Screw Public Financing!
And screw the flip-flopping label, too!
On Thursday, to the surprise of pretty much nobody, Barack Obama decided to opt out of public financing for the general election. This was widely seen as breaking a promise, or going back on his word, or flip-flopping. Or all three. The rules of public campaign finance are both complicated and boring, but the basic gist is that candidates agree to spending limits in exchange for matching funds from the government that add up to more than $80. Obama is the first candidate to opt out of public funding since the system was established in 1976 in the wake of Watergate. It all but guarantees him a colossal advantage in spending, especially in the last two months of the campaign.
In a video announcing his decision, Obama called the system of public financing “broken.” I’ll take that a step further and say that it’s not just broken — it’s stupid. The idea that the government was going to give the Barack Obama campaign more than $80 million dollars is ludicrous; it’s like a homeless person donating money to Microsoft. The government is racked with debt. Why should it be paying for campaigns?
I get that the point of the system is to limit money in politics. But the government already does that by limiting individual contributions (thanks John McCain!) I’m also aware that $80 million is a drop in the bucket to the federal government, who probably spend that much on ashtrays for a single submarine. But if you care even a little about balancing the budget and cutting wasteful spending (ahem, McCain) then you’ve got to at least compare the importance of health care to the importance of a swing state position ad.
Plus, there’s this point: over 1.5 million people have contributed to Barack Obama’s campaign. How is that not public financing?
McCain says Obama is going back on his word. He’s right. However, this is pretty rich coming from McCain, who just this week reversed himself on offshore drilling. That issue joins tax cuts, torture, and illegal immigration on the list of McCain flip-flops. I happened to catch Bill Bennett (himself a pseudo-flip-flopper) on CNN, who excused McCain’s change of mind on drilling because it was the right policy.
For once, I agreed with Mr. Bennett. Not about off shore drilling, but about flip-flopping. Who cares if a candidate flip-flops? If it’s the right thing to do, it’s the right thing to do. I don’t care that McCain flip-flopped on torture, I care that he voted to allow water boarding. His previous position has no bearing on the matter. After all, are people not allowed to change their minds? Doesn’t it take a courageous person to admit that he's wrong? Isn’t the humility to do that one of the things (along with intellectual curiosity and the ability to speak in public) that George W. Bush so severely lacks?The real knock on flip-flopping is that it’s indicative of political opportunism. Of course, politicians who aren’t politically opportunistic don’t get very far. Even Ron Paul has a constituency to answer to every two years.
And so, I’d like to offer yet another proposal. In fact, make it two: a moratorium on public financing, and a moratorium on charging people with flip-flopping.
I appreciate your remarks in regard to Obama’s rejection of public funding. I have also read widely that this is like a savings account for Obama, in order that he be able to respond forcefully and in a timely manner to the expected “swift-boating” that will surely occur before the election. I am not up on campaign finance law, so I don’t understand 1)if this is true, and 2) does it really allow Obama to spend campaign cash on refuting and answering these attacks (527s). What is certain is that whatever Obama does to prepare for the (un)expected will be run through the Mighty Wurlitzer and come out as “surely, he’s not worthy of your vote” type statements by McCain, his handlers and the right-o-sphere. Every time the Democrats think the right has surely reached the nadir of their moral and ethical decay, surprise, there’s a new low to which they will actively, forcefully and it is now obvious, consciously descend. This has had the left knocked back on their heels for years and years now, and it is high time for Obama and his handlers to take a new tack. Make the rules. Let McCain and his following do the reaction. Obama’s speech on race was an event that the right had trouble neutralizing because of it’s honesty and freshness and clarity. I think it was, to a large degree, neutralized. I say, keep at it Obama. Let the right do the reaction for a while. They sure have watched us do it. Let’s see how sell they handle it.
Oops: Let’s see how WELL they handle it.
Well-written article… I hadn’t even considered that aspect of public financing before (the fact that our government, already being in debt, is going to pay for political campaigns). And the whole “flip-flopping” accusation is something I never understood. People change their minds. Again, well said.