-Caveat Lector- Subject: Campaign Finance Crossroads Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2001 22:41:28 -0600 (CST) Please take a moment to read the following editorial on campaign finance reform that appeared in The New York Times. March 7, 2001 Campaign Finance Crossroads In 10 days the Senate will enter a period of maximum opportunity for campaign finance reform. At long last there is to be a full debate, free of filibuster threats, on the McCain-Feingold bill banning soft money and imposing other fund-raising controls. But the debate will also be fraught with peril. Though the bill has long had the full support of Senate Democrats, some of them are suddenly developing misgivings now that its enactment might actually take place. Today we urge all Democrats and Republicans who have supported the bill not to waver or push for amendments that would imperil the best chance in a generation to clean up American politics. Nobody is arguing that the McCain-Feingold bill is perfect or the last word in campaign reform. But by banning the unregulated donations to political parties by corporations, unions and rich individuals, the bill would take a giant step. Soft money has been at the core of most recent fund-raising scandals. You would think memories of the 1996 campaign alone would give any Democrat pause in slowing down the process of reform. There may be something to the argument that Democrats will find it harder than Republicans to adjust to a regimen that requires parties to raise money in smaller amounts from more individuals. But that is no reason to turn against a reform that, by banning gigantic donations to parties, will sharply reduce fund-raising abuses. Until this year, the main tactic of the majority leader, Trent Lott, and other opponents of campaign reform had been to block it with a filibuster. Now that there seem to be 60 votes to cut off debate, the Republicans will try to amend the bill with "poison pill" measures designed to repel the Democrats. One of these, the "paycheck protection" measure, would require members' permission for spending union money on political activities. Offering such an anti-labor provision is designed to drive Democrats away, and Democrats have to stand united to keep the bill free of such disabling amendments. A separate concern is the possibility that some Democrats, not always well intentioned, may try to broaden the bill in the name of reform and, in the process, repel Republican votes. Right now the McCain-Feingold bill has a provision barring independent groups from raising funds from unions and corporations for broadcast ads that mention the name of a candidate two months before an election. Some Democratic senators say they want to go further and impose restrictions on soft money for all political activity by independent groups. Many of these proposals have merit, but their inclusion as amendments might undermine the bill's chances. One of the most sensitive issues facing the Senate is whether, by banning soft money, the bill ought to raise the ceilings on regular "hard money" contributions to the candidates themselves from the level they have been at since 1974. There may be an argument for doing so. But the senators have to be careful not to raise these ceilings in such a wanton way that soft money is effectively legalized by being relabeled. The Senate Democratic leader, Tom Daschle, has been effective in holding the Democrats together for campaign finance reform. Now that victory is within sight, he needs to rally his troops and tell them not to falter. In 1993, the last time there was such an opportunity, some Democrats advised the newly elected president, Bill Clinton, that reform should not be a top priority. It was bad advice, and it ushered in a period of terrible excesses by Democrats and Republicans alike. The coming debate will serve as one of Mr. Daschle's biggest challenges to date. But if he and the Democrats can meet it, they will long be remembered for rising to the occasion and putting the nation's interest first. __________________________________________ This mail is never sent unsolicited. You, or someone on your behalf, has subscribed to receive this information at Straight Talk America. To unsubscribe from Straight Talk America click here: http://www.StraightTalkAmerica.com/team/unsubscribe.cfm?[EMAIL PROTECTED]&securecode=275969 Or click here http://www.StraightTalkAmerica.com/team/settings.cfm to review your subscriptions. Please do not respond to this email. To contact Straight Talk America please click here http://www.StraightTalkAmerica.com/feedback/feedback.cfm . <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om