Category: Spring 2002 Newswire
Environmental Group Endorses Johnson Campaign
WASHINGTON, March 27–As part of its political debut, a new environmental organization has made U.S. Rep. Nancy L. Johnson, R-Conn., one of its first political endorsements for 2002.
WILD PAC singled out Johnson and Reps. Mark Udall, D-Colo., and Rush Holt, D-N.J., on Monday for their strong commitment to preserving the nation’s wild lands.
Launched only eight months ago, WILD PAC is the first non-partisan grassroots political organization “focused on electing leaders and champions who will protect public lands and wilderness,” said the group’s executive director, Victoria Simarano.
“Johnson is the lead Republican to protect the Arctic,” Simarano said. “She has a very strong record of leadership, and that was the deciding factor.”
WILD PAC particularly commended Johnson for co-sponsoring legislation in the House that would permanently protect the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in Alaska from drilling by the oil industry.
The political action committee selected the three House members based on their voting records and positions on particular environmental issues as well as on personal interviews.
“We also look at political viability and who is going to have tough races,” Simarano said. “We want to put our resources in the tight races so we can make a difference.”
Johnson will face Rep. James H. Maloney, D-Conn., in November for the redistricted 5th Congressional District.
The League of Conservation Voters ranked Maloney as an environmental champion in 2001 and tallied his lifetime environmental voting record at nearly 30 percent higher than Johnson’s 58.4 percent. WILD PAC’s endorsement decisions, however, are not focused on as wide a spectrum of environmental issues, such as agriculture and energy, as the league’s, said the LCV’s political director, Betsy Loyless.
“We applaud Rep. Johnson for her leadership on the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge,” Loyless said. “We also recognize Jim Maloney’s leadership to clean up brownfields, but brownfields cleanup and other broader environmental issues don’t appear to be a major part of WILD PAC’s criteria.”
The league has endorsed both candidates over the years, Loyless said, and has not made a decision on “specific contributions” in the Johnson-Maloney race.
Maloney, in an interview, pointed to his efforts to preserve open land spaces and the nation’s wilderness, including securing $2.5 million during the Clinton Administration for the Weir Farm National Historic Site, Connecticut’s only national park, in addition to protecting Candlewood Lake. Maloney is a co-sponsor along with Johnson of the Arctic Wilderness Act of 2001, and has joined fellow Connecticut Democratic Rep. Rosa DeLauro as a co-sponsor of legislation that would permanently safeguard the nation’s second largest forest, Alaska’s Tongass and Chugach National Forest.
Maloney expressed no concern that his campaign war chest would be hurt by the lack of WILD PAC contributions.
“I am confident that my support from the environmental community as a whole is very strong and very deep. I am not new to the environmental cause,” said Maloney, who added that he still has the support of an “extensive network” of conservationists.
If it becomes law, the Arctic Wilderness Act of 2001 would continue to prohibit oil leasing and drilling as well as preserve the natural ecosystems in the Coastal Plain area of the refuge.
Several multinational oil corporations have been lobbying Congress to open up the currently protected Coastal Plain area, which accounts for only 5 percent of the refuge’s 19 million acres.
“Nancy has a spectacular environmental record,” said Johnson’s campaign manager, David L. Boomer. “She also passed legislation for the Farmington River to make it a Wild and Scenic River, which gets it more protection at the federal level. And she has helped designate the Connecticut River as a Heritage River.”
Based on these and similar accomplishments during Johnson’s 20 years in the House, Simarano said, WILD PAC plans to assist her campaign by making direct contributions, coordinating local fundraising events with environmental leaders, providing campaign staff assistance and initiating “get-out-the-vote” efforts.
But as to which campaign activities Johnson might need help with, “that would be something we would figure out as we get closer to elections,” Simarano said.
Published in The Waterbury Republican-American, in Waterbury, Connecticut.
Bass Helps Write Special Ed Funding Plan in House-Passed Budget
WASHINGTON, March 27--New Hampshire is in line for an increase of more than $4 million for special education programs next year and much more than that in later years under the budget resolution the House approved last week.
Rep. Charles Bass (R-NH), a member of the Budget Committee, played a key role in writing a provision that would ensure that the federal government, by 2012, fulfills its decades-old promise to pay 40 percent of state special education costs.
