March 27, 2002
WASHINGTON - An exemption in a sweeping
campaign-finance reform measure could soon boost the political capital of
American Indians. Critics say inequitable donation caps in the legislation would
give tribes an unfair advantage. The measure, known as the McCain-Feingold bill,
passed the U.S. Senate last week and is headed for President Bush's desk, where
it is expected to be signed into law soon. Tribes and some other groups are partly exempt from
the limits in the bill, because they don't qualify as individuals. They also are
not required to set up political action committees, as are corporations and
labor unions. PACs are subject to separate caps. Tribes must abide by a $2,000 per candidate limit, as
would all donors. Individuals cannot exceed a total of $95,000 in contributions
per election, but tribes can donate up to $2,000 to as many candidates as they
want, with no overall limit. Proponents tout the bill, the first major reform in
decades, as a breakthrough in limiting the influence of special-interest money,
but opponents see it differently. Critics say the lack of an overall donation cap would
give tribes wider influence, bringing more politicians over to their side when
battles arise over issues such as casino expansion, taxes or public safety. "We're talking about an uneven playing
field," said Cheryl Schmit of Stand Up for California!, a grassroots
organization that fought the legalization of Indian gambling in California. Three Inland tribes are among the top 10 political
contributors: Morongo Band of Mission Indians near Banning; Pechanga Band of
Luiseno Indians near Temecula; and Cabazon Band of Mission Indians near Indio. Tribal representatives and some campaign finance
experts say the naysayers are simply resentful of the tribes' growing influence. "Some people just can't stand it because tribes
have been able to accomplish what some thought they couldn't do, which is pull
themselves up out of poverty," said Michael Lombardi, an Indian-gambling
consultant and a former general manager at Casino Morongo near Banning. "Tribes are not doing anything illegal," he
said. "Every American should be proud that American Indians are involved in
the democratic process." Tribal representatives and some campaign-finance
experts scoff at the suggestion that the legislation will prompt tribes to give
donations in every federal race in the country. Tribes will continue to support their friends in
Congress and work against those they see as their enemies, Lombardi said. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., one of the authors of the
original Senate legislation, said the exemption is not a loophole. "It's a nice argument, but it's not true,"
he said. McCain, who sits on the Senate Indian Affairs
Committee, was the recipient of the largest amount of tribal money in the 2000
election cycle, racking up $42,900. FEC ruling The tribal exemption stems from a Federal Election
Commission ruling in May 2000 that found that tribes, homeowner associations and
unincorporated partnerships had to abide by some campaign spending limits but
not others. Under the reform legislation, that ruling means a
tribe could conceivably give to every federal race with total donations reaching
past the half-million-dollar mark, giving the tribe potential influence over
much of Congress. In July, Connecticut Republican Rep. Rob Simmons
introduced an amendment to the House version of the bill that would have capped
the total amount of direct, or hard money, donations for Indian tribes -- just
as they are for individuals. The House Rules Committee rejected the amendment,
and the bill cleared the House without it last month. The unlimited donations, known as soft money, that
contributors have traditionally been able to make to national political parties
won't be allowed any longer under the legislation. Seth Amgott, a spokesman for the election-reform
watchdog group Common Cause, said the legislation doesn't do everything and said
it's not the last word on reform. "It's inherently less corrupting for anyone to
give $2,000 to a candidate for Congress than to give half a million or a million
(dollars) to the Republican National Committee," he said. Big donors Tribes donated $2.9 million in the 2000 election
cycle, according to the Center of Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan group that
tracks campaign donations. Of that amount, $2.2 million was in unlimited
donations to political parties and $663,000 was to individual candidates. One campaign-finance expert said he didn't consider
the legislation a boon for tribes and suspected those who say so haven't gotten
used to "this sort of new kid on the block." "They're a wealthy organization now," said
Robert Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies in Los Angeles, a
nonpartisan research organization that studies campaign financing. Wealthy tribes already have influence, Stern said,
and will continue to have it under the McCain-Feingold legislation, but no more
so than any other wealthy organization. In the meantime, Schmit and other critics are hoping
the tribal exemption won't hold if it is challenged in court.