Copyright c 1993 by Nicholas Johnson The Cedar Rapids Gazette, Sunday, March 21, 1993, p. 7A Guest Column Needed slogan: 'It's public financing of campaigns, Stupid' During the Clinton campaign, our new President and his staff kept their eye on the prize with James Carville's now famous wall sign: "It's the economy, stupid!" Now that the campaign is over, we the people need our wall sign: "It's public financing of campaigns, stupid!" We've sensed our power. Newspapers, call-in radio, C-SPAN and CNN, 800 numbers, faxes, and old fashioned telephone calls have turned America into more of a democracy than our leaders bargained for. We are the ones who thought Zoe Baird had a problem -- not the White House or Capitol Hill. We are the ones who, unorganized, insisted on a new attorney general nominee -- and got one. But we can't do this on every appointment and issue. Our representatives have to take some responsibility. Health care, jobs, defense spending, education, women's issues, environment, tax policy -- issues are endless. But they all have one thing in common: Our campaign finance system. Have you ever asked people for money -- maybe for a charity, or band uniforms? Have you ever had to raise as much as $10,000? Not easy, is it? Imagine what life would be like if you had to raise that much not every year or so but every day, 365 days a year, for six years. That's the "job" of a U.S. Senator from a large state. Zoe Baird is one thing. But she's not a special interest group. How can "the best representatives money can buy" possibly give full attention to our positions on policy when they conflict with the interests of $10,000 -- or $100,000 -- "campaign donors"? Campaign contributions can be among the best investments around. Returns of $2000 for every dollar "invested" are not uncommon. The return comes in government contracts, subsidy payments and bailouts, price setting, "settlement" of antitrust or environmental pollution cases, trade restrictions on foreign imports, and unconscionable tax breaks. The opportunities are endless -- and costly for you and me. You and I are paying for "public financing" of campaigns now. Lobbyists can take a tax deduction for their work opposing our interests. We can't. So you and I pay an extra $100,000,000 in taxes to pick up their tax bill. But that's only the beginning. We're picking up the tab for every special interest's tax break, paying billions for savings and loan bailouts, defense contracts for weapons we don't need, and so forth. Yes, we can try to fight every issue on Capitol Hill. We can slow up, even stop, some things. But we won't win many. Not with the current, corrupting, campaign finance system. That's why we need our wall sign: "It's public financing of campaigns, stupid!" With meaningful campaign finance reform you and I will still not win all our political battles. But we'll at least get on the playing field and have an opportunity to be heard, and judged, on the merits -- rather than the size of our pocketbooks. We, too, will have the "access" to our officials that the big spenders have today. Whatever is your second and third political priority, and whatever side of those issues you're on, campaign finance reform simply must be your first priority -- and stay your first priority until you get it. Otherwise none of us has a prayer on our other priorities. President Bill Clinton's address is: The White House, Washington DC 20500. Iowans, your Senators are Charles Grassley and Tom Harkin (Senate Office Building, Washington DC 20510). Your Member of Congress is one of the following: Fred Grandy, Jim Leach, Jim Lightfoot, Jim Nussle or Neal Smith. (House Office Building, Washington DC 20515. If you don't know which, ask your local librarian.). If you write them only once this year, or if you have never written before, write now, right now, on this issue. Where do they stand? Don't let them weasel out with support of limitations on individual and PAC contributions. To work, meaningful reform needs to be a package. Why limit individuals to $1000 to $5000 contributions to a "campaign" if they can legally give $100,000 in "soft money" to a political party -- which uses it for the candidate? Let's reduce the pressure, on challengers and incumbents alike, who try to maintain both integrity and a full campaign chest. Public financing of presidential elections is the best tax bargain the taxpayers get. It will be an equally good bargain for us in electing members of the Senate and House. That kind of public financing will sure cost us a lot less than the kind we have now. Just do it. "When the people lead, their leaders will follow." Don't let ours off the hook. And don't forget to put that sign on your refrigerator door: "It's public financing of campaigns, stupid!" __________________________ Nicholas Johnson is visiting professor at the University of Iowa College of Law. A former Federal Communications Commission member, he has been a candidate for the U.S. Senate and House. *** Copyright c 1993 by Nicholas Johnson. Conditions: This material is copyright by Nicholas Johnson. However, permission is hereby granted to download, copy and distribute the text to others if (1) the text is not altered, and (2) there is no charge to the recipient, and (3) this copyright notice and conditions are attached. It is a copyright violation to distribute this material altered, or without the copyright notice and conditions attached, or to use the material in any way for which remuneration is received without the prior permission of Nicholas Johnson. Contact: 1035393@mcimail.com; Box 1876 Iowa City IA 52244; 319-337-5555. *** END OF FILE