[Mb-civic] USA Today: Once again, big donors find new ways to skirt the rules

[ean at sbcglobal.net]

OUCH! -- How Money In Politics Hurts You

#134: WE COULDN'T HAVE SAID IT BETTER OURSELVES!
October 28, 2004  

Yesterday, USA Today published an editorial on the role big money is playing 
in American politics. They also talked about the "Clean Money, Clean 
Elections" campaign finance systems that have been successfully 
implemented in several states across the country--most notably Arizona and 
Maine.  Below is yesterday's article. Please have a read and then pass it onto 
others!
 
USA Today
October 27, 2004
 
Once again, big donors find new ways to skirt the 
rules 

Trying to control the flow of money corrupting politics is a lot like trying to 
contain flooding on the Mississippi. Dikes can channel the torrent. But when 
there's a downpour, the river will keep on coming, breaking through at the 
point of least resistance. 

So it has gone in this presidential campaign. The walls erected by the last set 
of political engineers, Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Russ Feingold, D-
Wis., will largely have achieved their purpose: slowing the flow of illegal 
contributions — sometimes seven-figure checks — to political parties. But by 
the time the last vote is counted, a record $3.9 billion will have been 
showered on this year's campaigns for president and Congress, delivered 
through diverted means. 

That number, projected last Thursday by the Center for Responsive Politics, 
a non-partisan monitoring group, is up 30% from four years ago. And that's 
conservative. Lax disclosure rules mask the scale of special-interest 
involvement. 

What are beleaguered taxpayers to do? No doubt, they'll pay plenty when the 
recipients of that cash repay with government largesse. 

Putting more dams in the river isn't going to help. Donors intent on buying 
influence can always find new legal channels. Candidates, lacking any other 
way to make their campaigns competitive, will take what's offered. In fact, 
they're forced to grovel for it. 

There is a better option: Give honest candidates an alternative and, at the 
same time, expose the gifts taken by the rest. 

Four states — Maine, Arizona, Vermont and North Carolina — already are 
offering the “clean money” option of public financing to candidates for some 
state offices. New Jersey will launch a similar program next year, and New 
Mexico in 2006. 

This works. In Maine, where the movement started, nearly 80% of this year's 
legislature candidates rejected private money. 

Defenders of the status quo deride public financing as welfare for politicians. 
Catchy. But also hooey. Even the highest estimate of the cost of Maine-style 
public financing at the federal level is only $10 per taxpayer — trivial 
compared with the cost of payoffs to special interests. 

As for disclosure, the current system is a carefully constructed mirage. 
All contributions over $200 to presidential and congressional candidates and 
national party committees must be disclosed. But reporting runs weeks or 
months late. Voters may not find out until after an election. Further, many 
non-profit groups with their own parallel campaigns don't have to report at all. 
"The states' approach also avoids the problem inherent in all attempts to limit 
political donations: They undercut free speech. 

Donations often pay for campaign commercials by candidates or independent 
groups. Can any government arbiter be trusted to say who can speak and 
how loudly — particularly if that speech is unpopular? Certainly not the 
Federal Election Commission, which tries to do the job now. Virtually every 
independent political observer agrees that its members are chosen by 
Congress to be ineffective. And if they were effective, free-speech problems 
would quickly sprout. 

Giving candidates a chance to be honest and voters a way to watch the rest 
is a better option. It won't stop the flood of corrupt money. No system can. 
But it would protect voters and taxpayers far better than the patchwork 
system of levees in place now. 


OUCH! is a regular e-mail bulletin on how private money in politics hurts 
average citizens, published by Public Campaign, a non-partisan, non-profit 
organization devoted to comprehensive campaign finance reform. Every day, 
we pay more as consumers and taxpayers for special interest subsidies and 
boondoggles because of our system of privately financed elections. It's time 
for a change. 

You can also help support our work by making a credit card contribution on 
our website. This bulletin may be reposted to newsgroups as long as it is 
printed in its entirety.


If you received this message from a friend, you can sign up for Public 
Campaign:  http://ga3.org/publicampaign/join.html?r=5daGQA11AjYhE

-----


-- 
You are currently on Mha Atma's Earth Action Network email list, option D 
(up to 3 emails/day).  To be removed, or to switch options (option A - 
1x/week, option B - 3/wk, option C - up to 1x/day, option D - up to 3x/day) 
please reply and let us know!  If someone forwarded you this email and you 
want to be on our list, send an email to ean at sbcglobal.net and tell us which 
option you'd like.



Action is the antidote to despair.  ----Joan Baez
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20041029/41d56668/attachment.htm