From the Political Taoist: Two days after the Supreme Court
indirectly overturned the McCain-Feingold Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act on First Amendment grounds, by instructing the trial court to exempt issue advocacy ads, Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) is proposing
new ideas on lobbying reform.
I know that Senator Feingold is the "belle of the ball" for Progressives because of his principled stand against the Patriot Act, NSA wiretapping, the Iraq War and (belatedly) Judge Alito. But this does not make Feingold our "man for all seasons," and after the damage caused by the disastrous, but well meaning McCain-Feingold Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (later combined with the Shays-Meehan Bill to become law), we should keep him away from campaign finance issues (I am for campaign reform because of the influence of money on our government, but, as explained below, "reform" at the sole expense of Democrats is not reform).
Two days after the Supreme Court
indirectly overturned the McCain-Feingold Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act on First Amendment grounds, by instructing the trial court to exempt issue advocacy ads, Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) is proposing new ideas on lobbying reform.
I know that Senator Feingold is the "belle of the ball" for Progressives because of his principled stand against the Patriot Act, NSA wiretapping, the Iraq War and (belatedly) Judge Alito (Feingold supported Robert's confirmation). But this does not make Feingold our "man for all seasons" and we should keep him away from campaign finance issues (notwithstanding his personal-life problems, such as his second divorce, that could create a real liablity in the 2008 Presidential race).
Please hear me out on this. Russ Feingold was the co-author of the famous McCain-Feingold Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (later combined with the Shays-Meehan Bill to become law).
while it may have been a well meaning experiment, no law has been more harmful to Democrats and the Democratic Cause. As a result of this bill:
- Unions, Democratic Clubs and Progressive issue organizations may no longer communicate or coordinate with campaigns during a year ANY federal office is on the ballot, not even on voter registration (thus hamstringing the precinct-run, traditional field-oriented coordinated campaigns that Democrats ran so effectively in the past).
- Individual donation limits are increased but organizations were restricted.
- Grassroots organizing on the party level was forbidden because it imposed personal and criminal liability on party leaders for the actions of any suborganization, no matter how remote.
- First Amendment rights were restricted forbidding any mention of party or candidates except by parties and campaigns during the run-up to elections.
The California Democratic Party had fits dealing with this, as did other state parties and the DNC because it essentially banned the basic structure around which Democratic campaigns have been run for over 50 years.
The states such as Illinois and Pennsylvania were able to adapt because their precinct systems were run by county parties that were already independent. But other states were not so lucky.
The California Democratic Party had "Assembly District Committees" of grassroots activists (some active, some not) that were ideally positioned, because of their relationship with local Dem Clubs and unions, to fundraise and run local operations. However, McCain-Feingold changed all of that. As a result of the above issues, the Party had to eliminate these groups from the party structure because they could no longer have the liability of having 80 party committees running around violating McCain-Feingold by doing the things that campaigns normally do, such as working with candidates, working precincts for Federal candidates, registering voters and organizing campaign communications. Yes, that's right, under McCain-Feingold, unless a 527, Party or candidate did these independently (without communication or coordination), it imposed criminal and personal liability of $10,000 per incident.
Remember how 527s stumbled over each other this year hitting the same voters because they could not coordinate with the party? That was the result of McCain-Feingold.
Republicans, who run centralized campaigns with independent groups (such as the Christian Coalition) and large individual donors did not have these problems. This bill was built to screw Democrats and our own Senator Feingold led the charge, sacrificing the 2004 election for an experiment gone very bad. If we have three people to blame for 2004, it was Kerry, Shrum and Feingold.
I am for campaign reform because of the influence of money on our government, but "reform" at the sole expense of Democrats is not reform.
Please, Senator Feingold, we love your principled stands on our personal freedoms, but stay away from campaign finance for our own sake.