The proposed budget would provide a $1 billion increase for next year and annual increases over the next nine years that would bring the federal share up to the 40 percent level the 1975 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) mandated. The budget resolution would also change special education financing from discretionary to mandatory, thus freeing it from the unpredictability of the annual budget process.
The House-passed budget resolution would give New Hampshire $36.87 million next year for special education, a $4.32 million increase over current federal funds.
"This money is in a reserve fund, which can only be used for special education," Bass said on Wednesday from his district office.
IDEA calls for all public schools to provide special-needs students under 21 with an appropriate education. This year, however, Washington is contributing only about 17 percent of the cost. Even that is a considerable change; as recently as 1996, the federal government contributed only 5 percent.
For the past 27 years, schools in New Hampshire and around the country have been grappling with the huge costs and sometimes bureaucratic and counter-productive processes educators must follow under IDEA.
Bass authored the provision that would authorize the Education and the Workforce Committee to set the annual spending level. He said he worked with Rep. John Sununu (R-NH), the Budget Committee's vice chairman, in garnering support for IDEA.
"I wouldn't say that it was all that high on the budget list in the past," Bass said. "But visibility is very high now. Advocacy groups have effectively communicated how important this is to Congress."
Bass said he and the other members of the New Hampshire delegation have been especially strong advocates because of the high level of awareness of the subject among Granite Staters. "Constituents, parents, community groups, school boards and principals have all relayed to me how important fully funding IDEA is," he said. "In other parts of the country where education is funded differently than New Hampshire, there is less awareness of the lack of federal funding in the education budget."
Last week, for example, students and parents from Merrimack and Concord joined others from around the country at a Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee hearing on reauthorizing IDEA, cramming the hallway outside the committee room hours before proceedings began. Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) is the senior Republican on the committee and will play a part in reauthorizing IDEA, probably this summer.
Published in The Union Leader, in Manchester, New Hampshire
VA, Sununu Seek More Money for Veterans’ Care
WASHINGTON, March 26--Rep. John Sununu (R-NH) and Veterans Affairs Secretary Anthony Principi are scrambling to garner more money to care for the increasing number of Priority 7 veterans-middle-income people whose ailments did not result from military service-who are seeking care in the Manchester VA hospital and other VA facilities across the nation.
"There's no question our region has seen higher enrollment levels of Priority 7 veterans, and that hasn't been accounted for in how funding levels are set up," Sununu said on Tuesday from his Manchester office, a day after he met with his personal Veterans Advisory Group in the state. "I pressed the VA to look at funding formulas."
Sununu asked Principi twice in March - once at a meeting with the state's other legislators and again at a meeting of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies - to distribute more money to Region 1, which includes New Hampshire, when he adjusts the funding formulas for the nation's 22 VA health networks this spring.
"I asked for and received commitment from the secretary that they will complete the review by May," Sununu said. "Once he delivers his recommendations he will have to take a very hard look at whether funds are fairly and equitably distributed."
Gail Goza-MacMullan, the communications manager for the VA New England Healthcare System in Bedford, Mass., said the money the eight medical centers in New England's Region 1 now receive is related to the number of patients they saw three years ago. "So we're always behind," she said. "Since we've grown so much the amount being allocated isn't sufficient."
The VA created the formulas when it divided its 1,300 facilities into the 22 networks in the late 1990s.
Kerri Childress, a spokeswoman for the VA in Washington, pointed out that New Hampshire is only a piece of the pie. "I've seen lots of those requests from lots of representatives and senators," she said. "New Hampshire is not unique in that regard. Florida has seen an amazing increase in [Priority 7] population down there. The secretary has to look at funding from the national level."
Region 1 also has a shot at receiving an emergency allocation of $8 million in the coming months for Priority 7 veterans. Principi will ask Congress for $142 million in additional funds for Priority 7 veterans across the country, according to Goza-MacMullan.
"This is a very unusual situation," Goza-MacMullan said. "There is just such a great need for Priority 7s. Secretary Principi has not gone to Congress before and asked for specific funds."
Goza-MacMullan said the $8 million for Region 1 would still not be enough for Priority 7 veterans in the deficit-plagued region.
"Now we're roughly looking at a $36 million deficit - and that includes the emergency money we're anticipating getting on Priority 7," she said. "If that doesn't happen, then we're in more trouble."
Region 1's financial woes received attention last December when officials at the Manchester hospital considered reducing its emergency room hours because of an $80 million shortfall. Goza-MacMullan said that the money was ultimately received and ER operations were not altered.
