McCain's campaign finance reform nothing more than political rhetoric

As presidential candidate Bill Bradley '65's cerebral presidential campaign stumbles toward the South Carolina primary, lagging in polls behind Vice President Al Gore, expect political moderates around Princeton to begin rallying behind the next best alternative to the Class of '65's basketball star — Republican anti-establishment candidate — Sen. John McCain.

It's no wonder scores of voters are lining up to support McCain. Colored by the media as an incorruptible reformer, the Vietnam War hero and Arizona senator is now positioned with a clear shot to win the South Carolina primary and proceed to take the Republican nomination.

Before choosing McCain as our next president, we should question why he has this unique relationship with the media as every political talk show pundit's favorite Republican.

One of McCain's biggest issues during the campaign, and throughout his career in the Senate, has been campaign finance reform. Couched in the appealing language that would resonate on a Rosie O'Donnell talk show, McCain wants to "get the corrupt money out of political campaigns" and "return the power of democracy to the people." Digging deeper into an analysis of McCain's campaign finance reform bill reveals that the so-called reform isn't as egalitarian as it promises to be.

The McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill promises to ban soft money from political campaigns. In effect, banning soft money and limiting independent expenditure by political organizations would put a stranglehold on political speech, preventing think tanks and issue advocacy groups from expressing views on candidates within 60 days of an election. Similarly, the McCain bill seeks to cap campaign expenditures, making it illegal for candidates to spend money beyond a certain designated amount. Instead of opening up elections to average citizens, setting limits on campaign expenditure would make it virtually impossible for challengers to beat incumbents.

Incumbent candidates benefit from the name recognition and media access that comes with holding an elective office, like McCain did in 1998 when he won another term in Arizona. In order to compete with incumbent candidates, challengers generally have to outspend their opponents greatly in order to overcome the disadvantage of being the unknown candidate. McCain and other proponents of reform suggest that under their campaign finance plan, network television media stations could be forced to offer free air time for all candidates to express their views. But would this really make the election playing field more fair?

This campaign reform would only further enhance the power of the media. The editorial page editor of the New York Times can decide at any time to devote two columns to lauding McCain and championing his campaign finance agenda. The cost to McCain — zero. How much would it cost someone who disagrees with him to post an ad of equal size in an equally prominent spot? McCain's campaign finance reforms would make it illegal or financially impossible to do just that. No wonder the media establishment swoons in his presence.

A true reformer of corrupt government would offer a different approach than McCain. If we really want to eliminate special interest from our elections, we should drastically shrink the size of government. So long as Congress controls over a trillion taxpayer dollars, special interest groups will always battle for influence.

Unfortunately, that isn't likely to happen. For now, the best way to make our elections more fair would be to scrap the original Federal Election Campaign Act laws that created a system where only incumbents and the independently wealthy have a legitimate chance of winning. Congress and the states should allow unlimited contributions, so long as they are fully disclosed.

Don't hold your breath for this kind of reform from McCain. Expect more political rhetoric and more support from the liberal media. Before you enlist in the John McCain camp, consider more than the image you see on TV. Read his policies: underneath the maverick facade is typical Washington politics. Dan Lips is a politics major from Weston, Conn. He can be reached at danlips@princeton.edu.