Pay to play

It used to be said that Americans got the kind of government they deserved. Today, they get the kind of government they can buy.

The November 2000 election is shaping as the first $2 billion affair in the nation’s history; it is expected that the unregulated “soft money” pouring in from businesses, unions and the wealthy could triple the $260 billion of the 1996 presidential campaign. In response to the Clinton administration’s sleepovers, coffees and dubious foreign contributions, the GOP has launched its “Team $1 Million,” and exclusive club of their own for those with more money than scruples. In response to that, Democrats are leaning on their Hollywood friends harder than ever and have developed a “buddy system” in which well-off incumbents divert money and time to the less fortunate.

The primary force behind this frenzy is the narrow margin of the Republican majority in the House, just five slim votes. But that’s not all — raising a huge war chest early is seen as the best tactic to prevent a primary challenger from coming forward — several Congressional newcomers started raising money for their 2000 re-election before they were sworn in from the 1998 election. Increasingly, the phrase “serious candidate” means one who has raised a ton of money, not one who has good ideas.

While both parties are appalling gluttons, there is something delighfully brazen about the Republican’s “Team $1 Million.” It’s so refreshingly blatant: contribute seven figures and, in addition to a nice mug or tote bag, you are guaranteed “face time” to discuss your “concerns” with House Speaker Dennis Hastert, Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott and other leaders.

If history, as recent as the GOP’s $792-billion tax cut, is any indication, “concerns” is code — at least in the health care, insurance, real estate, banking, oil and gas, timber, securities, agriculture and even fishing tackle industries — for special, narrowly targetted tax breaks and subsidies.

Meanwhile, Rep. Hastert and Sen. Lott are doing their level best to defeat meaningful campaign-finance reform. Shays-Meehan, legislation that would actually and significantly reduce the impact of big money on politics, is back before Congress, but probably not for long.

Thanks to a some deft manuvering by Speaker Hastert, a substitute, do-nothing reform bill will be considered first and if it passes, Shays-Meehan is dead. And if the do-nothing bill is defeated and Shays-Meehan also fails, those who have fought hard for real reform will be accused of voting against. It’s clever, and a bitter disappointment who believed Rep. Hastert would be different breed of speaker.

Maine’s Congressional delegation — both parties, both chambers — has long been on the right side of the campaign-finance reform issue. The August recess would be a good time to tell them to keep up the good work, and to tell members of Congress from other states who vacation here to join in. Otherwise, you’ll get left out and you’ll have only yourself, and the lack of a million dollars, to blame.