Author Of McCain-Feingold: Obama Smart To Opt Out Of Public Funds

One of the principal authors of the most significant campaign finance legislation since Watergate said he was neither "outraged" nor "surprised" with Barack Obama's decision to forgo public funding in the general election.

Norm Ornstein, a fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute and substantial contributor to the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act -- also known as the "McCain-Feingold" campaign finance legislation -- said on Thursday that Obama's move was "pragmatically the right decision to make," and that, if the Senator had not chosen that path, "I would have sued him for political malpractice."

"What I told a bunch of people a few weeks ago," said Ornstein, "is that while it would be nice if he decided he felt honor bound to stay within the system and take the money, if he did so I might join a group of people who sued him for political malpractice. When you have the ability to raise the kind of money that he could raise and do it without selling your soul to spend all the time between now and the election on fundraisers, your goal is to win an election and not turn your back on the people voting. There will be outraged editorials and McCain will be justifiably pissed. But it was pragmatically the right decision for him to make."

Orstein told The Huffington Post that he had advised the Obama campaign about the issue of public finance a "long time ago" but not as the decision approached. "I don't think it was a slam dunk decision six months ago, in part because people didn't have any idea what kind of reach he could have, how many people he could bring into his camp."

In defending Obama, Orstein became the sole author of McCain-Feingold to offer sympathy for a position that, at least in the spirit, goes against the purpose of the campaign finance legislation. McCain, unsurprisingly, called Obama's pronouncement "a big deal."

"He has completely reversed himself and gone back, not on his word to me, but the commitment he made to the American people," said the Senator.

While Feingold, a stalwart champion of public funds, expressed a slightly less outraged sense of disappointment.

"This is not a good decision," said the Wisconsin Democrat. "While the current public financing system for the presidential primaries is broken, the system for the general election is not. The entire system must be updated."

Comments

[MadJeffersonian]

12:47 AM on 06/23/2008

Instead of funding never-ending campaign that seem to start earlier and earlier, I'd rather have my $3 going to eduction, food inspection and safety, or funding for alternative energy sources. There's got to be a better way of spending that money.

[MadJeffersonian]

01:54 AM on 06/23/2008

Within that education funding, how about typing classes!

[GLaB]

03:32 PM on 06/20/2008

FACTCHECK.ORG: OBAMA'S LAME EXCUSE -

Summary
Obama announced he would become the first presidential candidate since 1972 to rely totally on private donations for his general election campaign, opting out of the system of public financing and spending limits that was put in place after the Watergate scandal.

One reason, he said, is that "John McCain's campaign and the Republican National Committee are fueled by contributions from Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs."


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.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/142399

[gonavy]

05:39 PM on 06/20/2008

Lawyers & Lobbists have donated $34,329,214 MORE to dems than republicans during the election cycle

So, who is on the hook to the special interests and lobbists?

OpenSecrets.org

[vernonbc]

06:11 AM on 06/21/2008

Well, federally registered lobbyists weren't donating that money to Obama's campaign so what's your point? It sure isn't Obama that's on the hook to them. That's one of the reasons he won the primaries.

[Marijay33]

03:16 PM on 06/20/2008

who cares if he declines public financing. this is a smart choice and he isnt using our TAXDOLLARS to fund his camp. as you can see the republicants are scared sh*t less.

[NotMcCain]

02:52 PM on 06/20/2008

Until there are no PACs, no 527s, there IS no "public financing of campaigns".

[gonavy]

02:06 PM on 06/20/2008

Usually the candidates wait until they are elected to start to break their campaign PROMISES. Way to go Obama, you are such a trailblazer!

[vernonbc]

06:13 AM on 06/21/2008

He is, isn't he? He hasn't broken his campaign promise which is why so many people trust and believe in him.

[BigSid]

01:08 PM on 06/20/2008

THE SMALL PRINT

Did you notice how the author said..."When you have the ability to raise the kind of money that he could raise and do it without selling your soul"

I'd say Obama has done as much selling as anyone else in this election.

[marymansour]

03:54 PM on 06/20/2008

"I'd say Obama has done as much selling as anyone else in this election."

Yep, he sold it to small, regular donors like myself who believe in him deeply. Barack Hussein Obama is changing the face of the electoral process in the most wonderful ways. Go OBAMA!

[vernonbc]

06:14 AM on 06/21/2008

Amen.

[JAB20]

10:30 AM on 06/20/2008

Obama had to opt out. Otherwise McCain's highly-financed lobbiest-heavy 527's would have trumped the $50 I send Obama each month. If Obama hadn't opted out, he would have been saying to me, your contributions don't count, but the Swiftboaters' contributions do. --JAB

[Triciann]

10:14 AM on 06/20/2008

When I heard the news I donated to Obama. The people are acting. His decision was intelligent. Fantastic.

