You Play, Obama Wins!

I didn;t mean to imply that the donation was speech (though others have including at least two Justices) but that there is no way to limit the rich person from spending whatever he wants. Buckley concedes that. As configured, the whole system ultimatly could revert to only the wealthy running in my opinion. And pity the poor soul that relies on matching funds.

On buckley,

“However, the limitations on campaign expenditures, on independent expenditures by individuals and groups, and on expenditures by a candidate from his personal funds were found to be constitutionally infirm in that they placed severe restrictions on protected expression and association, yet lacked any compelling countervailing government interest necessary to sustain them.”
from wiki

That analysis pretty much says you can limit donations of property but you can’t limit spending of that property to exercise speech. That is where 527s and uber-rich candidates live.

It’s a real shame that Buckley (and campaign finance reform generally) produces the likes of Steve Forbes, Bloomberg, Perot, Romney (you see the trend$$) running for President. It also encourages abusive use of 527s. I think the rich guys have a right to use their dough to campaign. THough I realize i’m more Libertarian on this point than progressive, I just think that is what the constitution lays out as consequence.

I like Obama for one of the reasons he states. WE can get a message out, we can fund, we can put our money where our mouth is. The problem is not that the most money can win and drown out the message of the underfunded, the problem is the message of the people has never been able to galvanize into a wealth primary to compete against the first amendment of intersted parties including the rich guy and their wink wink 527s.

Obama has awakened the grassroots such that a rich guy would realize he could end the campaign a broke loser going against the collective resources of the “yes we can” people and their meager donations.

Romney learned this with the “least funded” Huckabee basically destroying his ability to go one on one. While I don;t like Huckabee I admire his David vs Goliath determination in the process. We overvalue the ability to “buy” the election. McCain too was just about broke heading to New Hampshire.

So far from being dismayed by the issue, I am actually encouraged that a half million Obama grassroots Davids can so easily deal with Goliaths like the Clintons.

Obama can beat MCCain with matching funds but I hope he chooses not to go that way.

Additionally, on a practical level I think Obama opens himself up for a big hit if he backs away from public financing now, both from McCain and the media. After generally positive coverage the media in particular is chomping at the bit for something to pounce on, something that runs contrary to his message, and this could fit the bill. Then again, maybe I’m overstating the importance of this issue and no one will fault him for raising as much as he can.

Thanks as always for reading the site (and for keeping it grounded in political reality).

Based on this singular move, I would advise Barack Obama not take the public funding to fight John McCain in November. McCain’s offer were not completely genuine but as a result of his fundraising incapability and an effort to curtail his opponent’s strengths.

Taking public funding would be rewarding John McCain for being disingenuous. The democratic nominee should give away the election to the republicans by tying his/her hands while the other party could boast of innumerable 527s and Swiftboaters.

What do you think?

If Barack and John McCain could come to some kind of enforceable agreement to ban or limit 527 spending on both sides and limit the spending by both party committees (at the moment the RNC has more money in the bank than the DNC, and has had for the past year or so, I understand) then this would be a good thing and create a fair and equal playing field without the taint of any special interest money.

Baring that however, I don’t think that Obama should unilaterally disarm for the sake of a principle that John McCain is busily violating his own self. It seems that he’s trying to get out of the public financing committment he made for the Republican primaries (because he needed the money….) now that he’s the probable nominee and wants to access the full power of the Republican fund raising machine to begin campaigning against the Democratic nominee (Barack?) now and up until the convention. It seems that Senator McCain is already violating the spirit of the pledge by trying to game the system now for his own political financial advantage. I don’t see that the Barack’s pledge is necessarily operable if McCain seems to have only a convenient and opportunistic commitment to public financing himself.

And I think a case can be made that Barack Obama has done campaign finance reform from the ground up. He’s just about to reach the 1 million donor mark, made up, to a signifigant degree, of small donors like myself giving 25 or 50 dollars when I can. That’s a kind of organic, democratizing and empowering campaign finance reform that John McCain can only dream of.

As long as there an attack machine with access to unlimited and unregulated funds that can be used to supplement whatever John McCain and Barack Obama are allowed to spend directly, then I think we have to recognize that we are engaging in more than a high minded civics lesson, we engaged in a power stuggle the likes of which this country may have never seen. We are trying (lest we forget) to elect the first black President of the United States. There will be a p0werful and well funded wall of resistance to that once we get to the general election, and we will need every dime we can to overpower it.

As for the donor base, I agree that the grassroots support Sen. Obama has built is crucial, but I don’t think accepting matching funds boxes those supporters out of the process. There is still plenty of work to be done and ways to get involved. Money can also still be raised under the guidelines, and the government will match up to $250 per donation. The limit is on how that money can be spent, as I understand it.

I share your concerns about attack response capacity, and think the 527 loophole must eventually be closed. But if both candidates are committed to the system and publicly and vociferously condemn 527s, which I don’t think is out of the question, I believe it could work this time around.

Thanks again for your comment and for reading the site.

It’s a mistake to limit your ability to respond to this especially when Obama has sounded similar clean campaign refrains on 527 as well. No response to swiftboating, cocaine use and muslim manchurian nonsense is not what I want to see happen. (at one stage in this campaign about 10% of people thought Obama was a muslim for example). Not sure about the Manchurian part though. LOL

Personally I think the number of small (and very small) donors to Obama are left out if he accepts Federal matching. The Obama campaign is truly a historical grassroots acheivement in fundraising. That fundraising reflects the voice of the people moreso than an agreement to take FMF.

Look, I want a good President not promising “more wars” and 100 years in Iraq. And using my donation as well as countless like me who have contributed small amounts gets that done that is what I want to see happen.

If there were no 527 wave coming (and it most certainly is with McCain’s own limitations in funds) I’d say go for it. But just today there is an article about McCain backing out of matching in the primaries and being warned by the FEC. He’s already a hypcorite on the issue so I doubt he can take the reformer mantle on this issue. I think its unfortunate Obama made a promise when he had no idea that the people want to give him enough to campaign on a level playing field which includes his personal responses to 527 attacks. I sure hope that is his view becuase its mine.

Unfortunatley at this stage of the game in national politics the dream of running a level playing field campaign that would allow all to participate with the same basic resources is wishful thinking. I also think its problematic from a first amendment point of view to limit some rich person (and we have seen a lot of them) with enough resources to finance their message. Call me libertarian on this point but its how I see it.

A law limiting the first amendment is like killing the patient to cure the disease. I mean after all its the first amendment for a reason. So I have donated to Obama in hopes that the first amendment message he carriers can be heard regardless of the wave that comes against him.

In my opijnion once a 527 hits Obama should send out a fundraising request. I’ll send what I can to stop the madness that the current system allows and in fact encourages. Because accepting matching doesn;t change this reality but limits the ability to respond to it, it would be a big mistake to take it.

I for one will be glad he did not.