All of these reforms and adjustments are happening because the nature of veterans' health has changed since VA's health care system was designed and built decades ago, said Childress. The medical centers initially focused on inpatient care, with long admissions for diagnosis and treatment. Over the past 10 years, the VA has shifted from focusing on in-hospital treatment and now looks at "prevention, early detection of disease, the promotion of better health care and easier access to care," according to Childress.
As a result, the Manchester hospital and all other VA hospitals this spring will kick off a massive reevaluation process, called CARES (Capital Asset Realignment for Enhanced Services), spearheaded by its Washington office, aimed at assessing and adjusting the way all facilities provide services.
The CARES process, which will last for over a year, will do a count of veteran populations, determine what kind of health care those veterans need, decide where best to provide that care and adjust its facilities and services accordingly.
Childress said the VA will evaluate options in Manchester by holding hearings and accepting local comments.
The VA, Childress said, will also "brief New Hampshire veterans, VA employees, university affiliates, unions and local and national elected officials and evaluate their input to ensure everyone's concerns are heard and veteran' health care is enhanced."
Principi will announce how the VA's resources will be rejiggered in May 2003.
Published in The Union Leader, in Manchester, New Hampshire
University of Massachusetts-Darmouth Receives Grant Money From Department of Defense
WASHINGTON, March 21--The University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth is one of 102 academic institutions to be awarded money from the Department of Defense to purchase state-of-the-art research instruments.
Dr. Lou Goodman, technical director and professor in the School of Marine Science and Technology at the University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth and Dr. Ed Levine at Naval Undersea Warfare Center in Newport, Rhode Island, wrote the proposal to the Office of Naval Research requesting $428,000 for an autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV), which acts like a small unmanned submarine, used to measure small scale physical processes in the ocean.
"There is a phenomenon of turbulence in the water, which occurs throughout the depth of the water column and we want to understand that relationship to ocean currents, ocean fronts, and ocean internal waves," Dr. Goodman said.
Dr. Goodman believes the study of turbulence in the water is critical in a number of importance areas to people and to the economy, including "the pollution of water and making food available, or not available, to larger living underwater organisms."
According to Dr. Goodman, the AUV will be used by students for research involving fisheries, the environment and operational oceanography.
The awards are distributed from the Defense University Research Instrumentation Program (DURIP) based on a merit competition conducted by the Army Research Office, Office of Naval Research, Air Force Office of Scientific Research and the Advanced Technology Development Directorate of the Missile Defense Agency.
Of the 733 proposals the research offices at the Department of Defense received, the University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth and Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution are among the list of 59 institutions that will receive money from the Office of Naval Research.
Steve Elgar, senior scientist in the Applied Ocean Physics and Engineering Department at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) said the official funding began in January for their Nearshore Canyon Experiment (NCEX) and the most recent DURIP equipment award from the Office of Naval Research is about $400,000.
"This equipment includes an array of pressure gages (measure waves) that will be deployed in the surf-zone near a humongous submarine canyon in Southern California," Mr. Elgar said. "The goal is to understand how complicated underwater terrain, such as submarine canyons near the shore affects waves and currents."
According to Maj. Jay Steuck at the Department of Defense, all the awards, ranging between $50,000 and $1,000,000, are subject to an agreement between the institutions and the four Department of Defense research offices.
"This is an annual program from the Department of Defense," Maj. Steuck said. "Awards are not finalized and this is an ongoing project. The final amount of funding for a specific institution will be decided between the institution and the specific research office."
"We are really thankful and really appreciative of the support from the Office of Naval Research," Dr. Goodman said. "The AUV is going to be an important resource, educational and public outreach tool."
Harvard University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston University, Boston College, University of Massachusetts-Amherst, University of Massachusetts-Boston, and Northeastern University were among the other schools in Massachusetts to receive grants from one of the four research offices.
Written for The New Bedford Standard-Times in New Bedford, Mass.
Campaign Finance Reform is Victorious
By Justin Hill
WASHINGTON, March 20--The crusade by Rep. Christopher Shays, R-4th District, to pass campaign finance reform legislation ended in triumph yesterday when the Senate handily adopted the first major campaign reform legislation since the Watergate era.
