Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

McCain-Feingold, RIP (Thank God)
Wall Street Journal ^ | 12/04/02 | Un-identified editor

Posted on 12/04/2002 10:43:26 PM PST by Pliney the younger

In force for less than a month, campaign finance is already dead.

It must be a democratic land speed record. In force for less than a month, the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform is already being declared a failure--by the same people who labored for years to pass it.

So while money will still be raised and surely spent, all the reformers have accomplished is to make it harder for the media to track it and keep voters informed about its sources. Like the Prohibitionists, they are merely pushing the money into the shadows.

But we hardly need to wait for the Justices to tell us that McCain-Feingold is folly. The bill's own supporters are already disowning it, and before the ink of President Bush's signature is even dry.

(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: cfrlist; financereform; finegold; mccain
My Dear Friends,

The Leftist press outlets have been fanatical to create a campaign finance Reform bill. Their goal was to take away the Republicans’ advantage in fund raising.

All that they succeeded in doing was to create a new hidden political finance system, with an untraceable money trail. The leftist press created a monster system which is a dozen times worse, and a dozen times more corrupting than the system it replaced.

When the leftist press learned that President Clinton and the Democrats political campaigns were being subsidized by America’s mortal enemy the Communist Chinese they had no desire to interfere. It was just fine by the leftists.

When hundreds of Union workers complained that monies were being taken out of their paychecks against their will, to support the Democrat party, which they didn’t support. The leftist newsmen not only felt that there was nothing wrong with the system, they felt that since it aided their leftist friends that it was an excellent idea.

But when the American people repeatedly gave more money to the Republicans than to the Democrats, the leftist press demanded that changes be made to help their leftist friends in the Democratic Party (which also serves the secularists as a pseudo-religious sect)

And when groups of Americans expressed their fee speech rights, by raising money and expressing their opinions on topics that the leftists disagreed with, the leftists again decided that Americans freedom of speech must be taken away from them.

To accomplish their goal the leftist press constantly misrepresented the truth. They told the Americans that, unlike Communist Chinese money, money voluntarily given by Americans was a danger to the political process.

To give their proposal the appearance of bipartisanship they got John McCain, the Republican who had betrayed his party by telling his constituents before he was elected that he was a Reagan Republican (over a hundred times) and then voting with the Democrats on every issue. (Mc Cain you might remember was previously discovered to have prostituted his office by using it to support the projects of Keating as he destroyed the life savings of thousands of Americans.

It is interesting how the plans of evil men often end up with consequences, that end up damaging themselves. That is exactly what happened this time.

Better luck next times Buckwheat. Oh I forgot America has had enough of you, and your leftist politicians. And didn’t America just throw them out of control of any branch of the government.

And the next time you decide to try to fool the American people, America’s New Free Press coalition will be there to explain to the nation just how despicable you are.

Well your viewers and subscribers have already deserted you by the millions. There are no reasons millions more shouldn’t leave when they learn that they can’t believe one single thing that you write or say anymore.

Now that is what I call reform!

Always yours,

Pliny the younger

1 posted on 12/04/2002 10:43:26 PM PST by Pliney the younger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Pliney the younger
Very well said. You sound like a veteran FReeper. Welcome aboard.




Step Lively Matey - There be Pirates afoot!
2 posted on 12/04/2002 10:53:34 PM PST by WSGilcrest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pliney the younger
What is even better is that the issue will die with the bill when the bad parts are declared unconstitutional by the Supremes.
3 posted on 12/04/2002 11:09:52 PM PST by patriciaruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pliney the younger
Good analysis of how McLame and others attemped an attack on the First Amendment.

When hundreds of Union workers complained that monies were being taken out of their paychecks against their will, to support the Democrat party, which they didn’t support. The leftist newsmen not only felt that there was nothing wrong with the system, they felt that since it aided their leftist friends that it was an excellent idea.

I have no doubt that what you say about the leftie media whores is true, but was there a specific event that you had in mind when any of them expressed that it was an excellent idea? Just asking.

4 posted on 12/04/2002 11:16:36 PM PST by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pliney the younger
I agree with everything in the article, except the part about "Bush's misguided signature".

The writer apparently does not give him credit for sending this mess to the courts. It has been bandied about as a political issue by the dems for 12 years. Enough is enough.

WSJ is still on the learning curve about "mis-underestimating" President Bush.

5 posted on 12/04/2002 11:21:30 PM PST by Cold Heat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pliney the younger
John McCain, the Sisyphus of reform

A perfect metaphor for McLame. His conduct in the Theatre of the Absurd, aka the Senate, would make Camus proud.

6 posted on 12/05/2002 12:11:44 AM PST by Maedhros
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wirestripper
The writer apparently does not give him credit for sending this mess to the courts. It has been bandied about as a political issue by the dems for 12 years. Enough is enough.

WSJ is still on the learning curve about "mis-underestimating" President Bush. Passing the bill so that it can shot down in the courts is a piss poor excuse for dubya signing it. What if it isn't declared unconstitutional? The president has a responsibility to veto unconstitutional legislation. No Excuses!

