TIME.com: What's the problem with paycheck protection?
Jay Carney: Labor unions hate the provision. They view it as an overt attempt by Republicans to strip them of their political clout, and their objection would peel a lot of Democrats off the ranks of the bill's supporters. McCain actually supports it in theory, but in practice he's against it because he needs to keep Democrats on board.
What has allowed Republicans to sell the idea is the fact that it's supposedly evenhanded because it affects both unions and corporations alike — but the unions say the comparison isn't valid. Wealthy officers of corporations can simply give their own money, and many corporations are privately held, so there are no stockholders to consult.
This was something Bush mentioned every time he talked about campaign finance reform — is this a blow to the White House?
JC: Not a huge one. This is sort of a tired item that everybody knows is a poison pill for the legislation, and the White House never expected it to pass. In fact, it gives Bush an excuse to veto the bill — not that he doesn't have enough of those already.
What may be a bit surprising to the White House, however, is the 69 votes it got. That's a pretty impressive showing, in terms of the number of Republicans that crossed over to vote down what would have been a poison pill for the bill. That definitely gets the White House's attention.
So stay tuned.
JC: Yeah. The goal for the backers of these unfriendly amendments is to find ways to split up the Democrats, most of whom are looking for a reason to jump ship anyway. But this one shows that the Republicans bear watching too, for the possibility that they'll start to move in the other direction.