For all of Bernie Sanders’ populist crusading against the political influence of “millionaires and billionaires,” when faced with a rare chance to pass major campaign-finance reform, he voted against it, putting the party’s biggest donors first. The vote is worth remembering not only for what it says about Sanders, but also as a reminder of the Democratic Party’s history of saying one thing about reform and doing another.
n 2006, House Republicans backed a bill to rein in spending by 527 groups, named for a section of the tax code, the forerunners to Super PACs. In the 2004 election, those groups raised more money for Democrats than their Republican counterparts in unlimited contributions from wealthy donors, especially George Soros, while Republican Party committees attracted more in regulated donations.
To address the imbalance, the bill treated 527s like party committees, with contribution limits and a prohibition against direct corporate and union contributions. It also lifted limits on what parties could spend in coordination with candidates’ campaigns. Major government-reform organizations including Common Cause and the League of Women Voters backed the bill, which was co-sponsored by Massachusetts liberal Marty Meehan. But for Democrats, passing the bill would have meant giving up a campaign advantage. So Sanders joined nearly all Democrats in voting against it.
The bill wasn't perfect. Some Democrats complained it didn't cover 501(c)(4) organizations that later became a vehicle for large anonymous contributions. But winning half a loaf was hardly the problem. Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer put it plainly: “This is not reform, it’s retaliation.” In fact, it was both, but for Democrats, the latter mattered most.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi declared 527s “a freedom of speech issue,” though she now supports, as does Sanders, a constitutional amendment to restrict such speech.
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker
No comments:
Post a Comment