Assets and Liabilities for McCain-Feingold
Here's a pretty old legacy post from the blog archives of Geekery Today; it was written about 23 years ago, in 2001, on the World Wide Web.
The Money Jungle by William Saletan is an interesting analysis of some of the pitfalls for the coalition over McCain-Feingold. This was particularly perceptive:
McCain imposes disclosure requirements on interest groups that run ads against candidates close to an election. He portrays these groups as constitutionally protected but insidious. In his worldview, citizens are on one side, and special interests are on the other. McCain’s chief antagonist, Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., sees it differently.
My favorite definition ofMcConnell quipped during Monday’s debate. McConnell offers a kinder term for organizations whose missions he favors:special interestis a group [that’s] against what I am trying to do,citizens’ groups.
It’s worth pointing out in this context that currently the biggest PAC in American politics is not the National Rifle Association or incumbents’ re-election PACs. It’s EMILY’s List, a PAC focused on electing more women to office. Not exactly my idea of a malignant special interest.
But, on the other hand, this presumes that the only thing that citizens’ groups have to offer is money for campaign contributions or interest ads. This is most of what they do today, but that’s only because money is so powerful in modern campaigning. An organized group of citizens has something besides money behind them: they have votes. And, geeze, isn’t that what democracy is supposed to be about? Part of the point of changing the campaign finance system is to make it so that citizens’ groups no longer compete for the amount of money they can organize, but rather the number of, well, citizens.