(Cross Posted at Whatif?)
When John McCain and George W. Bush were vying for their party’s nomination, I was a McCain fan. How could a person not be impressed by the man who refused to leave Vietnam’s prison camp to stand by his men?
As time has progressed, however, my admiration for McCain lessened. The biggest wound to my opinion of the man was McCain-Feingold. The notion that like-minded people are prevented from pooling their money and expressing themselves about political candidates has always struck me as a clear violation of our free speech rights. No arguments I have ever seen have even mildly dissuaded me from this belief.
Just in the last few days, I had some discussion with those who are strongly in favor of governmentally funded campaign financing. I argued that those with power and money will always find a way to influence politics; the best we can do is to insure that there is full and immediate disclosure as to where funds originate.
My friends responded that “no one pays attention to this”. There may well be truth in this statement. But I argued back that those who pay little or no attention are those who will be voting for someone because they are cute and charismatic, or because of some 10 second soundbite they saw in the middle of a reality show.
I then asked my friends about government financing. “Who gets the money? How much? When do you judge that others are ineligible for funding? What are the caps, and how do you determine them?” And so forth. This was met with: “We have discussed this before, and we will not change one another’s minds, so I am ending the conversation now.” How convenient. Questions are asked that cannot be answered – so the discussion stops.
Well, the discussion is not stopping for McCain now. With wealthy opposition, McCain is growling about his competitor who can self-fund as McCain cannot.
Money finds its way into the process no matter how many artificial barriers get imposed and artificial categories created for it. Americans express their support by their pocketbook — and they turn to other mechanisms when thwarted in efforts to directly support candidates. That accounts for the rise of 527s and their mostly-negative impact on national politics.
Now the author of the BCRA wants to complain about running against a candidate who self-funds. John McCain can’t have it both ways. If he dislikes the wealthy who have to spend their own money to challenge the power system, then get rid of the Byzantine mess that his McCain-Feingold bill has created — and its attendant insults to the First Amendment.
Is McCain being hoist by his own petard? Perhaps. We could find joy in a bit of universal justice at this spectacle. Instead, I would prefer to see this ransacking of our free speech rights simply killed and given the funeral it so richly deserves.
Yeah, I hear ya’.
I’ve been curious about something over the last few days and was hoping if you didn’t mind sharing your opinion with me.
You stated you were for Rudy. So does Rudy endorsing McCain have any weight at all? Do you think that the majority of Rudy fans will now look upon McCain with easy eyes?
Also, McCain-Feingold rubs a lot of people the wrong way and is clearly the first bullet fired at McCain at all opportunities. Another thing that which bothered me is that a lot of these same people giving McCain a lot of grief over that were supporting Thompson. Some people here on this blog even admitted to giving Thompson money. Which is strange to me because Thompson supported McCain-Feingold.
Any thoughts on this?
Cheers.
Rudy endorsing McCain is a small plus for me. Nevertheless, if I had strong feelings for Romney (which I do not) – the endorsement would be irrelevant.
More and more, it appears as if McCain will be the Republican candidate. Although, as I mentioned, I find serious flaws with McCain as president – every one pales in contrast to either potential Democrat candidate. HRC would be horrible beyond words. An Obama presidency would have some plusses – but so many of his policies are terrifically far removed from what I believe – so – neither individual is a choice for me.
McCain does have his strengths, and, he will get my vote. I will not be voting, however, with the relish and good cheer that a Giuliani nomination would have engendered.
As for your last point – Thompson in favor of McCain-Feingold… all I can say is “people are not rational nor entirely consistent when it comes to politics”! And – that is an understatement
“people are not rational nor entirely consistent when it comes to politics”
Pogue is one person who you will not have to convince of that!
Fred pretty much admitted that certain parts of McCain-Feingold were a mistake:
Not exactly a repudiation of McCain-Feingold (a bill which he championed), but at least an acknowledgment that the bill had nasty unintended consequences. McCain on the other hand has never admitted to one problem with the bill, nor to the Constitutional problems with restricting political speech.
That’s just one aspect of supporting Fred over McCain. Fred’s biggest attraction was his solid support for federalism — i.e. moving power out of DC and back to the states. He consistently argued that the federal government should not be in the business of regulating people’s personal affairs. John McCain does not think this way at all.
IOW, Fred’s support for McCain-Feingold was problematic, but not insurmountable. If McCain could admit to problems with his legislation, and if he staked out other positions similar to Fred (e.g. immigration, taxes, federal regulation, etc.), then his campaign finance reform would not be as big of a deal.
Pingback: A Second Hand Conjecture » The Left and John McCain