7 posted on 12/05/2002 12:52:28 AM PST by rmmcdaniell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: patriciaruth
Ohhh, the issue won't die as long as there is a percieved benefit to the left in arguing about it, call it "Keep Hope Alive" if you will.

The left will merely claim that the Supremes who knock it down are Evil Republican Appointed justices, and the fact that they struck it down is proof positive that more "reform" is needed.

Nope. As sick as I am of hearing about campaign finance reform, I'm resigned to hear about it forever.

8 posted on 12/05/2002 1:32:01 AM PST by biggerten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rmmcdaniell
Passing the bill so that it can shot down in the courts is a piss poor excuse for dubya signing it. What if it isn't declared unconstitutional? The president has a responsibility to veto unconstitutional legislation. No Excuses!

Bump to your response, with one minor addition. It is far moer likely that SCOTUS would refuse to hear it (they review lesss than 1% of the cases presented to them), making it permanent. Bush was foolish to sign it.

9 posted on 12/05/2002 2:30:29 AM PST by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: biggerten
From the article:

All of this was entirely predictable; in fact it's an eerie repetition of what happened after the post-Watergate campaign reform of 1974. Business and labor PACs proliferated, as did millionaire candidates, who could spend as much of their own money as they wanted. The courts upheld some spending limits but struck down others, creating a maze of new loopholes. A main author of that reform, Fred Wertheimer, is still whispering into John McCain's ear today that if only we can pass one more . . . The poor Senator is now his personal Sancho Panza.

10 posted on 12/05/2002 2:33:23 AM PST by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Pliney the younger
all we ever needed was quick disclosure, and no personal limits, something the reformers fear
11 posted on 12/05/2002 2:34:51 AM PST by The Wizard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pliney the younger
Welcome aboard!

I've already reqad several excellent posts you have made. I didn't realize you were "new" unless you've been lurking.

12 posted on 12/05/2002 2:43:42 AM PST by Caipirabob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pliney the younger
All that they succeeded in doing was to create a new hidden political finance system, with an untraceable money trail.

What makes you think that, their protestations to the contrary, that that's not exactly what they set out to do?

13 posted on 12/05/2002 3:01:26 AM PST by metesky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pliney the younger
Good article, good essay, and welcome! Your VRWC membership card is in the mail.
14 posted on 12/05/2002 3:27:24 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pliney the younger
I heard John Kerry this morning on Imus say that "ALL money must be taken out of politics".

As I suspected, M-F was just a salami slice. Typical for Government: prescribe a solution, declare immediately that the solution failed, as a pretext for an even more onerous "solution".
15 posted on 12/05/2002 5:55:43 AM PST by Guillermo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Guillermo
"All money must be taken out of politics."

Then, you first, dude.
16 posted on 12/05/2002 5:58:21 AM PST by lavrenti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: *CFR List
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list
17 posted on 12/05/2002 7:02:26 AM PST by Free the USA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Guillermo
Hey, if I had Kerry's bank account, I'd push for restrictions on my competition's ability to raise money too. I'm sure he'd like nothing better than to have politics be a game where only candidates who ould finance their own campaigns personally would have a chance. Under a system like that, Mr. Ketchup would win hands down.
18 posted on 12/05/2002 7:08:02 AM PST by Media Insurgent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: The Wizard
I even struggle with quick disclosure, since payback from political rivals would cause a problem. Like releasing tax returns, I almost believe it should be up to the individual canidate to decide whether to release the names of their contributors or not.
19 posted on 12/05/2002 7:11:30 AM PST by JohnGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Media Insurgent
When he said "ALL money should be taken out of politics", I don't know if he meant his own.
20 posted on 12/05/2002 7:12:30 AM PST by Guillermo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: rmmcdaniell
The president has a responsibility to veto unconstitutional legislation. No Excuses!
Incorrect. All bills are potentially unconstitutional.
21 posted on 12/05/2002 7:14:52 AM PST by Quicksilver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: patriciaruth
Given the most recent election scenarios with Carnahan, Toricelli and Wellstone there would seem to be no way on earth that the thirty day/sixty day rule could be constitutional or even manageable.

No doubt the media is the biggest loser and the American public is the biggest winner if this bill dies an early death.

22 posted on 12/05/2002 7:41:00 AM PST by OldFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Guillermo
Of course Kerry wasn't referring to his own money. Whenever a liberal wants to restrict someone else's freedom, it is goes without saying that they believe they are the exception. Kerry deserves special treatment, becuause after all- he's smarter, cares more, and has better hair than the rest of us.
23 posted on 12/05/2002 7:42:33 AM PST by Media Insurgent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Pliney the younger
"Special-interest lobbies often demand specific commitments in return for their cash, which can make compromise in government more difficult to achieve."

That is a good thing, in my opinion. "All of this was entirely predictable; in fact it's an eerie repetition of what happened after the post-Watergate campaign reform of 1974. A main author of that reform, Fred Wertheimer, is still whispering into John McCain's ear today that if only we can pass one more . . . The poor Senator is now his personal Sancho Panza."

ROTFLMBO!!!