[LonesomeThunderbolt]

10:09 AM on 06/20/2008

Obama will take heat from the McCain camp and from some campaign finance reform purists. But he would have been crazy to forgo an incredibly successful fund-raising machine. The new model, based on drawing in massive numbers of small donors over the Internet, is the embodiment of what campaign finance reform has always been about. And with that fund-raising prowess, Obama will be able to "give an election" to many people who otherwise wouldn't have one this year. The Obama campaign will have the money to campaign in many red states where a Kerry or a Gore could not have cost-justified going. Even if those states can't actually be won, there is logic to investing in them to force McCain to spend his scarce funds defending them. And those red-state efforts will certainly boost Obama's eventual nationwide popular vote margin to undergird what will probably be a narrower electoral college majority.

[Intelligentia]

09:35 AM on 06/20/2008

Obama did not achieve his current political position by making wrong decisions. He has shown again that he is adept in countering political attacks against him. McCain did not have a problem with leveraging the Republican 5/27s to circumvent the public financing laws, however, he is appalled that Obama will not be financially caged by accepting public financing. My advice to McCain: Get some smart people in your camp, that way, you will not be so surprised when intelligent decisions emerge from the Obama camp! Obama's decision calls for another donation!

[Xspackle]

09:02 AM on 06/20/2008

Count me among those less enamored of the so-called public financing system in light of a new system that is truly funded by the public in millions of small donations. By getting all those new donors and voters into the process, isn't that a more pure kind of public participation, and not just a check box on a tax form.

Especially since there's nothing to stop shadowy and heavily funded 527s out there, on both sides, banging away anyway.

The Obama plan IS public financing. What's the problem, other than McCain and the GOP know they are bringing a pop gun to an artillery duel?

If the shoe were on the other foot, I doubt McCain and his party would be boo-hooing so much.

Whiners.

[schicklett3]

07:12 AM on 06/20/2008

Another brilliant decision by Senator Obama!

I think John McCain is running scared, and trying too hard to make it look as though Obama is doing something wrong. Desperation is showing in the republican party.... fear and desperation.

[dtmaciag]

09:23 AM on 06/20/2008

Obama is just another slick politician. Reformer? I think not! Just another opportunist. this would be equilivant to Hillary saying "I changed my mind, people don't need universal Health coverage."

Between cutting back room deals with Iraqi leaders, and now turning his back on public financing, how can we believe anything he says he stands for (he does give nice speaches though)?
this might be a good election to write in Hillary's name.

[dana342]

04:35 PM on 06/20/2008

Are you kidding me? Your upset because Obama won't take taxpayers money to beat McCain. Why is it okay for McCain to flip-flop like a fish out of water but no okay for Obama to start something new.


He gives very nice speeches(check your spelling)

Obama '08

[girard1991]

04:43 AM on 06/20/2008

I have thought about Russ's statement all day. At first I was angry, then I was dissappointed, now I am much better. I understand that Russ had to say this or the Republicans would have been all over him (i.e., double standard, etc). This was Russ's CYA statement and he most likely told Obama that this was coming due to the absence of blowback from the Obama camp. So now Russ, you have said your piece. We can move forward. I can barely wait until Obama spends McCain into the ground so that November will bring a Democratic Administration and larger majorities in the House and Senate. Then Joe Lieberman can be kicked to the curb.

[gonavy]

05:44 PM on 06/20/2008

How arrogant of you to claim to know the motivation of another man's statement.

Russ Feingold and John McCain took alot of heat for pushing through this legislation. Obama agreed to support it, to be a part of a REAL change in Washington. By all accounts, Obama does not want to be part of the change.

[vernonbc]

06:21 AM on 06/21/2008

How is it real change if the 527's are unfettered and unregulated by any rules? That's the change that Obama wants to make and when he's president, he'll be able to.

[DRDudley]

03:58 AM on 06/20/2008

Personnally, I could care less about the so-called "flip flop" on campaign finance reform. If opting-out allows me to continue to make contributions towards Sen. Obama's campaign, I strongly support it. The Republicans have used unlimited funds which are not going through the FEC in the past and will continue to do so. If we, as Americans, want to use our personal funds to help our candidate succeed, that is our right.

Its not our fault if the Republicans can't raise as much support from individual donors as Sen. Obama.

I feel that we, as grassroots supporters, will have more influence with Senator Obama as president than the large corporations and lobbyists who have purchased the White House in the past. This is the perfect opportunity for our voices to be heard.

[lvdragonlady]

01:28 PM on 06/20/2008

Well said.

[jacqmac]

02:46 AM on 06/20/2008

"Federal law requires that (fundraisers) use thier best efforts to get the occupation and employer of all donors." This DOES NOT mean that a single individual who is giving $25 is 'lobbying'. It does NOT mean that someone who works for a company that gets federa contracts is 'lobbying' by donating $50 or $100. The reason that employment and employer come under scrutiny in the Federal Election Laws is to IDENTIFY companies and donors who give MORE THAN the Federal MAXIMUM of $4600.
WE are then talking in the hundreds of thousands and MILLIONS, something which a nurse, mid-manager, foundry worker or teacher is NOT going to be having to worry about. "We the People....."