Let's Deep Six the 527 Campaign Finance Scheme

Senators McCain and Feingold are at it again. They're trying to convince Congress to cut off the mother's milk of politics -- big money. Although they may get more support from politicians this time around, they will likely face more opposition from outside interest groups who have taken in the millions in unlimited donations that used to go to the political parties before Congress cracked down on that in 2002.

McCain and Feingold, along with Senators Trent Lott of Mississippi, Ken Salazar from Colorado, Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe from Maine, and Chuck Schumer from New York, have introduced legislation to close a loophole that was exploited by big donors to influence the last presidential campaign. Powerbrokers moved money into so-called 527 groups that could promote and attack candidates without being subject to limits on their contributions the way that political action committees (PACs) or political parties are.

Billionaires like George Soros on the left and Bob Perry on the right just aren't satisfied with casting a vote the way the rest of us do. They want to use their wealth to tell us how we should vote much the way Budweiser and Miller use advertising to tell us which beer to drink. Soros gave some $24 million to Americans Coming Together and other anti-Bush 527 groups. At $6.6 million, Perry was the chief sponsor of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, whose attack ads about Kerry's Vietnam record arguably cost him the election.

It's great that some people strike it rich in America -- we all hope to someday. And it's fine for those people to buy spiffier cars and bigger houses than the rest of us. But we shouldn't let them buy election results. For democracy to function, we need to adhere to the principle of one person, one vote, which means that we all need to have roughly equal say in the political process.

McCain and Feingold's new legislation would get rid of the 527 loophole by declaring that all electioneering groups working to influence federal elections must register as political action committees (PACs) and limit the contributions they raise to $5,000. Even that amount is far beyond what most of us can afford to give, so if anything this proposal really doesn't go near far enough.

You would think that an effort to create a fair system where everyone plays under the same rules would be met with broad support. But you would be wrong. A host of interest groups, ranging from the Sierra Club to the NRA, are lining up against this legislation, even though it explicitly exempts them. They are concerned that if big money donors can no longer influence elections by giving to 527s, they will give to non-profit groups whose primary purpose is to lobby for legislation and educate their members about policy issues. The non-profits worry that Congress will go after them next, asking them to disclose their donors and limit their contributions.

But the Chicken Little cries from interest groups are unfounded. If they want to keep campaign finance rules from applying to them in the future, they can simply turn down the campaign donors' money and refuse to engage in electioneering. On the other hand, if they do want to get into the campaign business, then why should they be entitled to different rules than everyone else?

Senator McCain and Feingold's latest proposal isn't perfect and neither was their last effort, which increased the big money that candidates can raise themselves while banning soft money raised by political parties. But no campaign finance law is ever perfect. You don't stop playing football just because the other team scores, and reformers shouldn't throw in the towel just because some players are still getting around the rules.

If nothing else, these Senators deserve some public respect for being willing to stand up to interest groups on the left and the right and fight for some common sense rules that will benefit all Americans. It is refreshing to see politicians of both parties who are willing to put the public interest ahead of their own interests or those of their political allies.