The Senate voted 60-40 in favor of the campaign reform, introduced by Shays, which will now be sent to President Bush who is expected to sign the legislation. Ten years ago his father, President George H.W. Bush vetoed campaign finance legislation that would have provided partial public financing for political candidates.
Earlier in the day, the Senate voted 68-32-eight more than the required 60-to prevent a filibuster by Republican opponents of the measure.
"We need the president's signature and we have itá, and this bill is going to become law," Shays said at a news conference where he was loudly cheered by supporters of campaign reform. "After years of total excitement, compromise, bipartisan coalition buildingáwe are almost at the finish line," Shays said.
"I'm thrilled," said Shays, who introduced the bill in the House last January along with Massachusetts Democrat Martin Meehan. The House passed it, 240-189, on Feb. 14.
Shays was joined at the news conference by Meehan and by the Senate co-sponsors of campaign reform - Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Russell Feingold, D-Wis., as well as Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-N.D., and House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt, D-Mo.
The Shays-Meehan bill would ban unregulated "soft money," which corporations, labor unions and individuals may now contribute to national political parties. But it would permit limited soft-money contributions to state and local parties. The measure would also ban the use of soft money to finance so-called issue ads by interest groups during the 60 days before a general election and the 30 days before a primary. The bill would increase individual contributions to candidates from $1,000 to $2,000 per election, or $4,000 per election cycle.
"The public does care. It does matter to the public that they have an honest government," said Shays, who first co-sponsored a campaign finance reform bill in 1989 and then in 1995 sponsored the legislation similar to the bill that the Senate approved yesterday. "In the United States of America, you shouldn't have to feel you have to make a large contribution to have your legislation have a hearing."
The bill faces a court challenge. Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who argued that the measure's restrictions on issue ads violate free speech, said he would be a plaintiff in a federal suit battling the bill's constitutionality. The new law would go into effect on Nov. 6, the day after this year's elections.
"I'm eager to become the lead plaintiff in the case" and appeal the legislation to the Supreme Court, McConnell said after the vote. "We've allowed a few powerful editorial pages to prod us" to do something that is not constitutional by passing this legislation.
"Today is a sad day for our Constitution, for our democracy and for our political parties," he said.
Shays, however, said he was confident that the bill would survive a court fight over its constitutionality.
"We've crafted this bill to be consistent with their court precedents, and we think that the Court will ultimately rule that our bill is constitutional," he said, but he warned that he is "expecting some very close decisions."
Shays said the Federal Election Commission presents another hurdle for campaign finance reform, calling the commission "a very big problem" because of its Republican appointees who oppose such reforms.
"I'm part of a group that's looking to see if we should be reforming the FEC because they're the ones who kind of got us in some of this mess with their willingness to have soft money," Shays said.
Soft-money donations soared from $100,000 in the 1988 presidential election to $86 million in 1992 and to about $500 million in 2000.
"The result [of soft money] has been a system that often leaves the average personádisempowered, disinterested and disengaged from our political process," Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, D-Conn., said on the Senate floor, before voting in favor of the reform legislation. "It causes them to continually question why their leaders are taking the actions they take. And it causes those of us in public life to work too often under a cloud of suspicion-with our constituents wondering whose interest we are serving. The demise of the Enron Corp. is but the most recent example of this phenomenon."
Three New England Republicans: Sen. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island and Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine joined eight other Republicans and Independent James Jeffords of Vermont in voting for the measure.
Published in The Hour, in Norwalk, Conn.
Meehan Celebrates Passage of Campaign Finance Reform
By Kelly Field
WASHINGTON, March 20--Nine years of hard work paid off for Congressman Marty Meehan, D-Lowell, yesterday, as the Senate voted, 60-40, to pass a campaign finance reform bill he called "the most significant rewrite of our election laws in a generation."
"This is the final nail in the 'soft-money' coffin," said Meehan, who sponsored a companion bill the House passed on Valentine's Day. "It has been a long battle. There were many times I thought this moment would never come."
Meehan first introduced a bill to fundamentally reform campaign finance reform in 1993. Over the years, his bill underwent several revisions to make it more bipartisan and less objectionable to opponents. The Shays-Meehan bill, which passed yesterday, would ban unlimited, unregulated soft-money donations to the national political parties and prevent interest groups from running so-called issue ads in the final days before an election. Though "issue ads," unlike "campaign ads," cannot mention candidates' names, they can strongly and indirectly urge a vote for or against a candidate.
