The Daily Tar Heel
Printing news. Raising hell. Since 1893.
Friday, March 29, 2024 Newsletters Latest print issue

We keep you informed.

Help us keep going. Donate Today.
The Daily Tar Heel

Finance Reform Takes Back Seat to Homeland Security

Campaign finance reform focuses on soft money contributions to political candidates. Soft money is funding channeled to a candidate through various groups in an effort to avoid legally mandated limits on donations.

The most prominent legislation proposed in Congress to reform campaign finance laws is the McCain-Feingold Bill, proposed by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis.

McCain's press secretary, Nancy Ives, said that after Sept. 11, the senator decided to focus his attention on immediate issues concerning national security, such as aviation security. "With the events of Sept. 11, (the bill) was put on the back burner (in order to) focus on national security issues."

Ives added that she expects the senator to readdress campaign finance in 2002.

She said the ultimate goal of the McCain-Feingold bill is to eliminate all soft money campaign donations. "It will take away the power of the special interests and restore the voices of the American people who've been shut out because of their lack of big money," Ives said.

Michael Munger, a political science professor at Duke University, said he thinks focus has shifted from the McCain-Feingold bill because the September attacks caused members of Congress to back away from the debate.

Munger said he expects the issue to resurface next year prior to the congressional elections. "It will be brought up in some form because it's a campaign issue."

But Munger added that he thinks the bill will be defeated in the U.S. House of Representatives as long as Republicans control the chamber.

The Republican leadership in the House tabled discussion of the bill in July after Democrats pulled the bill from the floor because they were dissatisfied with the ground rules for the debate.

Democrats and some Republicans complained the rules were designed specifically to kill the legislation.

But while supporters of the bill want to ban the use of soft money in congressional elections, Munger said he opposes the ban because it would limit the amount of money given to parties.

Richard Brody, a retired political science professor at Stanford University, said he thinks fundamental differences between the parties have prevented the bill from passing the House.

He added that the public and Congress are more concerned with issues such as air travel and anthrax. "The public had some concern for it, but at the moment -- zero."

But Brody said the initial bipartisanship that resulted in Congress after the attack on America has begun to dissipate.

Brody also said he thinks the attacks have shifted national priorities. "(The terrorist attacks) transformed the whole agenda ... for the time being anyway," he said. "At the moment there's no one leading the charge on it. It's unfinished business."

The State & National Editor can be reached at stntdesk@unc.edu.

To get the day's news and headlines in your inbox each morning, sign up for our email newsletters.

Special Print Edition
The Daily Tar Heel's Collaborative Mental Health Edition