an easy fight. But those in favor of reform prevailed. I hope the majorityin the Senate that favors reform willbe able to prevail here.
A majority inthe House passed reform because the American people demand it.
Membersof the House recognized that the cur-rent system is awash in money,exploited loopholes, and publiclyperceived corruption. It is a systemthat no Member of Congress shouldtake pride in defending.As I mentioned, Mr. President, yes-terday was primary day in Arizona.Turnout was an all-time low, indicat-ing another record-setting lowturnout election day.
I have no doubt whatsoever that the way in which we finance our campaigns has in no smallmeasure contributed to the abysmal healthof our democracy.
The people’s con-tempt—there is no more charitableway to describe it—for us and for theway in which we attain our privilegedplace in government cannot be sus-tained perpetually. We will somedaypay a high price for our inattention tothis problem. We will forfeit our abili-ty to lead the country as we meet thecomplicated challenges confrontingus at the end of this century becausewe have so badly squandered the pub-lic respect necessary to persuade theNation to take the often difficultactions that are required to defendthe Nation’s interests.Our ability to lead depends solelyon the public’s trust in us. Mr.President,
people do not trust us today. And that breach, that calamity, is what thesupporters of campaign finance reformintend to repair.
I beg all of my col-leagues to join in this effort and giveour constituents a reason to againtrust us, and to take pride in the insti-tution we are so proud to serve.
9
McCain is not the only senator to makeunsupported claims. On the campaignfinance section of his Web site, Sen. FredThompson (R-Tenn.) writes: “Americans haveless and less faith in their government. Oneof the main reasons is that they are distrust-ful of the system we have in place to elect ourpolitical leaders.”
10
On
Meet the Press
onJanuary 7, 2001, Thompson reiterated theimportance of getting campaign finance leg-islation on the agenda, because it could helprestore confidence in the system:I think that President-elect Bush willwork with McCain and others of uswho think we ought to do some-thing in this regard, that big moneyhas gotten out of control and playedtoo much of a role in American poli-tics. . . . [F]or the first time, we havean opportunity of coming up withsomething that I think is good andwill help restore a little bit of confi-dence of the American people in oursystem.
11
Some journalists make similar claims. Inher book on the corruption of American pol-itics, Elizabeth Drew writes that the “danger-ously low” trust in government has beencaused in large part by “the enormous andever-growing role of money in our politicalcampaigns—with corruption now outpacingeven that of the Nixon era.”
12
She offers littlein the way of actual evidence for such aclaim.
13
In all, reformers are quite confident thatcampaign finance is a major cause of thepublic’s distaste for politics.
14
It turns outthat those claims are overblown. Yes, citizens’trust in government is low,
15
and, yes, cam-paign spending has been increasing at a rapidclip. However, if we examine the time-seriesrelationship between trust in governmentand overall spending shown in Figure 1, norelationship exists.Before drawing any final conclusions, let’sbe precise about what the would-be reform-ers are claiming. They believe that increasesin campaign spending have caused decliningtrust in government. To be the cause of
3
Reformers arequite confidentthat campaignfinance is a majorcause of the pub-lic’s distaste forpolitics. It turnsout that thoseclaims areoverblown.
Add a Comment