The bill would also increase the amount individuals can contribute to campaigns from $1,000 to $2,000 per election, or $4,000 per election cycle.
The legislation will now go to President George W. Bush, who is expected to sign the bill soon. Opponents to the Shays-Meehan legislation, led by Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky, vow a court challenge over the constitutionality of the issue ad limitations in the bill.
"We fully intend to fight this all the way to the Supreme Court," said Ian Welters, communications director for the American Conservative Union, one of the groups that oppose the legislation. "This bill would outlaw or criminalize speech that every American has always believed to be protected."
The National Rifle Association, which has given generously to the political parties in the past, also objected to the issue ad restrictions.
"This creates a black-out period on issue advocacy," said Chuck Cunningham, the NRA's director of federal affairs. "It leaves six weeks in which citizens and their organizations would be vulnerable to bad legislation because they've been silenced."
Meehan countered that so-called "issue ads" are often little more than thinly veiled campaign ads and said that he expects the bill to withstand any legal challenges.
"I know our day in court is coming, and I welcome that," said Meehan in a speech at Georgetown University on Tuesday, where he was introduced by student Charles Daher, son of Lawrence businessman Charles Daher. "But I think the limits are going to be upheld by the US Supreme Court." He said the Court has allowed rare restrictions on speech in cases of "compelling government interest" and cited laws banning child pornography or requiring truthful advertising and product labeling.
Public Citizen President Joan Claybrook acknowledged that "armies of political lawyers will surely try to carve out new loopholes," but she predicted that "the Court will sustain the measure approved today."
But Charlie Cook of Cook's Report, an expert on congressional elections, was less optimistic, saying that "there are only two ways to reform campaigns: clean up the Constitution or kill all the lawyers. They are going to find the holes; it's like water running down the hill. The advocacy ad [provision] has no chance of surviving a constitutional challenge."
Supporters of campaign finance reform contend that the Shays-Meehan/McCain-Feingold bill will restore confidence in democracy by limiting the ability of wealthy individuals, corporations and unions to "buy access" and favorable treatment from politicians through soft-money donations to the political parties. They say the ban on soft money would make parties and candidates more responsive to individual voters by forcing them to rely more on smaller "hard money" donations from individuals and political action committees to get out the vote and get their messages across on television.
"The [current] system has fostered cynicism about politics [and] has had an insidious impact upon our democracy," Meehan said on Tuesday. "Parties spend all their time romancing big donors."
Common Cause president Scott Harshbarger said of the Senate vote, "Americans have won an historic victory to help bring our government back to the people."
But some opponents-interest groups excluded-argue that the bill would do more to empower interest groups than to reduce the amount of money in politics. They say the bill would weaken the parties and shift control to special interests, which can still raise-and spend--as much money as they want.
"This bill doesn't take money out of politics, it just takes the parties out of politics," McConnell said during debate yesterday. "Make no mistake about it, soft money will exist and it will thrive under Shays-Meehan."
Daniel Manatt, associate director of the Campaign Finance Institute, said that he doubted "anyone could say with a straight face that it will reduce the overall amount of money. Clearly, there are many ways to spend money on politics."
If upheld, the law would go into effect on November 6, the day after the congressional elections. Yesterday, at a news conference before the vote, Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, praised Meehan, calling him an "incredible leader."
"He challenged the power structure," Wertheimer said. "Some of his colleagues didn't like it, but he never flinched, not even when people tried to take his congressional district away from him. He never flinched."
Three New England Republicans: Sen. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island and Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine joined eight other Republicans and Independent James Jeffords of Vermont in voting for the measure.
Published in The Eagle-Tribune, in Lawrence, Mass.
Smith Introduces Segway Legislation
By Kelly Field
WASHINGTON, March 20-- If Senator Bob Smith, R-N.H., has his way, Dean Kamen's Segway scooters may soon be zipping along sidewalks, trails and bike paths across the nation.
Yesterday, Smith introduced a bill that would enable "personal mobility devices" to travel on federally built or federally financed sidewalks and bike paths-but not highways. The bill builds upon a law passed by the New Hampshire legislature last month.
"This broadens the scope" of the state law, Smith said. It would give users, particularly the handicapped, "a little more mobility, a little more flexibility."
Current federal regulations prohibit the use of all motor vehicles, except wheelchairs, on sidewalks.
