-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
