Checkbook Politics Still Drawing Interest

In 2002, Russ Feingold and John McCain convinced Congress and the American people to sell out the First Amendment in exchange for getting the big money out of politics. Accept these limitations on free speech, proponents of the BCRA asked, and we’ll keep rich people from buying our elections. On that basis, it passed both houses and George Bush signed it into law.
So how has it worked? The First Amendment restrictions have worked rather well; people still cannot criticize incumbents in the final 60 days before an election, a development that would have shocked and angered the men who wrote and adopted the First Amendment as a check against professional politicians. However, the money keeps on rolling into politics, only now it goes outside the channels of accountability, as the Los Angeles Times reports:

Unions, corporations and wealthy individuals have pumped nearly $300 million this year into unregulated political groups, funding dozens of aggressive and sometimes shadowy campaigns independent of party machines.
The groups, both liberal and conservative, air TV and radio spots, conduct polls, run phone banks, canvass door-to-door and stage get-out-the-vote rallies, with no oversight by the Federal Election Commission. Set up as tax-exempt “issue advocacy” committees, they cannot explicitly endorse candidates. But they can do everything short of telling voters how to mark their ballots.
Because they can accept unlimited donations from any source, the committees — known as 527s — have emerged as the favored vehicle for millionaires and interest groups seeking to set the political agenda. …
Named for a section of the IRS code, 527s have been around for years but became a political force in 2004 after the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 — also known as the McCain–Feingold Bill — limited donations to political parties. Groups such as Swift Boat Veterans for Truth on the right and America Coming Together on the left contributed $600 million that year, with a heavy focus on the presidential race.

The midterms have generated lower contributions, but the process has become more sophisticated. In Colorado, three liberal millionaires have funded a 527 named Coloradans for Life, attacking the Republican incumbent for not being sufficiently pro-life, when the Democrat is more pro-choice than the Republican. The largest contributions to 527s this year come from unions, which amounts to $60 million of the $300 million collected thus far by the tax-free advocacy groups.
Who tops the list in individual checkbooks? Bob Perry, who financed the Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth, has contributed $5.5 million for conservative issues. He’s matched by Jerry Perenchio, with another $5 million for similar purposes. George Soros and Peter Lewis fund liberal groups with donations of $3 million and $1.6 million respectively, and they’re joined by John Hunting with another $1.6 million. The top two 527s both come from unions (SEIU, $23.2 million and AFSME, $16.3 million).
Ironically, the Times found all of these figures at Opensecrets.org, the web site devoted to full disclosure in politics. This represents the real reform of the campaign system in the US; disclosing whose money supports which politicians. If that money went directly to the candidates in question, we could draw direct lines between politicians and contributors. We could also hold the campaigns and political parties responsible for their campaign messages, rather than witness the slew of attack ads that come from left field, especially in the final weeks of the election cycle.
John McCain and Russ Feingold sold America a bill of goods. Restricting free speech did not free us from checkbook politics; in fact, it made the problem worse by allowing it to hide behind these so-called advocacy groups. We should be ashamed of buying such a scheme, almost as much as the men who sold it to us in the first place.