
Excerpted from Thursday's piece by Sam Stein for the Huffington Post:
During a private fundraiser last month, Sen. Barack Obama said he was "considering" voluntarily restricting the amount of money he could raise in a general election from campaign donors.
"We need to separate money from political influence. It's an experiment in open source politics," Obama told a crowd of supporters in Silicon Valley. "One thing that I am considering, and my advisers might not like this: I may limit campaign contribution amounts per person to less than the federal limit in the general election."
The remark, which was shared with The Huffington Post by an event attendee and not disputed by the Obama campaign, is the first public indication that Obama is willing to forgo some of his massive financial advantages if he were to face off against John McCain in the fall. The current federal cap on individual general election donations is $2300.
It is a trailblazing move that could give him political leeway to forgo public funds, as well as one that could serve as a starting point for reaching a fundraising compromise with McCain. But, if pursued, it will fall short of what some reform groups are hoping for from each of the party's standard bearers.
For weeks, Obama and McCain have battled each other over an alleged pledge made early in the campaign for Obama to pursue public financing in a general election. McCain, whose campaign financing woes pose a serious threat to his electoral hopes, has stressed that the pledge was concrete. Obama has countered that his pledge was conditioned on reaching an agreement with the GOP nominee, and that the very nature of his fundraising apparatus -- 1.5 million donors giving relatively small amounts -- constitutes a public financing system.
Good government groups, by and large, view Obama as committed to reforming the predominance of money in politics. And Obama, in his appearance at this fundraiser, stressed that this was his ultimate goal, noting that the system by which he has been successful effectively undercuts moneyed-interests.
"We have not seen this before," Obama said. "It takes power away from PACs, from lobbyists. It takes power away also from institutional players. Endorsements from a governor might not mean as much as it once did. Endorsements from some of the traditional institutional players, even those that are part of the Democratic Party, may not mean as much. That is actually a healthy thing."
With the proliferation of outside groups and 527s, there is a concern, especially from the Obama campaign, that by relying only on public funds, a candidate could face obstacles matching opposition spending dime-for-dime. A basis for a McCain-Obama compromise on fundraising would center on somehow restricting those 527s, a task complicated by the fact that candidates are legally prohibited from coordinating with outside groups. That, political observers say, raises a major hurdle for Obama to reach a deal.
("Money doesn't talk, it swears.")




2 comments:
How about an update? Is the voluntary limit in place. Care to place a bet?
TBLMISBT
Update? Stein's piece was from yesterday. And I'd imagine Obama would have to be the actual "official" nominee before any agreement could be struck.
We'll have to wait and see what happens with this, if anything.
But I'd never BET that a politician would limit his or her own piggy-bank.
Until PACs, lobbyists, and 527's are curtailed, there will be pols on the street corner with their skirts hiked up.
Post a Comment