McCain’s Commitment to Public Financing

March 31st, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

The Boston Globe reports that “Senator John McCain has retreated from his longtime commitment to public financing of campaigns since he started planning his 2008 bid for the presidency, according to nonpartisan advocates who had hoped McCain would be a strong voice for reform during the most expensive presidential campaign in history.”

In 2003 McCain cosponsored “legislation to expand the federal matching system to help fund presidential campaigns, but failed to add his name to similar measures in 2006 and 2007. And while McCain once supported a law in his home state of Arizona providing full public financing of campaigns, he now says he opposes that idea at the federal level.”

‘McCain’s campaign said the presumptive Republican nominee, who completed a fund-raising swing through western states Friday, has “a clear and long record” of supporting campaign finance reform, and has not recently advocated an expansion of public financing because it would be inappropriate for him to take a lead role in increasing funding for a program from which he could benefit.’

However, campaign finance reform activists (yes, they exist) say they’re distressed ‘at what they see as McCain’s abandonment of the issue at a time when supporters of reform most need bipartisan backing of efforts to control the influence of money in campaigns.’

They thought they had someone who was supportive of their issue running for president, but now that he has won the Republican nomination, McCain suddenly seems to realize that his pro-campaign finance reform views may make it more difficult for him to raise the money he needs to win the Democratic nominee, whoever he may be.

Not only that, McCain also fears – many think – that he has to distance ‘himself from controversial reform issues to placate the conservative wing of his party.’ In other words: it could cost him money and votes.

But isn’t that what McCain is supposed to be about? Telling it like it is? Straight talk? Not giving in to pressure? Doing what’s right, even if he’s punished for it?

Well, sometimes yes, sometimes no. More than anything else, McCain is a politician. And all politicians do what they think is necessary to win. If doing ‘good’ doesn’t hurt their chances, they’ll do good (or what they perceive as good; I’m not giving my opinion on campaign finance reform). But if it does hurt their chances, well, they rather refrain from making the world a better place.

As such, activists shouldn’t be surprised. McCain does what he considers best for his political future. And if we were in his shoes, we would probably all do the same.

And if we wouldn’t, well, then we would not ever be in his shoes.

That’s politics. That’s life.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Rudi666
    March 31st, 2008 at 17:25
    Reply | Quote | #2

    McCain opened a door he should have left closed if/when Obama wins the Democratic nomination. Both candidates promised to use Federal money, now McCain backs out first. Obama’s Internet funding will swamp McCain. On top of that, if the "Straight Talk Express" is linked to lobbyist money it won’t look good.

  2. Jason
    March 31st, 2008 at 17:46
    Reply | Quote | #3

    McCain is a politician. And all politicians do what they think is necessary to win.

    But when it comes to campaign finance reform, didn’t McCain above all others promise to be "different", Micheal?  ;)

  3. Interested
    April 1st, 2008 at 00:57
    Reply | Quote | #4

    now McCain backs out first.

    Not accurate Rudi.  That would have been the other side (no surprise).

    I realize that he needs to not stick with Public money to keep even with the Dem side, however I would personally place more weight on the standing with principle of it all.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.