Culture of Corruption: McCain Reforms?

There was an interesting editorial in the Rocky Mountain News today praising John Boehner, saying Boehner has never sponsored political pork for his constituents. Apparently supporting corporate constituents' bribes is okay with our Colorado red rag: A quick google of his name with the words "tobacco check" added gets you straight to a story I remember from 1995. The good Mr. Boehner, the man the Rocky thinks will be the great reformer, passed out checks from tobacco companies on the House floor just prior to a major vote on tobacco-related legislation. And this is the man our paper implies is an excellent choice because he voted against the McCain-Feingold campaign finance act. Apparently, according to the Rocky, there isn't enough special interest money in politics or it's going the wrong way. As for me, I rather doubt a man who'd blatantly attempt to help tobacco companies buy votes is the one to lead reform of the Congress.

Nor, apparently, is Mr. McCain. I had high hopes for the man. Apparently, Senator Obama wanted to work with Mr. McCain but had some differences in some points. Resorting to the primary Republican debate tactic, Mr. McCain proceeded to write Mr. Obama a letter that, in a very insulting tone, denounced Mr. Obama's differences as partisan politics. I mean, it's not as if they're members of different parties or anything and it's not as if everyone sees eye-to-eye on everything. As I read things, Mr. Obama just wanted to go a bit farther than Mr. McCain and outlaw all gifts and meals from lobbyists, increase the time before a former congressman can take a job as a lobbyist and require congressman to pay for their flights on corporate jets. These are not to me unreasonable measures. If you limit the number of quos the lobbyists can get for their quid, you limit corruption. It must have been that office of public integrity that brought out the Republican side in McCain. Apparently the Republicans lack that quality. In a culture of corruption, you don't bribe the minority. Your money works better when you spend it on the majority party and that's what rankles McCain. He's a Republican.

If I were reforming congress, I'd go farther. I have six suggestions for meaningful congressional reform. Screw the lobbyists, they'll always exist and they'll always find ways to buy votes. I want to reform congress by:

- Publically funding elections. The money treadmill of raising millions to get reelected is a major weakness of our political system. Congressmen are literally for sale to the highest bidder when it comes to campaign finance. So let's eliminate campaign finance and fund elections publically.

- End corporate contributions. Corporations are owned. Anything owned doesn't have rights; therefore, corporations have no first amendment privilege to political speech. Put their money to work growing business and creating shareholder value rather than attempting to buy advantage in Congress.

- End lobbyists' contributions in kind. That means donated office space, transportation, phone banks, anything that would be paid for normally.

- Allow individual contributions to political campaigns and causes under current limits. Include in the contributions the cost of a fundraiser above the costs of the event, that is, if you go to a $500 per plate fundraiser and the cost per person of the food and the hall are $200, you've made a $300 contribution that counts against your individual limit.

- End earmarks. If there's nothing to buy, the lobbyists won't try to buy it.

- Create an investigative office in Congress that is not tied to either party, i. e. not elected.

These reforms would pretty much reform Congress. That's not to say that some smart guy won't find a way around these rules but it would be a start. The biggest one is publically funding our campaigns. Only then will our Congress no longer be for sale.