The Bush team had asked what McCain had actually accomplished in Washington. What were his so-called reforms? On key issues, they argued, McCain had been consistently shot down. McCain had failed to persuade Congress to pass either tobacco legislation or campaign finance reform.
Second, the Bush campaign attacked McCain's claim to outsider status. Reminding voters that McCain was far more the Washington insider than he suggested, Bush took to calling the senator "Chairman McCain." Of course, McCain had indirectly given them this issue, by overplaying his outsider status.
Third, Bush stole McCain's message, in effect, calling himself a "reformer with results."
Most Republican primary voters got exactly what they wanted: NOT reform but restoration, albeit one with a patina of reformist veneer to make it palatable.
Though the McCain-Feingold proposals have gone through multiple incarnations, the gist of the reform legislation touched on accepting voluntary spending limits, which differ from state to state, in exchange for free broadcast time and other concessions. A second component has involved banning so-called "soft money," that is, money given, not to the candidates outright, but for party-building purposes. "Soft money" is, in fact, a camouflaged donation to candidates, a way of evading the campaign finance laws.
Many Republicans have opposed McCain-Feingold because it would constrain their ability to rake in money from corporate donors. Quite simply, Republicans currently have a fund-raising edge over Democrats. By contrast, the Democrats, with the support of organized labor, are better organized at the grass-roots level, which perhaps makes them objectively less dependent upon, but in reality no less addicted to, "soft money." Though less conspicuous, Democrats have discreetly opposed any reform of the campaign finance laws for much the same reasons as Republicans have. Nonetheless, because they are a minority party within Congress (and thus have less to lose from opposing the status quo), Democrats have tended to support reform.
The issue of campaign finance reform has made McCain the darling of many who believed that money has indeed corrupted the political process; it also has, however, made him something of a persona non grata among those within his own party who rather like the status quo.
McCain has not reassured his GOP fellow travelers how such reform would work to their mutual advantage. He has not convincingly suggested how it would be tactically shrewd for conservatives to get ahead on the issue. In short, he has not argued the case on its conservative merits. Instead, McCain has framed the issue in terms that played to his maverick strengths but also to his maverick weaknesses.
Ultimately, reform is a complicated process of watering down strident ideas, thereby bringing change, but perhaps not too much.
What is perhaps most intriguing about McCain 2000 was the loneliness of his message. He has ventured down a public road that politicians, particularly senators, tend not to take, preferring instead the technical aspects of brokered deals. McCain possesses Clinton's policy knowledge but matches it to Reagan's conviction and credibility and, in the politics of reform, credibility is the most important asset. What is certain is that change will take place. The real question concerns the direction of change, and just how much influence McCain will have. And that is a chapter that remains to be written.
| |||
| 2012 Presidential contenders on Government Reform: | |||
|
Democrats:
Pres.Barack Obama(IL) V.P.Joe Biden(DE) Republicans: Gov.Mitt Romney(MA) Rep.Paul Ryan(WI) |
Third Parties:
Green: Dr.Jill Stein(MA) Libertarian: Gov.Gary Johnson(NM) Justice: Mayor Rocky Anderson(UT) Constitution: Rep.Virgil Goode(VA) Peace+Freedom: Roseanne Barr(HI) Reform Party: André Barnett(NY) AmericansElect: Gov.Buddy Roemer(LA) | ||
|
Please consider a donation to OnTheIssues.org!
Click for details -- or send donations to: 1770 Mass Ave. #630, Cambridge MA 02140 E-mail: submit@OnTheIssues.org (We rely on your support!) | |||