House votes to end election funding by taxpayers

The House voted last week to end taxpayer funding of presidential campaigns.

Lawmakers voted 235-190 for a bill to terminate the Presidential Election Campaign Fund that is fed by $3 checkoffs on income tax returns.

It also would abolish the Election Assistance Commission, created after the disputed 2000 presidential election to distribute grants for states to modernize voting systems. The agency also serves as a clearinghouse on the running of elections.

Rep. Gregg Harper, R-Miss., said taxpayer financing of elections is “growing less and less popular for both taxpayers and candidates.”

He said the percentage of taxpayers who participate dropped from 28.7 percent in 1980 to 7 percent. No presidential candidate this year has indicated he or she would take part, he added. Accepting public funding requires a candidate to limit spending. Terminating the election system would save $200 million now and $447 million over five years, Harper said.

In opposition, Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., said ending public funding “opens the door for large political spenders to enjoy an even greater role in the funding of political campaigns.” If anything, Lofgren said, the fund “has not kept pace with the cost of modern campaigns, so we should fix it instead of eliminating it.”

Reps. Steve Womack, R-Rogers, Rick Crawford, R-Jonesboro and Tim Griffin, R-Little Rock, voted to end taxpayer financing of presidential elections. Rep. Mike Ross, D-Prescott, voted to preserve the system.

Standoff on payroll tax cut

The Senate hit an impasse on proposals to extend Social Security payroll tax cuts, a central part of President Barack Obama’s jobs strategy. The deadlock set the stage for further negotiations ahead of the tax break expiration at the end of the year.

Democrats failed to gain the necessary 60 votes to advance a bill that would continue the tax cut and expand it from 2 percent to 3.1 percent. The benefit would be paid for through a 3.25 percent surtax on individuals’ income of more than $1 million.

The vote was 51-49. Sen. Mark Pryor, D-Ark., voted for the bill. Sen. John Boozman, R-Ark., voted against it.

In turn, a plan backed by Republican leaders was shelved, 20-78. It would have paid for the tax cut by continuing a freeze on federal worker pay, reducing the government’s workforce and by increasing Medicare premiums for millionaires. Pryor and Boozman voted against that version.

Most Democrats and some Republicans agreed the year-old tax break, which has saved families as much as $1,000, should not be allowed to expire as the economy sputters. But critics from both parties questioned the extent it has been helpful in stimulating the economy. Also, both sides differed widely on how the cost should be offset.

Detainee policies debated

The Senate passed a $662 billion bill for defense programs amidst debate over how the government should handle suspected terrorists.

The bill formed by Senate defense leaders required captured members of al Qaeda and associated groups, including individuals who are U.S. citizens, to be held by the military for indefinite periods rather than in civilian custody. Waivers would be allowed.

Those provisions triggered a White House veto threat, and an amendment by Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colo., to have them removed. Udall’s amendment was defeated 38-60, following a debate whether detainees should be treated as criminals or as war prisoners. Udall said the provisions “could well represent an unprecedented threat to our constitutional liberties…Do we want to open the door to domestic military police powers and possibly deny U.S. citizens their due process rights?”

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said captured Americans are given due process in having a judge determine whether they are al Qaeda members.

If captives are determined to be al Qaeda, “They should not be read their Miranda rights,” Graham said. “They should not be given a lawyer. They should be held humanely in military custody and interrogated about why they joined al-Qaeda and what they were going to do to all of us.”

Pryor and Boozman voted against the Udall amendment.

Amendments by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., that sought to limit the military’s powers over captured Americans also were defeated. Finally, senators agreed to a compromise that effectively would toss the issue to the Supreme Court for a decision.