"But we hardly need to wait for the Justices to tell us that McCain-Feingold is folly. The bill's own supporters are already disowning it, and before the ink of President Bush's misguided signature is even dry."

It's a shame this piece ended this way. What on earth is "misguided" about Bush's signature? He knew McCain-Feingold was a pathetic joke all along. He's been laughing about CFR since the beginning when he informed Congress that he would sign whatever bill they sent to his desk, ie., that he would not pull their fat rear-ends out of the fire for them. I really think that everybody involved, with the possible exception of McCain, knew that whole "campaign reform" exercise was a waste of time.

24 posted on 12/05/2002 7:43:49 AM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wirestripper
It may have been brilliant to send it to the court, but every person that voted for it, and when Bush signed it, they all broke their oaths of office.

If they feel it is unconstitutional, it is their duty to either A: not vote for it, and B: not sign it.

THe courts should not recieve such Blatantly unconstitutional laws, because they should be kicked out in the legislative level, and if not there, then the executive level. Unconstitutional Laws should not exist beyond Congress.
25 posted on 12/05/2002 8:03:20 AM PST by Aric2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Pliney the younger
Campaign Finance Reform is simply a tribute to the cynicism which drove the Clintonian ideology of the past 8 years -- that "law abidance" is interchangeable with "integrity".
26 posted on 12/05/2002 8:29:07 AM PST by Cosmo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pliney the younger
John McCain, the Republican who had betrayed his party by telling his constituents before he was elected that he was a Reagan Republican (over a hundred times) and then voting with the Democrats on every issue.

John McCain, a fraud to the first degree, a traiter to the Republican party his constituents, to the tenth. With the President barely having assumed office, McCain, a rapid dog, salivated over CFR, his "priority" and, seemingly, his only selfish concern (a Bill ironically proving itself a failure).

McCain's true mission, however, was transparently clear: to discredit the one who defeated him and silence those who would dare oppose his (and the Rats') diseased beliefs, opinions, and views.

McCain is a failure, in every sense of the word.

27 posted on 12/05/2002 9:23:13 AM PST by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rmmcdaniell
Passing the bill so that it can shot down in the courts is a piss poor excuse for dubya signing it. What if it isn't declared unconstitutional? The president has a responsibility to veto unconstitutional legislation. No Excuses!

I couldn't agree with you more! The President should have went on national TV and decried the bill as unconstitutional, reminded people of his oath of office, and refused to sign it. He should have then read the list of senators and congress-critters that voted in favor of it, polital party notwithstanding.

28 posted on 12/05/2002 9:33:11 AM PST by Ignatz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
Aric2000, Please see my post #28.
29 posted on 12/05/2002 9:34:57 AM PST by Ignatz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Pliney the younger
p.s.: "rapid" = "rabid" (duh.)
30 posted on 12/05/2002 9:54:53 AM PST by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
THe courts should not recieve such Blatantly unconstitutional laws, because they should be kicked out in the legislative level, and if not there, then the executive level. Unconstitutional Laws should not exist beyond Congress.

Yes, in a perfect world!(we would not need the courts)

This particular Bill was nearly six years in the making. There were several before this, that died in committee or on the desk.

My point was that it all would simply be repeated.

Bush did not agree at all with this bill. Not at all!

He manipulated the issue and sent it to the courts for the awaiting trashcan.

31 posted on 12/05/2002 10:52:27 AM PST by Cold Heat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Pliney the younger
bump
32 posted on 12/05/2002 11:03:30 AM PST by rwfromkansas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pliney the younger
and before the ink of President Bush's signature is even dry.

Important to remember that the President signed this abomination.

33 posted on 12/05/2002 11:07:04 AM PST by Protagoras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Guillermo
Kerry is just another commie. The day the bastards actually reform campaign finance will be the day the world ends. The problem is not that there is money in politics. The problem is that there are politicians in politics.
34 posted on 12/05/2002 11:13:26 AM PST by 45Auto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Pliney the younger; ALOHA RONNIE
When the leftist press learned that President Clinton and the Democrats political campaigns were being subsidized by America’s mortal enemy the Communist Chinese they had no desire to interfere. It was just fine by the leftists.

Just a taste from this fine post!! (See #1 from Pliney the younger) I especially like the line about when the American People give money that this is considered dangerous!

35 posted on 12/05/2002 11:56:07 AM PST by Joy Angela
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joy Angela
Dear Joy,

Thank you for taking the time to post your kind sentiments, concerning my post about the Mc Cain-Finegold finance bill.

Most Sincerely,

Pliny
36 posted on 12/06/2002 8:24:37 PM PST by Pliney the younger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend
The thirty/sixty day rule would keep groups like Right to Life or Christian Coalition (or leftists groups) from putting out any non-partisan info on candidate's positions. It is truly awful.
37 posted on 12/06/2002 8:33:22 PM PST by Zack Nguyen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Zack Nguyen
These are the very groups that McCain blames for his 'lost' presidency. And they talk about Gore being unable to move on.......McCain is far more dangerous because he works with the dems to hurt our country.
38 posted on 12/07/2002 6:03:26 AM PST by OldFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson