting requirements under this 
Act.]
  (6)(A) Each political committee shall notify the Secretary or 
the Commission, and the Secretary of State, as appropriate, in 
writing, of any contribution received by the committee during 
the period which begins on the 90th day before an election and 
ends at the time the polls close for such election. This 
notification shall be made within 24 hours (or, if earlier, by 
midnight of the day on which the contribution is deposited) 
after the receipt of such contribution and shall include the 
name of the candidate involved (as appropriate) and the office 
sought by the candidate, the indentification of the 
contributor, and the date of receipt and amount of the 
contribution.
    (B) The notification required under this paragraph shall be 
in addition to all other reporting requirements under this Act.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (11)(A) The Commission shall [permit reports required by] 
require reports under this Act to be filed and preserved by 
means of computer disk or any other appropriate electronic 
format or method, as determined by the Commission.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (b) Each report under this section shall disclose--
          (1)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (4) for the reporting period and the calendar year, 
        the total amount of all disbursements, and all 
        disbursements in the following categories:
                  (A)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                  (H) for any political committee other than an 
                authorized committee--
                          (i)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                          (v) any other disbursements; [and]
                  (I) for an authorized committee of a 
                candidate for the office of President, 
                disbursements not subject to the limitation of 
                section 315(b); and
                  (J) in the case of a political committee of a 
                national political party, all funds transferred 
                to any political committee of a State or local 
                political party, without regard to whether or 
                not the funds are otherwise treated as 
                contributions or expenditures under this title;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) If a political committee of a State or local political 
party is required under a State or local law, rule, or 
regulation to submit a report on its disbursements to an entity 
of the State or local government, the committee shall file a 
copy of the report with the Commission at the time it submits 
the report to such an entity.
  (e)(1) The Commission shall make the information contained in 
the reports submitted under this section available on the 
Internet and publicly available at the offices of the 
Commission as soon as practicable (but in no case later than 24 
hours) after the information is received by the Commission.
  (2) In this subsection, the term ``Internet'' means the 
international computer network of both Federal and non-Federal 
interoperable packet-switched data networks.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


             limitations on contributions and expenditures

    Sec. 315. (a)(1)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (9) The limitations established under this subsection shall 
not apply to contributions made during calendar years beginning 
after 2000.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


                 INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


             Subtitle F--Procedure and Administration

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                  CHAPTER 61--INFORMATION AND RETURNS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                   Subchapter A--Returns and Records

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


PART VIII--DESIGNATION OF INCOME TAX PAYMENTS TO PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 
                         CAMPAIGN FUND

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 6096. DESIGNATION BY INDIVIDUALS.

  (a)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) Termination.--This section shall not apply to taxable 
years beginning after December 31, 1999.

       Subtitle H--Financing of Presidential Election Campaigns

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


            CHAPTER 95--PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN FUND

Sec. 9001. Short title
     * * * * * * *
Sec. 9014. Termination

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 9006. PAYMENTS TO ELIGIBLE CANDIDATES.

  (a)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) Transfer of Funds Remaining After 1998.--The Secretary 
shall transfer all amounts in the fund after December 31, 2000, 
to the general fund of the Treasury.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 9014. TERMINATION.

  The provisions of this chapter shall not apply with respect 
to any presidential election (or any presidential nominating 
convention) after December 31, 2000, or to any candidate in 
such an election.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


       CHAPTER 96--PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY MATCHING PAYMENT ACCOUNT

Sec. 9031. Short title
     * * * * * * *
Sec. 9043. Termination

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 9043. TERMINATION.

  The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to any 
candidate with respect to any presidential election after 
December 31, 2000.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                       Views of Committee Members

    Clause 3(a) of rule XIII requires each committee to afford 
a two day opportunity for members of the committee to file 
supplemental, minority, or additional views and to include the 
views in its report. The Committee on House Administration 
Minority members have submitted dissenting views.

                             MINORITY VIEWS

    H.R. 1922 neither ``reforms'' the system, nor opens it up 
to the light of disclosure. In fact, H.R. 1922 guts those parts 
of our current system that continue to work well. H.R. 1922 
would remove all contribution limits and repeal the 
Presidential financing system. While the sponsors of H.R. 1922 
claim that it promotes disclosure and further opens the system 
to the light of day, H.R. 1922 provides for no public 
disclosure of any advertising that does not contain the few 
``magic'' words of express advocacy. This would, in effect, 
sanction between $275 million and $340 million in undisclosed 
political advertising each cycle. The reality is that H.R. 1922 
would represent a return to the pre-Watergate days of unlimited 
contributions from unknown sources.
    We view H.R. 1922 as a misguided bill that shows a lack of 
respect for the voters, and the American tradition of full and 
open disclosure. One of the co-sponsors of H.R. 1922, Majority 
Whip Tom DeLay, recently expressed his contempt for both reform 
and the voters, telling an audience in Rochester, New York: 
``Campaign finance reform--no one cares about.'' We have 
confidence that our colleagues and the voters will see that 
this is not a reform bill, but a backward step. We note that 
our colleagues voted to report this bill without 
recommendation, and we are similarly hopeful that it will 
quickly be voted on and once again defeated on the House floor.
                                   Steny Hoyer.
                                   Chaka Fattah.
                                   Jim Davis.