The rush toward campaign finance reform continues to pick up
momentum. People want to purge money from politics. That's a little
like asking to take the grinder out of the sausage factory. The
whole thing is about money.
The Federal government will spend around 1.7 trillion dollars this
year. How the money gets spent is in the hands of roughly 536
people-our elected Senators, Representatives and President.
The reformers want the people, not special interests, to influence
how that money gets spent. That's the appeal of banning "soft
money," the money spent by the political parties and donated by the
special interests.
One snag with this plan is that it may conflict with the First
Amendment. But even ignoring the Constitution, will a ban on soft
money increase the power of the people?
It will enhance the power of incumbents. Incumbents don't need money
to generate name recognition and publicity. They already have it.
If soft money isn't available to be spent on behalf of new
candidates, incumbents' seats become even safer. Without the threat
of a well-financed challenger, incumbents won't have to be as
responsive to the electorate.
But the real problem is those pesky special interests. If soft money
is banned, do you think they'll stop trying to influence policy? With
almost 2 trillion dollars to be spent and countless regulations to be
written, do you think those lobbyists and industry groups and unions
are going to shrug, fold their tents and disappear?
If the special interests can't donate soft money, they'll still find
ways to influence government. Under Gore's proposal, lobbying groups
will still be able to make so-called independent expenditures on
issues they care about.
They'll also find ways to influence policy that are harder to detect.
They'll befriend legislative aides and staffers with gifts and
favors. They'll try to position friends and allies as delegates and
party officials. When $1.7 trillion dollars is up for grabs, special
interests will work awfully hard to have a say in how it's spent.
In a world without soft money, the influence of the special interests
won't be eliminated, just further removed from scrutiny and
accountability. Instead of trying to sweep special interests under
the rug, let's keep their impact out in the open. Let money flow
freely and openly. Eliminate the limits on hard money, the direct
contributions to candidates, and post all contributions on the
Internet.
Letting money flow freely creates more challengers to incumbents.
That means more choice for the voters and more competition within the
political parties. Letting it flow openly gives the voters a chance
to judge whether a politician is in the pocket of special interests.
More choice and more information enhances the power of the ballot
box. That's the best way to give power to the people.