For Cleaner Elections

Congress has an opportunity this fall to correct a cancerous flaw in our political system, as it debates the Shays-Meehan and McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bills. As of late last night, several dangerous amendments to the House bill had been killed, and the bill appeared to be headed towards passage. As unregulated donations continue to flow into party coffers for the 2000 elections, it is vital that the members of Congress resist the obstructionist tactics of the GOP leadership and prevent the political process from becoming a system of legalized bribery.

The U.S. has been trying to limit the influence of big donors in political campaigns since 1907, when corporations were first prohibited from giving money to candidates. Post-Watergate reforms attempted to place hard dollar limits and disclosure requirements on how much corporations or political-action committees could contribute to individual campaigns. But a loophole in the reform laws allowed unregulated, unlimited "soft money" donations to flow into political parties, where it was then effectively used to support individual candidates.

First employed by the Bush and Dukakis campaigns in 1988, the soft money loophole has become a dominant force in the political process; in the last presidential election, donors flooded $260 million in soft money into both political parties. Corporations, unions and foreign entities that were all otherwise barred from donating money were able to sneak donations into the parties' pockets. The bills before the House this fall would plug the soft-money loophole, mandating that soft money would fall under the same regulations and restrictions as the money that is donated to individual campaigns.

Perhaps more concerning than the soft-money loophole in the election process is the emergence of so-called "issue ads"--advertisements clearly intended to sway an election which claim merely to discuss political issues and evade current laws by eschewing the magic words "vote for" or "vote against." Since they are also insufficiently regulated, as much as $275 million was spent on these advertisements in the 1998 Congressional elections. The Shays-Meehan bill would also extend current spending limits and disclosure requirements to the organizations that air these advertisements in the last 60 days before an election. While some criticize these restrictions as unconstitutional, the Supreme Court has already set wise limits on campaign reform laws that protect the interests of free speech while allowing Congress to stem widespread corruption.

The constant flow of cash into the political system, and the accompanying exchange of favors, influence, and access, reduces the political importance of those who cannot afford large donations and makes a mockery of the principle of "one man, one vote." Special interests would not give so much money if they did not feel they received benefits in return; companies in various industries, from tobacco to gambling to oil and mining interests, have received favorable treatment from legislators following their campaign donations.

However, one hopeful sign in the system is that extortion can work both ways. Corporations that are often pictured as the corruptors of innocent pols are now complaining that they have been pressured to give with threats of adverse regulations, and many of them are tired of the shakedowns that accompany each election cycle. The Committee for Economic Development (CED), a group of powerful business and educational leaders, has called on Congress to pass the Shays-Meehan bill. The response was a threatening letter by Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Tenn.), the GOP's anti-reform attack dog in the Senate, recommending that the CED's members publicly disclaim the report.

The Republican leadership, which currently controlls Congress, has consistently thrown roadblocks in the path of campaign finance reform. Last year, the Shays-Meehan bill passed the House but was blocked in the Senate by a Republican filibuster. Yet the House debate has finally arrived, and the Senate is scheduled to consider its version, sponsored by Sens. John S. McCain (R-Ariz.) and Russell D. Feingold (D-Wisc.) later this fall. After so much talk and so many failed promises, it is high time that Congress reject the potential for corruption in the current system and cast a vote for reform.