Asked if he could envision people cruising up the White Mountains on a Segway, Smith said he wants to "see people have the flexibility to use the devices as they might a bicycle or a wheel chair."
Kamen, the Manchester-based inventor of the Segway, agreed, calling his scooter "an important alternative transportation solution that could help solve many of the pressing problems facing urban transportation around the world."
Supporters of the Segway, formerly known as "Ginger," say that it will help reduce congestion and fuel consumption nationwide. Opponents worry about the safety of allowing the devices--which can travel up to 12 miles per hour--on the sidewalks. Segway maintains that the damage from a collision with a pedestrian would be no greater than if two people collided, but a recent Wall Street Journal article reported that the devices have not been crash-tested for safety.
Asked about this, Brian C. Toohey, Segway's vice president of international and regulatory affairs, said that it "depends on what you define as testing."
"We have done a tremendous amount of in-house testing, and we believe it is extremely safe. We are undertaking more extensive testing."
Toohey said the product is now being sold exclusively to postal workers, police and other professionals to "prove its safety" to consumers before it goes on the public market.
Published in The Eagle-Tribune, in Lawrence, Mass.
Senate OK’s Campaign Finance Reform Bill
WASHINGTON, March 20--The U.S. Senate voted yesterday to reform the nation's campaign finance laws after nearly a decade of gridlock. The Shays-Meehan-McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform act passed by a vote of 60-40, with Senators Bob Smith, R-N.H. and Judd Gregg, R-N.H. voting against the bill.
Smith and Gregg also voted earlier yesterday against a motion to end debate on the bill and move to a final vote. That cloture motion carried, 68-32. Both Senators previously voted against the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill, which the Senate approved last April.
"This legislation raises serious First Amendment concerns regarding limitations on free speech and political discourse," Smith said in a statement yesterday. "Full disclosure, not limitations on free speech, is the right kind of campaign finance reform."
Smith added, "I am also concerned that this bill hurts average Americans by limiting grassroots politics and by prohibiting the advocacy groups they support from fully representing their views."
Gregg referred to the bill as "a very poor piece of legislation" and "an affront to the First Amendment."
"[The bill] dramatically tilts the playing field away from parties and toward special- interest groups," Gregg added.
The legislation will now be sent to President George W. Bush, who is expected to sign it. Ten years ago his father, President George H.W. Bush vetoed campaign finance legislation that would have provided partial public financing for political candidates.
The House approved the Shays-Meehan bill last month by a vote of 240-189. John Sununu, R-N.H., voted against the bill and Charles Bass, R-N.H., supported it.
"[Congressman Bass] is hopeful that it passes the Senateáand is signed into law by the President," press secretary Sally Tibbets said yesterday before the final Senate vote.
Bass was one of the final four House members to sign a discharge petition forcing a House vote on the reform bill
"We wouldn't have a vote today if not for Charlie Bass," said the House bill's co-sponsor, Christopher Shays, R-CT. "He was huge, and he's been here for us for a long time."
At a news conference yesterday following the cloture vote, reform supporters heralded the end of what Arizona Senator John McCain called a "seven-year odyssey."
"I hope every young person feels more welcome at the table of American politics," said Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold, McCain's co-sponsor.
The reform legislation would ban unregulated "soft money," which corporations, labor unions and individuals may now contribute to national political parties. But it would permit limited soft-money contributions to state and local parties. The measure would restrict the use of soft money to finance "issue ads" by interest groups broadcast during the 60 days before a general election and the 30 days before a primary. The bill would also increase individual contributions to candidates from $1,000 to $2,000 per election, or $4,000 per election cycle.
Opponents questioned the constitutionality of the bill's advertising restrictions, saying that they would silence free speech.
"As far as we're concerned, legislated restrictions on political speech are unconstitutional," said Ian Welters, communications director for the American Conservative Union. "Political speech, as an idea, is protected by the First Amendment."
"We think full disclosure is, of course, the obvious way to go," said Charles McGee, executive director for the New Hampshire Republican Party. "I think [this bill] will eventually be seen as Congress overstepping its bounds in terms of limiting free speech."
Supporters have argued that the bill would not restrict free speech because it would permit ads paid for with limited "hard-money" contributions.
"New Hampshire voters clearly care about this," said Colin van Ostern, communications director for the New Hampshire Democratic Party. "McCain made that clear when he won in the New Hampshire primary by 20 points campaigning almost solely on that issue." Van Ostern characterized Smith and Gregg's votes against the measure as "shameful."
