Evening star., 1957-04-21
DISPUTE A FACTOR
Political Fund Curb
Faces Dim Outlook
BY DAVID KOONCE

ny DAVID kOONCE
Only last year. the Senate ex-
pressed what appeared to be an
almost unanimous desire to write
a law to control multi -million-d dollar
campaign spending.
One bill had already been intro
duced to that end. and another.
signed by So of the SO Senators,
was offered. A special committee
was chosen to look into campaign
contributions and lobbying, and
the Privileges and Elections Sub
committee set out on q thorough
scrutiny" Of the subject while the
campaigns were in progress.
The furry of activity was spurred
by disclosure Of a lobbyists offer
Of campaign contribution during
debate on the natural gas bill. That
brought bill sponsored by Major
ity Leader Lyndon johnson and
Minority Leader william F. Know
land and signed by "a other Sem
ators to repeal the Federal Corrupt
Practices Act Of 1925 and parts
Of the Pernicious Political Activi-
ties Act Of 1899.
But nothing was ever done.
This year, there are again two
Senate bills aimed at tighter con-
troll over campaign contributions
and expenditures. One was first
offered in 1855 by Senator Thomas
Hennings, Democrat Of Missouri, and
reintroduced. The other was intro
duced by Senator Albert Gore,
Democrat of Tennessee.
Both bills approach the problem
in much the same way. They re-
quire written authorization by a
candidate before a political COM
mittee can spend in his behalf.
They extend the law to cover pri-
maries and nominating caucuses
and conventions as well as general
elections and include, in addition
to candidates for Congress, candi-
dates for President and Vice Presi-
dent. Both bills seek to control the
interstate spending Of campaign
money and also would tighten the
methods Of reporting contributions
and expenditures Of candidates and
committees. At the same time, rec
ognizing that existing law is un-
realistic, they increase the amounts
that legally may be spent and con-
tributed in campaigns.
Chonces Not Bright
The chances for legislation this
year. with the first session of the
85th Congress already at the half
way point. are not over-bright.
The idea has run into the same
dilemma that has faced It before.
In nonelection year, when politi-
cal pressures that might be adverse
to such legislation are ebbing, it is
difficult to arouse interest in correc-
tive proposals. But if its propon-
ents wait until next year to push
the bills, they are faced with the
problem Of changing the rules in
the middle Of the game"
So far, both the Gore bill and
the Hennings bill have been referred
to the Subcommittee on Privileges
and Elections. but no hearings have
been set for either.
The issue now has been further
complicated by a dispute Sover the
accuracy Of the weighty report re-
leased February 3 by the Privileges
and Elections Subcommittee on
1856 campaign contributions and
expenditures.
The subcommittee, which was
able to track down $33 million of
an estimated SITS million spent on
campaigns last year. reported that
62.3 per cent of the spending was
done by Republicans. 1871 per cent
by Democrats and as per cent by
political action committees Of labor
and other groups. The report showed
that 66.8 per cent Of the reported
contributions went to Republicans,
although the Republicans got only
a per cent of organized labors
contributions.
On March 20. Senator Andrew
F. Schoeppel Of Kansas. chairman
Of the Republican Senatorial Com
mittee, attacked the report as
Democrat campaign material"
charging that ''it was prepared to
support the thesis voiced by many
New Dealers throughout the past
campaign that the Republican
Party was the party Of big business.
and that the Democrats were the
party concerned with labor and the
so-called little man." He also
charged gross errors"
One of Senator Schoeppels major