From The Chicago Sun-Times:

Finance reform? Yeah, right

February 20, 2002

BY CINDY RICHARDS

Cynicism is one of those occupational hazards we opinion columnists need to guard against. Generally, I do a pretty good job of keeping my cynical side at bay. But once in a while, an issue comes along that sends the needle on the Cynic-Meter soaring into the red zone.

Campaign finance reform is one of those issues. Many people I admire worked very hard for many years to get campaign finance reform passed in Congress.

They believe--and rightly so--that the "soft money" contributions to political parties have had a corrupting influence on American politics.

They also believe--wrongly, I fear--that the bill that passed the House last week will make a difference.

Years of watching the sausage of American politics being made has left me with the strong belief that this is not a problem that can be solved at the margins.

Rather, I think it's time we accepted that extreme action is needed. Either open up the system all the way--no spending limits, no contribution limits, no rules at all beyond full, fast and complete disclosure. Or close the system completely. Full public funding of campaigns with free television access for all candidates, strict spending limits and rules governing campaign advertising.

Personally, I opt for the closed system with public financing.

Why? Two reasons:

1.) Full disclosure sounds good, but in a world where most voters can't even name their own elected representatives, who is going to sift through all of that information to find out who's bankrolling whom in the election?

2.) As long as candidates are encouraged to outspend each other in their quest to buy their way into Washington or Springfield or City Hall, money will continue to define politics. Only by setting limits on spending can we even the playing field for all candidates and, I hope, lessen the influence of special interests and raise the level of citizen input.

Indeed, much of the opposition to campaign finance reform has centered on what would and would not violate someone's First Amendment right to free speech. The Supreme Court has ruled that limiting a candidate's right to spend money is a violation of politicians' free speech. Limiting contributions violates the contributors' right to free speech, others charge (although the Supremes did not agree). Telling the AFL-CIO or the National Rifle Association they can't run ads supporting a particular candidate within days of the election--a key provision of the bill that passed the House--violates their free speech, the groups say, an argument that is headed back to the Supreme Court if this bill becomes law.

Well, excuse me, but I think the Supremes are wrong on this one. I can't think of anything more un-American than the notion that one's free speech rights are defined by the size of one's wallet. If this campaign finance reform bill would end the belief that cash equals First Amendment rights, I'd be all for it.

But I harbor no illusions that this bill, or any other that attacks one aspect of political fund-raising, will have more than a limited effect.

While my friends were out celebrating their victory last week, there was, I'm sure, a cabal of $500-an-hour lawyers dusting off Plan B (Use in the Event of Campaign Finance Reform) and revamping their fund-raising, commercial-buying, influence-peddling system to be in tune with the new campaign finance realities.

Now, it is important to note, we don't actually have any new campaign finance reality yet. The celebrating followed passage of the Shays-Meehan bill (named for its House sponsors, Shays-Meehan is the companion bill to the Senate cousin with the more famous name, the McCain-Feingold bill). But the bill still must be passed by the Senate and signed by the president--neither of which is a done deal.

My friends in the business assure me that, should Shays-Meehan become law, it will have some positive effect for at least the next few elections.

Perhaps. But until I see the proof, the Cynic-Meter needle remains firmly in the red zone.

E-mail: cindyrichards@ameritech.net