Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : THE 2004 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: calgal who wrote (1336)	2/18/2004 12:10:12 AM
From: calgal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2164

Campaign Finance Follies Democrats owe Bradley Smith an apology. Wednesday, February 18, 2004 12:01 a.m. EST Democrats in Congress owe Federal Election Commission Chairman Bradley Smith an apology. The man they once called "Dracula" and tried to banish from Washington may now save their ability to keep raising millions of dollars in "soft money" to defeat President Bush this November. And properly so. The FEC meets today to consider whether to rein in the nation's newest political fund-raising machines, known in Beltway parlance as "527s" (after a section in the IRS code). The 2002 campaign-finance "reform" has handcuffed political parties, so these groups have become everyone's favorite new outlet for raising unlimited cash for advertising and political activities. Liberal activists have exploited the 527 trend first, with George Soros and other high rollers pledging millions to a network of groups that amounts to a shadow Democratic Party. All of which has made for some amusing, and embarrassing, reversals of principle. Democrats such as Nancy Pelosi, who for years have denounced the "corruption" of large political contributions, have suddenly discovered an intimate connection between financial donations and free speech. Liberal pundits who have devoted careers to taking dictation from Common Cause by denouncing fat cat donors are suddenly mum about 527s. Republicans are hardly any better. After staking a claim for free speech as they fought McCain-Feingold over the years, the Republican National Committee is now suddenly urging the FEC to regulate the 527s as if they were political parties. GOP lawyers are endorsing a draft opinion by the FEC general counsel that advocates doing precisely that. This hypocrisy might help them during this election cycle, but sooner or later Republicans might well need their own 527s. About the only honorable man in this political bordello is Mr. Smith. A Republican appointee and long-time proponent of free speech, the FEC Chairman is sticking to his long-held beliefs, arguing that the groups should be allowed to continue to raise and spend "soft money." Mr. Smith's views raise the chances that the six-person FEC will do the right thing. As it should, under the law. Apart from the larger issue of regulating political speech, the McCain-Feingold ban on soft money was expressly directed at political parties. That law makes no mention of the money-raising activities of interest groups, and nothing in last year's Supreme Court decision upholding that law changed that. The FEC has no authority to set a new standard for speech by interest groups, especially given that Congress has explicitly chosen not to do so. The supreme irony in all this is that Mr. Smith's consistency has suddenly made him the darling of every pro-Democrat organization in Washington. No fewer than 324 liberal groups have warned the FEC not to restrict 527s, including Ralph Neas's People for the American Way, the abortion rights lobby and the Sierra Club. Many of these groups not only supported campaign finance reform but also tried to block Mr. Smith's nomination to the FEC in 2000. At the time Mr. Smith was variously denounced as a "nihilist" (Illinois Senator Dick Durbin), a throwback to "the dark days of Watergate" (Common Cause), and a "flat-earth society poobah" (Atlanta Constitution, where they need fresher metaphors). Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle was quoted at the time saying that giving Mr. Smith the job was "not just asking the fox to guard the chicken coop," but "inviting the fox inside and locking the door behind him." Apparently these worthies are only in favor of regulating free speech when the speakers at issue are their political opponents. If nothing else, this 527 hypocrisy is helping to expose the folly of "campaign-finance reform." Far from banishing money from politics, McCain-Feingold has merely moved it out of the major parties and into the political shadows where it is less accountable. Howard Dean learned this the hard way during the recent Iowa caucuses, where he found himself pounded by TV ads sponsored by a mysterious 527 calling itself Americans for Jobs, Health Care and Progressive Values. The ads took the bark off the Vermont governor and certainly contributed to his defeat. At the time voters speculated that the group was allied with Dick Gephardt, but only recently have we all learned that one of the men behind that 527 was none other than former New Jersey Senator Robert Torricelli, who just so happens to be a fund-raiser for John Kerry, his old Senate pal. Readers may recall that Mr. Torricelli was run out of the Senate for his fund-raising misdeeds. The answer to this isn't for reformers to chase their tails with ever more fund-raising rules. The solution consistent with political accountability and American traditions is to let everyone contribute whatever they want, subject only to immediate disclosure on the Internet. Of course this is what Mr. Smith has been trying to tell them all along. URL:http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110004708