By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer Tue Jan 30, 5:32 PM ET

WASHINGTON – As the cost of presidential campaigns moves toward the $1 billion mark, leading congressional advocates of tougher campaign finance laws want to reduce the influence of special interests by pumping more taxpayer money into the system.
ADVERTISEMENT

Three House members and one senator on Tuesday introduced legislation that would increase the amount of money in the presidential public financing system and increase the spending limits for candidates who participate in it. It would not change the rules for the 2008 presidential election.

“This system that’s in place now is not sustainable,” said Rep. Martin Meehan, D-Mass., who introduced the legislation in the House with Reps. Christopher Shays (news, bio, voting record), R-Conn., and David Price (news, bio, voting record), D-N.C. Sen. Russ Feingold (news, bio, voting record), D-Wis., introduced similar legislation in the Senate.

The legislation would triple the amount available to candidates during state primaries and eliminate state spending limits. It would increase the amount available for general elections to $100 million (More than $80 million would be available in 2008). It also would offer more money to candidates whose opponents chose to decline the public money and raise more on their own.

To pay for the extra money, the sponsors would increase the voluntary presidential campaign checkoff on income tax returns from $3 to $10.

But the fund has faced chronic shortfalls as the percentage of taxpayers contributing has declined to less than 10 percent last year from over 30 percent in the 1970s.

There should be no way for people to opt in or out. I would be fine if with a system where funds could be directed by choice. That is say you could force your $3 this year to go to Clinton or Obama or whoever, and any money which wasn’t directed would then go into some sort of general pool. This would still allow people to express their ‘freedom of speach’ while provideing an ammount of money that could match private donors.

There is still the problem of soft money contributions….

the Public Election Fund which can not compete with the escalating amounts of money it takes to run a Presidential campaign for a front runner.

That wouldn’t be a problem if candidates were limited to the money from the fund.

Here are the sponsors of H.R. 3099:

Rep Abercrombie, Neil [HI-1] – 2/16/2006
Rep Baldwin, Tammy [WI-2] – 6/28/2005
Rep Blumenauer, Earl [OR-3] – 6/28/2005
Rep Capuano, Michael E. [MA-8] – 2/16/2006
Rep Case, Ed [HI-2] – 2/16/2006
Rep Clay, Wm. Lacy [MO-1] – 6/28/2005
Rep Conyers, John, Jr. [MI-14] – 2/16/2006
Rep Crowley, Joseph [NY-7] – 6/28/2005
Rep Davis, Danny K. [IL-7] – 6/28/2005
Rep DeFazio, Peter A. [OR-4] – 3/8/2006
Rep Delahunt, William D. [MA-10] – 6/28/2005
Rep DeLauro, Rosa L. [CT-3] – 6/28/2005
Rep Eshoo, Anna G. [CA-14] – 6/28/2005
Rep Farr, Sam [CA-17] – 6/28/2005
Rep Filner, Bob [CA-51] – 2/1/2006
Rep Frank, Barney [MA-4] – 6/28/2005
Rep Grijalva, Raul M. [AZ-7] – 6/28/2005
Rep Hastings, Alcee L. [FL-23] – 2/16/2006
Rep Hinchey, Maurice D. [NY-22] – 6/28/2005
Rep Holt, Rush D. [NJ-12] – 6/28/2005
Rep Honda, Michael M. [CA-15] – 2/1/2006
Rep Kaptur, Marcy [OH-9] – 6/28/2005
Rep Kind, Ron [WI-3] – 6/28/2005
Rep Kucinich, Dennis J. [OH-10] – 2/1/2006
Rep Lantos, Tom [CA-12] – 6/28/2005
Rep Lee, Barbara [CA-9] – 6/28/2005
Rep McDermott, Jim [WA-7] – 6/28/2005
Rep McGovern, James P. [MA-3] – 6/28/2005
Rep McNulty, Michael R. [NY-21] – 6/28/2005
Rep Meehan, Martin T. [MA-5] – 6/28/2005
Rep Miller, George [CA-7] – 6/28/2005
Rep Nadler, Jerrold [NY-8] – 6/28/2005
Rep Olver, John W. [MA-1] – 6/28/2005
Rep Pascrell, Bill, Jr. [NJ-8] – 6/28/2005
Rep Sanders, Bernard [VT] – 6/28/2005
Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. [IL-9] – 6/28/2005
Rep Stark, Fortney Pete [CA-13] – 6/28/2005
Rep Van Hollen, Chris [MD-8] – 6/28/2005
Rep Waxman, Henry A. [CA-30] – 6/28/2005
Rep Woolsey, Lynn C. [CA-6] – 6/28/2005