Three New England Republicans: Sen. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island and Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine joined eight other Republicans and Independent James Jeffords of Vermont in voting for the measure.
Published in The Keene Sentinel, in New Hampshire
Smith Takes Segway to the Sidewalks
WASHINGTON, March 20--The Segway vehicle received a helping hand from U.S. Sen. Bob Smith, R-N.H., yesterday when he introduced legislation that would allow the Segway and other motorized devices to be used on federally funded walkways and paths.
Several states, including New Hampshire, have already passed legislation allowing the Segway onto local and state-funded sidewalks. In February, Governor Jeanne Shaheen signed into law an act allowing such devices, referred to as "electric personal assistive mobility devices" to be used on sidewalks and public ways, and also created a task force to study how it would impact pedestrians.
Smith's bill would only give states the authority to lift prohibition of the Segway from federally funded sidewalks, but does not seek to affect state or local ordinances.
Smith is a ranking member on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, which has jurisdiction over transportation legislation.
Dean Kamen, inventor of the Segway, has spent months lobbying members of Congress and federal transportation officials to treat the vehicle like a motorized wheelchair and allow it onto public sidewalks. Smith expects to continue working closely with Kamen while seeking support from fellow members.
Currently, both the Manchester Police Department and the United States Postal Service use the Segway in their daily line of work. Smith suggested it can also be used as a recreational vehicle, and emphasized the battery-powered vehicle's energy efficiency and minimal environmental impact.
In a statement supporting Smith's bill, Kamen stated yesterday that "the Segway [Human Transporter] is both safe and has the potential to become an important alternative transportation solution that could help solve many of the pressing problems facing urban transportation around the world."
"What this does is remove a potential conflict that might exist between state law and federal law, as regards to Segway," said Brian C. Toohey, vice president of international and regulatory affairs for Segway LLC, the company founded by Kamen to design and market the Segway vehicle, which is manufactured in Bedford.
New Hampshire traffic officials have expressed support for the Segway, saying it could reduce traffic congestion and pollution.
"Down the road there probably will be issues that need to be addressed, but at the moment we are supportive of any and all efforts to increase people's mobility and make the Segway a viable transportation alternative," said Bill Boynton, a spokesman for the New Hampshire Department of Transportation.
Though Smith has not personally taken the Segway on a test run, Kamen demonstrated the vehicle for him in Manchester and Concord, and Smith said he expects the vehicle will "broaden the horizons of people's personal mobility."
The Senate committee's press secretary, Genevieve Erny, said that at least three-quarters of sidewalks are locally funded, with the rest receiving funding from either the state or federal government.
"A number of states have pending legislation regarding the Segway, and this gives them power to use federally funded sidewalks," Erny said.
Published in The Keene Sentinel, in New Hampshire
Smith, Gregg Vote Against Campaign Finance Bill that Passed the Senate
WASHINGTON, March 20--Sen. Bob Smith (R-NH) and Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) voted against the wide-reaching McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill that the Senate approved, 60-40, on Wednesday.
The two also voted against a motion earlier in the day to end debate on the bill that aims to reduce the role of special-interest money in politics.
The bill would ban corporations, unions and individuals from donating unregulated "soft money" to national political parties. It would allow individuals to double their regulated "hard-money" contributions to $2,000 per candidate per election. The measure would also forbid so-called issue ads for or against candidates from being broadcast in the final 60 days before general elections and the final 30 days before primaries.
The House passed its version of the bill on February 14, 240-189. Rep. Charles Bass (R-NH), who signed a petition in January that forced a vote on the bill, voted for it. Rep. John Sununu (R-NH) voted against it.
The McCain-Feingold bill is now headed to President George Bush to be signed into law.
Gregg called the bill "a very poor piece of legislation" in an interview earlier this month. "I think it's clearly, in my opinion, an affront to the First Amendment, to free speech significantly," he said. "And secondly, it dramatically tilts the playing field away from parties and toward special-interest groups."
Smith, in a statement, said the bill "hurts average Americans by limiting grassroots politics and by prohibiting the advocacy groups they support from fully representing their views." He added that "full disclosure, not limitations on free speech, is the right kind of campaign finance reform."
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has pledged to challenge portions of the bill in court.
Published in The Union Leader, in Manchester, New Hampshire
