Bring the Voters Back by ’98

The reports that the national political parties have continued their incessant pursuit for “soft money”--raising $34 million in unregulated contributions during the first half of 1997--should sound a loud alarm in the halls of Congress. And it adds further credence and urgency to the case of those on Capitol Hill who are resuming their push for consideration of campaign finance reform this month.

Progress on reform is perhaps the most important step that can be taken to restore voter confidence in the ability of all citizens, regardless of wealth, to participate fully in elections. The failure of Congress to act will only deepen voter despair about politics.

Since spring, substantial progress has been made toward developing a bipartisan consensus on campaign finance reform that could pass Congress and credibly be described as significant.

Reform must start with a ban on soft money donations, the unregulated corporate, union and large individual contributions to national parties and their campaign organizations. This ban is something on which nearly everyone agrees, and it’s part of every major reform proposal. This summer, former Presidents Bush, Carter and Ford joined this call to end soft money.

More than anything else, the flood of soft money during the last several elections has swamped our political system. It has collapsed the foundation of safeguards built over the course of this century, beginning with the ban on corporate contributions during Theodore Roosevelt’s administration and continuing through the prohibition of large individual contributions in the aftermath of Watergate.

The rules for donations were designed to end abuses such as the infamous white envelopes stuffed with cash. For awhile, they were effective, but not any longer.

Already, despite the widespread controversy surrounding soft money, there has been a rush to raise more of it. So far this year, the national parties have raised soft money at a level 2 1/2 times greater than during the same period four years ago. The quarter of a billion dollars in soft money raised during the 1995-96 election was three times the amount raised in the previous election cycle.

When the American people hear that soft money con- tributions of $50,000 or $100,000 are not uncommon, many naturally question whether their small contributions, much less their votes, count for anything at all.

But real reform will require more than banning soft money. Voters must be able to make informed choices and have confidence that election laws are truly being honored and enforced. Disclosure rules should be broadened to ensure that citizens can enter the voting booth with full knowledge about who is responsible for funding campaign activities. Effective campaign finance laws also depends on timely and effective enforcement by a stronger Federal Election Commission.

Even if the campaign finance system cannot be made perfect all at once, it can and must be made better. At the very least, Congress should act now on these basic reforms, on which we believe bipartisan agreement is possible.

The window of opportunity for achieving reform may soon close. As the 1998 elections get closer, it will be all the more difficult for Congress to put aside partisanship. And once the next presidential election starts--in effect, the day after the 1998 elections--the hope for reform in this century will have all but disappeared.

Congress must show the American people that they can have trust not only in the integrity of our election campaigns but also in the ability of Congress to act to ensure this integrity.