-
McCain-Feingold: The Battle Begins
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.
The McCain-Feingold bill that just passed in the Senate, is being promoted, in the words of the Associated Press, as "the most sweeping overhaul of campaign finance law in a quarter-century." While historically true, at least in terms of the federal government which has not tackled campaign finance reform since the Federal Election Campaign Acts of the early 1970s, the bill, in substance, does very little to alter the system of legalized bribery by which political candidates get elected. Even with McCain-Feingold, rich and powerful special interests will still be able to invest millions of dollars in elected officials and so, with their contributions, dominate the political process. Still, passage of the bill represents a breakthrough for reform, if for no other reason than it shows the political power that the movement for campaign finance reform now has.
Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell, the point man of the Republican opposition, has long maintained that the American people are bored with campaign finance reform and are satisfied with the current money-based system. The passage of McCain-Feingold proves him wrong. Without public pressure, the Senate would have voted against the bill. A number of Senate Democrats abhor campaign finance reform and would have voted with their Republican allies to defeat it, if opposition to reform was politically viable. But the political climate no longer makes opposition tenable. Democrats and moderate Republicans have to support the bill because of pressure from their constituents.
The bill itself is minimally acceptable. While closing the soft money loophole (huge donations given by corporations, unions, and other special interest groups (ostensibly to support political parties), it raises the amount of hard money (contributions made directly to candidates and parties). Even as you read this, lawyers for both parties are working to find ways to get around the bills prohibitions.
Here are some of the obvious ways special interests will continue to corrupt the political system. First, we can expect an increase in the amount of Political Action Committee money going to candidates for federal election. Expect, also, an increase in the increase the number of PACs as special interest groups create additional vehicles to deliver their money.
Though banning soft money, McCain-Feingold doubles the amount of hard money, from $1,000 to $2,000, that individuals can invest in politicians and raises the aggregate limit they can give to politicians and parties from $25,000 to $37,500. In reality, the limit is doubled per couple and increased even more when the parents give money in their childrens name, already a common practice.
Hard money contributions invite "bundling," a system where a corporation will collect the $2000 checks from executives and their spouses and children and bundle them so that the candidate knows they come from the corporations. A study by Public Campaign (
Even this underestimates the influence of large contributors. Most big contributors leverage their influence by giving money to candidates of both parties. There is an implicit threat with each proffered gift. "If a legislator doesnt do the interest groups bidding, the contribution can be withdrawn for the next election cycle, with more money going to the legislators opponent.
Now the ball is in George W. Bushs court. Hes consistently spoken out against McCain-Feingold but is obviously afraid of John McCains stature, not to mention his famous anger. Had McCain enough money to compete with Bush on a level playing-field in the Republican presidential primary, he, not Bush, would likely have been the Republican candidate for President. If Bush signs McCain-Feingold he shows weakness to his rabidly ideological right-wing supporters. If he opposes it, he emboldens McCains increasingly assertive "Bull Moose" challenge.
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email






