More On Obama’s Campaign Finance Sellout
David Brooks in the New York Times:
Barack Obama has worked on political reform more than any other issue. He aspires to be to political reform what Bono is to fighting disease in Africa. He’s spent much of his career talking about how much he believes in public financing. In January 2007, he told Larry King that the public-financing system works. In February 2007, he challenged Republicans to limit their spending and vowed to do so along with them if he were the nominee. In February 2008, he said he would aggressively pursue spending limits. He answered a Midwest Democracy Network questionnaire by reminding everyone that he has been a longtime advocate of the public-financing system.
But Thursday, at the first breath of political inconvenience, Fast Eddie Obama threw public financing under the truck. In so doing, he probably dealt a death-blow to the cause of campaign-finance reform. And the only thing that changed between Thursday and when he lauded the system is that Obama’s got more money now.
And Fast Eddie Obama didn’t just sell out the primary cause of his life. He did it with style. He did it with a video so risibly insincere that somewhere down in the shadow world, Lee Atwater is gaping and applauding. Obama blamed the (so far marginal) Republican 527s. He claimed that private donations are really public financing. He made a cut-throat political calculation seem like Mother Teresa’s final steps to sainthood.
This was his signature issue, folks…it’s not a minor thing. And the incredible idea that it wasn’t for his own selfish reasons but McCain’s sneaky use of 527s is blown away by the nonpartisan Factcheck.org:
We find that to be a large exaggeration and a lame excuse. In fact, donations from PACs and lobbyists make up less than 1.7 percent of McCain’s total receipts, and they account for only about 1.1 percent of the RNC’s receipts.
…McCain – As of the end of April, the McCain campaign had reported receiving $655,576 from lobbyists, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. That is less than seven-tenths of 1 percent of his total receipts of $96,654,783. His campaign also took in $960,990 from PACs, amounting to just under 1 percent of total receipts. The two sources combined make up less than 1.7 percent of his total.
RNC – The Republican National Committee has raised $143,298,225, of which only $135,000 has been come from lobbyists, according to the CRP. That’s less than one-tenth of 1 percent. It also took in about 1 percent of its receipts from PACs, CRP said. Taken together, that’s about 1.1 percent from PACs and lobbyists.
If I seem unreasonably focused on this issue, remember: (a) this was a pet cause, and (b) Obama himself set the expectation that this would be a different kind of campaign, a new brand of politics. I never bought it, but plenty did…
UPDATE 06/21/08 11:24 a.m.: The Boston Globe‘s editorial board:
SENATOR Barack Obama has presented himself as the candidate of change, but the change he announced yesterday is a throwback to the no-holds-barred rules of campaign finance that prevailed before Watergate. Obama will be the first major party candidate since Watergate to reject public financing in the general election, instead relying on his base of more than 1.5 million donors for a war chest that could easily double or triple the $84.1 he would get in public financing. His decision deals a body blow both to the system of campaign finance and to his own reputation as a reform candidate.
The New York Times editorial board:
The excitement underpinning Senator Barack Obama’s campaign rests considerably on his evocative vows to depart from self-interested politics. Unfortunately, Mr. Obama has come up short of that standard with his decision to reject public spending limitations and opt instead for unlimited private financing in the general election.
See, that’s the thing about campaigning as the candidate of change – people might actually expect you to follow through…

All true, but you could say the same things about McCain, who withdrew from the public financing system in February, after using the promise of matching funds as collateral to borrow money so he could keep his then-struggling campaign alive. This was possibly illegal, not only because he benefited from the program before deciding that he didn’t want to participate, but also because he withdrew before receiving certification from the FEC to do so, violating the terms of the program. So McCain’s feigned shock and indignation of a few days ago is more than a little disingenuous.
Yeah, maybe so, but see, the whole ‘the other guy does it, too’ thing is just not going to work for Obama. I can’t stress enough how many people, particularly young people, supported him because they bought the rhetoric that this campaign was going to be different, this wasn’t the same ol’, same ol’…as for myself, I may have been born at night, but it wasn’t last night…
I don’t want to sound like a five year old — he did it first! — but McCain also positions himself as an independent reformer, and I give him a lot of credit for the work he has done in the past for finance reform.
However, McCain’s flip flops on other, more important issues — the Bush tax cuts, pandering to those he once called “agents of intolerance,” where to draw the boundaries on fighting terrorism — make John Kerry look like the model of constancy by comparison.
I am not suggesting that politicians should be inflexibly locked into a position in perpetuity. Things change. However, it is fair to ask what a candidate’s core beliefs are, and whether they come from conviction or political expediency. On balance, I think that Obama has been much more consistent in his policies and beliefs than McCain.
Please give me an example of a core belief where Obama has demonstrated consistency. Certainly not on NAFTA, campaign finance reform, or surveillance (where he’s trying to have it both ways by supporting the House bill and claiming, laughably, that he will strip the telecom immunity out of it, something even Harry Reid says is well-nigh impossible)…
Iraq, fiscal policy, energy policy, health care, immigration, education ….
To be clear: I have a lot of respect for John McCain, and I think he is the best GOP Presidential candidate since Bush I, who I also have an enormous amount of respect for. Both men have biographies which are inspirational, showing personal courage and selfless love of country. I disagree with much of what they espouse, but they both devoted their lives to public service, which anyone would find admirable.
However, regarding campaign finance, I think McCain is a glass house dwelling stone thrower…
Actually, Obama has shifted on Iraq, though not as blatantly as NAFTA or Campaign Finance.
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/tony-rezko-and-obamas-shifting-positions-on-iraq/
I will say this much for Obama’s flip-flops – in most cases, he’s shifted to the better position, so I’m torn between criticizing him for his inconsistencies and applauding him for turning his back on the recklessness of the primary campaign’s positions, where he had to run left…
thats really awesome post really.