"We have a genuine opportunity to earn some trust back from the American people by passing meaningful campaign finance reform," Smith said. "Unfortunately, the House leadership has designed the process so that even if a majority of members vote for the bipartisan Shays-Meehan campaign finance reform bill — the bill that is supported by all major reform organizations such as the League of Women Voters and Common Cause — it could still be rejected in favor of weaker legislation."

After efforts by pro-campaign finance reform members of Congress to obtain 218 signatures on a discharge petition to force debate on campaign finance reform proposals, House leadership reluctantly agreed to allow the issue to come up for floor debate and a vote.

"At first, I was very encouraged that the Republican leadership seemed to be putting the interests of the American people above partisan politics," explained Smith. "However, instead of allowing a simple up-or-down vote on Shays-Meehan, the House leadership is thwarting the process by instituting an unprecedented, convoluted rule that will most likely put the nail in the coffin of campaign finance reform this year."

The base bill for the debate will be HR 2183, the bipartisan freshman bill. Although Smith supports some of the provisions in this legislation, he would vote against it because it raises contribution limits. "I think the current contributions of $1000 per individual and $5000 per political action committee per election are high enough," Smith said. "I don't support raising those limits so that wealthy contributors have undue influence."

Under the rule, House leadership will permit eleven substitutes to HR 2183. The House will consider substitute amendments under an unusual and rare "Queen of the Hill" procedure, which dictates that whichever of the eleven substitutes receives the most votes will be the substitute amendment to HR 2183.

Furthermore, the House leadership is permitting over 250 non-germane amendments and unlimited germane amendments, which will drag out the process for months.

"The leadership instituted this rule because they know that Shays-Meehan has majority support," Smith explained. "They don't want Shays-Meehan to pass, but on the other hand they couldn't refuse to bring up Shays-Meehan because it is clearly the most popular and most respected campaign finance reform bill. Instead they are hoping that another, weaker measure will receive more votes than Shays-Meehan — thereby killing it."

The legislation most likely to thwart Shays-Meehan is Representative Rick White's (R-Wash) Independent Commission on Campaign Finance Reform Act. The legislation would create a twelve-member commission. If nine of the twelve members could agree on recommendations within six months, those could be put before the next Congress on an expedited basis for an up- or-down vote. Commission members would be appointed by congressional party leadership.

"Last year, I signed on as a co-sponsor of Representative White's bill because it is better than nothing. In fact, I co-sponsored several campaign finance reform bills because they are all a step in the right direction," explained Smith. "However, I will not support White substitute because I feel that we have a real chance to pass Shays-Meehan, and a vote for the White bill is a vote against Shays-Meehan."

Common Cause, a pro-campaign finance reform citizens group, agrees. President Ann McBride commented, "The Republican leadership is using the White substitute as the vehicle to try to defeat the Shays-Meehan bill...Any Member who votes for the Commission bill — even if that Member also votes for Shays-Meehan — will be participating in this concerted effort to derail real reform."

The House is scheduled to begin debating campaign finance reform today and continue throughout the summer.