GOP sues to overturn campaign finance scheme

Washington Times:

The Republican Party will file federal lawsuits Thursday seeking to overthrow the McCain-Feingold federal campaign finance regulations, Republican National Committee Chairman Robert M. "Mike" Duncan revealed Wednesday night at a private dinner with the nation's Republican governors.

The move is considered a slap in the face of the Republican Party's failed 2008 presidential candidate, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, who was dramatically outspent by Democrat Barack Obama, and of President Bush, who signed McCain-Feingold into law in 2002.

"We will bring two federal suits tomorrow to strengthen the Republican Party," Mr. Duncan told The Washington Times.

Mr. Duncan said one suit will be filed in the District of Columbia to strike down the soft-money ban that is the central tenet of the McCain-Feingold Act — formally known as the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002. "Soft money" is largely unrestricted contributions from wealthy individuals, corporations and labor unions.

The second suit will be in a Louisiana federal court to strike down the limits under the law Mr. McCain co-sponsored with Sen. Russ Feingold, Wisconsin Democrat, that control coordination between parties and their candidates.

"It prohibits us from spending over $84,000 in coordination with a candidate in a congressional race," Mr. Duncan said. "That means we have to find some group to raise and spend money but without any coordination" with the candidate, his campaign or the RNC.

"That does not allow for a unified message," he said. "We don't think there is anything corrupting about coordinating with a candidate."

McCain-Feingold helped Republicans in 2004, when Mr. Bush, under the increased hard-dollar contribution limits in the bill, set what was then a campaign fundraising record in his successful re-election bid. Hard-money contributions are lower-amount donations — $2,300 per election to individual candidates, with a higher limit for political parties — that can be spent on any election activity.

But the coordination limits hamstrung Republican efforts to aid their candidate this year. They were unable to make up for the financial difficulties of Mr. McCain, who lost the Nov. 4 election in part because the senator from Arizona chose to take taxpayer financing for his general election campaign, limiting himself to spending $84 million while his Democratic opponent was free to raise and spend as much as he wanted.

Mr. Obama raised upwards of $600 million in the primary and general election, at least half of which was available in his battle with Mr. McCain. Mr. Obama's haul allowed the Democratic National Committee to use nearly all $221 it raised through Oct. 15 in races that helped increase the party's control of Congress.

...

It is clear that the Democrats have been better at exploiting the restrictions. The Democrats also have more very rich donors who have found created ways to give Democrats millions of dollars. Obama also profited from bogus contributions from small donors who used fictitious names and addresses. These could have been from people who had reached the maximum legal contribution. The Obama campaign also solicited illegal foreign donors who were encourage to donate in amounts below that which required reporting.

I don't think campaign finance issues will be on the Democrat radar in this Congress unless a special prosecutor is appointed to investigate abuses. That might create enough of a political embarrassment to force them to make legislative changes.