I was contemplating writing a bit about Howard Dean's decision to skip public financing for his campaign, about how it would be nice if he had made the decision on moral instead of strategic reasons. But lo and behold, Real Campaign Finance.org sent out a message this morning from Steve Dasbach that says pretty much the same thing.
Howard Dean has decided to forgo federal matching funds and
run his primary campaign with political welfare courtesy of
the taxpayers. Good for him.
It would be great if this were a decision of principle, if
Gov. Dean had belatedly recognized the immorality of taxing
Americans to finance his presidential aspirations. Alas, it
appears to merely be another example of Dean's political
opportunism.
[...]
Of course, Bush's decision to forgo federal funds was no
more principled than Dean's. Like Dean, Bush still plans to
take nearly $80 million from the taxpayers to run his
campaign in the fall, and both of their respective
political parties will receive an additional $15 million or
so to stage 4-day campaign infomercials, otherwise known as
the national conventions.
Even without Bush and Dean feeding at the public trough
during the primaries, the public financing system is in
deep trouble. Estimates are that by 2008, there won't be
enough money in the system to take care of all the
political welfare kings and queens that can't compete in
fundraising with the likes of Bush and Dean and are
perfectly happy to let the taxpayers help foot the bill for
their presidential ego trips.
As an added bonus, Dasbach goes on to explain how current campaign finance laws make it difficult to run upstart campaigns:
The truth is, the entire campaign finance system, from
public funding to contribution limits, is designed to
protect incumbents and frustrate challengers, especially
those who dare to bypass the Democratic and Republican
parties. It's not a coincidence that Congressional
reelection rates are 98.5% and climbing -- it's the law.
The traditional method to launch an insurgent, challenger
campaign was for the candidate to raise seed money from a
few individuals, in very large amounts, based on shared
positions on issues or personal relationships. For example,
Eugene McCarthy raised a few million dollars from a handful
of people opposed to the war in Vietnam to launch his 1968
insurgent presidential campaign. His strong showing in the
New Hampshire primary led to President Johnson's decision
to not seek reelection and paved the way for Robert
Kennedy's entry into the race.
That method of launching a campaign is illegal under
today's campaign finance laws, leaving personal wealth as
the only remaining loophole.
Emphasis mine. I can't stress it enough. The people who thought campaign finance limits would level the playing field and take 'big money' out of politics were duped. The restrictions have done exactly the opposite.
I should add that Libertarian Harry Browne was the first presidential candidate to turn down federal matching funds. He did it for moral reasons, as he sorely needed the cash for his campaign. Not that the voters noticed or cared.
Posted by Walter at November 15, 2003 09:04 AM